No good fruits from wrong deeds, no bad from good

[Johann]

An importand but very large underestimated factor of view is "there are (related) fruits of good and bad deeds".

Recently Nyom Rieng asked if it's really necessary to abound gaining Dhamma, listening to Dhamma mixed with worldly interests, avoid facebook and youtub Dhamma, traded, commercial Dhamma.

Atma told him not to doubt that it's most destructive to gain Dhamma in wrong ways, at the wrong time. Then he showed some records of Smot (melancholical sung Dhamma reflects0 teachings of trade monks... and argued that at least he wouldn't have found basic faith if he would have listened to it, and resumed that it therefore can't be wrong.

Told and explained that good fruits aren't ever results of bad deeds, although they can of course appear right after bad deeds, as the ripping of fruits will not necessary direct after deed.

To give a heavy sample: "So Ven. Angulimal heard the Dhamma, became an Arahat, because he was on hunt and mudering? Then we should say: No problem, go for trying to kill Arahats and if meeting then a real, you'll get taught the Dhamma and awake."

It's in so many ways that people argue in such ways, that hardly ever one would even abstain from unskilful on faith, how lesser those then who know.

Today the large destruction of the tradition by pulling it into the stream of commercial gain is all but argued in such ways, likewise copythieving and "rights for Dhamma".

What do you think how many Angulimalas could be out there, luckily to gain the right time, right person, right teaching, that tendency of relinquishing all skilful for that sake, are rightly argued?

People who are not dear to do, encourage, approve, bad for a good sake, should be known as evil like people waging wars and kill to gain peace, telling peace comes from killing, and lose from not fighting rights.

As most might remember: wrong view is the highway to hell.