<p>To my knowledge, there is no blood in a statue. Therefore, the soccer ball your brother kicked did not shed the blood of a Buddha. Buddha statutes are <em>representations</em> of the Buddha rather than the Buddha himself.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-11-04T20:03:16.047Z
2023-11-04T20:03:16.047Z
Dhamma Dhatu
<p>I think that the five <em>anantarika-karma</em> are described in <a href="https://suttacentral.net/an5.129/en/sujato?lang=en&amp;layout=linebyline&amp;reference=none&amp;notes=sidenotes&amp;highlight=true&amp;script=latin" rel="nofollow noreferrer">AN 5.129</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Murdering your mother or father or a perfected one; maliciously shedding the blood of a Realized One; and causing a schism in the Saṅgha.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The same phrase is used in <a href="https://suttacentral.net/an6.87/en/sujato?lang=en&amp;layout=linebyline&amp;reference=none&amp;notes=sidenotes&amp;highlight=true&amp;script=latin" rel="nofollow noreferrer">AN 6.87</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>They murder their mother or father or a perfected one. They maliciously shed the blood of a Realized One. They cause a schism in the Saṅgha. They’re witless, dull, and stupid.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The phrase translated there as, &quot;they maliciously shed the blood&quot;, includes <em>duṭṭhena cittena</em> -- i.e. something like, &quot;evil-minded&quot; (see <a href="https://suttacentral.net/define/du%E1%B9%AD%E1%B9%ADha?lang=en" rel="nofollow noreferrer">duṭṭha</a> and <a href="https://suttacentral.net/define/citta?lang=en" rel="nofollow noreferrer">citta</a>).</p>
<p>Some people interpret or expand on &quot;shedding blood&quot; as including, &quot;harming the dharma&quot; -- for example, by destroying sutras.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-11-05T11:16:34.310Z
Which people say shedding blood is burning books?
Dhamma Dhatu
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-11-05T13:37:42.130Z
I think that is what is behind the OP -- i.e. a doctrine about 'harming the Dharma', by for example destroying sutras or even statues -- which, I suppose is related to doctrine about the [dharmakaya](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharmak%C4%81ya). I presume it's a tradition or country other than Theravada -- the OP also mentions Guanyin. Although as an aside re Theravada, the Pali suttas include the last paragraph of [SN 22.87](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.087x.wlsh.html) which seems to equate (seeing) the Buddha's person with the Dhamma.
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-11-05T09:55:23.283Z
2023-11-05T10:29:49.227Z
2023-11-05T10:29:49.227Z
ChrisW
<p>Im too anxious,in the past my brother play football he kicked the ball to Guanyin statue i don't know he is intent or not did he committed shedding the blood of Buddha sin? the statue did not break</p>

<statue>
Did my brother committed shedding the blood of Buddha sin?
# Did my brother committed shedding the blood of Buddha sin?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-11-04)

Im too anxious,in the past my brother play football he kicked the ball to Guanyin statue i don't know he is intent or not did he committed shedding the blood of Buddha sin? the statue did not break

**Tags:** statue


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2023-11-04. Score: 1

To my knowledge, there is no blood in a statue. Therefore, the soccer ball your brother kicked did not shed the blood of a Buddha. Buddha statutes are *representations* of the Buddha rather than the Buddha himself.


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2023-11-05. Score: 1

I think that the five *anantarika-karma* are described in [AN 5.129](https://suttacentral.net/an5.129/en/sujato?lang=en&layout=linebyline&reference=none¬es=sidenotes&highlight=true&script=latin):

> Murdering your mother or father or a perfected one; maliciously shedding the blood of a Realized One; and causing a schism in the Saṅgha.

The same phrase is used in [AN 6.87](https://suttacentral.net/an6.87/en/sujato?lang=en&layout=linebyline&reference=none¬es=sidenotes&highlight=true&script=latin):

> They murder their mother or father or a perfected one. They maliciously shed the blood of a Realized One. They cause a schism in the Saṅgha. They’re witless, dull, and stupid.

The phrase translated there as, "they maliciously shed the blood", includes *duṭṭhena cittena* -- i.e. something like, "evil-minded" (see [duṭṭha](https://suttacentral.net/define/du%E1%B9%AD%E1%B9%ADha?lang=en) and [citta](https://suttacentral.net/define/citta?lang=en)).

Some people interpret or expand on "shedding blood" as including, "harming the dharma" -- for example, by destroying sutras.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Which people say shedding blood is burning books?  
> **username_2**: I think that is what is behind the OP -- i.e. a doctrine about 'harming the Dharma', by for example destroying sutras or even statues -- which, I suppose is related to doctrine about the [dharmakaya](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharmak%C4%81ya). I presume it's a tradition or country other than Theravada -- the OP also mentions Guanyin. Although as an aside re Theravada, the Pali suttas include the last paragraph of [SN 22.87](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.087x.wlsh.html) which seems to equate (seeing) the Buddha's person with the Dhamma.  

---

