Recently, there was a big profile case with matricide and patricide in the USA.
Someone asked about matricide and patricide. I think we all know that it is immediate kamma. One cannot ordain, one cannot attain jhāna, one cannot attain nibbāna. In the immediately following life, one is bound for the deepest hell realms for a long long long time.
Even someone like Ven. Aṅgulimāla was able to escape his bad kamma by attaining liberation. However, for matricide, patricide, killing an arahant, shedding blood of a Buddha (with malicious intent), and causing a schism, there is no escape.
I think we all know this in this group.
However, I brought up a point that people do not know. The idea is, if you have intention to kill an animal, and there happens to be a father or an arahant in that same place, and it dies, the same results will follow. It does not seem fair, but it is what it is.
Commentary to Pārājika III (vol 2)
Taken from Pa-Auk’s website (but we studied this at IIT vinaya class).
Kammāpattibyattibhāvatthañcettha eḷakacatukkampi veditabbaṃ. Yo hi eḷakaṃ ekasmiṃ ṭhāne nipannaṃ upadhāreti ‘‘rattiṃ āgantvā vadhissāmī’’ti. Eḷakassa ca nipannokāse tassa mātā vā pitā vā arahā vā paṇḍukāsāvaṃ pārupitvā nipanno hoti. So rattibhāge āgantvā ‘‘eḷakaṃ māremī’’ti mātaraṃ vā pitaraṃ vā arahantaṃ vā māreti. ‘‘Imaṃ vatthuṃ māremī’’ti cetanāya atthibhāvato ghātako ca hoti, anantariyakammañca phusati, pārājikañca āpajjati. Añño koci āgantuko nipanno hoti, ‘‘eḷakaṃ māremī’’ti taṃ māreti, ghātako ca hoti pārājikañca āpajjati, ānantariyaṃ na phusati.
And here, the fourfold case of the goat should also be understood for the purpose of making manifest the distinctions of kamma and offenses. Indeed, a monk observes a goat lying in a certain place, thinking, ‘I will come at night and kill it.’ And in the place where the goat was lying, his mother or father or an Arahant, having wrapped himself in a pale yellow robe, is lying down. That monk comes in the night and, thinking, ‘I will kill the goat,’ kills his mother or father or the Arahant. Because of the existence of the intention, ‘I will kill this being,’ he is a killer, he incurs an immediately resultant kamma, and he falls into a Pārājika offense. If some other visiting person is lying there, and thinking, ‘I will kill the goat,’ he kills him, he is a killer and falls into a Pārājika offense, but he does not incur an immediately resultant kamma.