Karma or environmental factors and geneticsc

jll

I remember Glenn Hoddle had to resign as England coach
for saying something about disabled children.
Anyway, what do you think?
"Karma is the law of moral causation. The theory of Karma is a fundamental doctrine in Buddhism. This belief was prevalent in India before the advent of the Buddha. Nevertheless, it was the Buddha who explained and formulated this doctrine in the complete form in which we have it today.

- What is the cause of the inequality that exists among mankind?
- Why should one person be brought up in the lap of luxury, endowed with fine mental, moral and physical qualities, and another in absolute poverty, steeped in misery?
- Why should one person be a mental prodigy, and another an idiot?
- Why should one person be born with saintly characteristics and another with criminal tendencies?
- Why should some be linguistic, artistic, mathematically inclined, or musical from the very cradle?
- Why should others be congenitally blind, deaf, or deformed?|
- Why should some be blessed, and others cursed from their births?

Either this inequality of mankind has a cause, or it is purely accidental. No sensible person would think of attributing this unevenness, this inequality, and this diversity to blind chance or pure accident.

In this world nothing happens to a person that he does not for some reason or other deserve. Usually, men of ordinary intellect cannot comprehend the actual reason or reasons. The definite invisible cause or causes of the visible effect is not necessarily confined to the present life, they may be traced to a proximate or remote past birth.

According to Buddhism, this inequality is due not only to heredity, environment, "nature and nurture", but also to Karma. In other words, it is the result of our own past actions and our own present doings. We ourselves are responsible for our own happiness and misery. We create our own Heaven. We create our own Hell. We are the architects of our own fate.

compassionate_warrior

There are Buddhists who believe that this theory of karma was added to the canon as a later Hindu influence. It's up for each practitioner to decide whether or not it rings true for them. This has been the gist of the discussion on this topic on previous threads.

patbb

i don't see karma as having anything particular to do with morality.

the way i see it, karma is simply the law of causation.

so for example, i don't have to explain handicapped children's with past life.
they are handicapped because of genetic defects or accidents or whatever...

the way i currently see past lifes is through evolution.
my grand dad had bad genes so those affected my body.
or our long ago ancestors monkey had to display their masculinity and show off to impress females so today's youth have those strong urges/cravings (working out to have nice body, nice cars etc... to impress females).

my mind is still open tho to the possibility of cause in past life affecting current life as believed in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition. But i'll have to experience it first.

jll

These Buddhists are not very Buddhist.
lol.

There are Buddhists who believe that this theory of karma was added to the canon as a later Hindu influence. It's up for each practitioner to decide whether or not it rings true for them. This has been the gist of the discussion on this topic on previous threads.

Dakini

These Buddhists are not very Buddhist.
lol.

There are Buddhists who believe that this theory of karma was added to the canon as a later Hindu influence. It's up for each practitioner to decide whether or not it rings true for them. This has been the gist of the discussion on this topic on previous threads.

You're talking about some of the moderators on this forum, among others, jll. Just FYI.

Talisman

Karma is not a mystical force. Karma, as defined by the Buddha, means any act of volition fabrication. Either mental, verbal, or bodily. They are called fabrications because they fabricate fabricated things. For example, I purposely think the thought (I hate her) and such an action breeds consequence either immediately or at some other point in the future and manifests as a non-volitional fabrication, either mental, verbal, or bodily.

Consider, you tell a person they are ugly (verbal and bodily volitional fabrication). Then you feel like a bad person for hurting their feelings (mental non-volitional fabrication). You think "I am a bad person" (mental volitional fabrication), and so you cry (bodily non-volitional fabrication). You friend sees you crying and touches your shoulder and says "it's okay" (bodily and verbal volitional fabrication for him, bodily non-volitional fabrication for you).

This is obviously extremely over-simplistic since as the Buddha says, to contemplate the consequence of Karma will lead to vexation and madness. All you have to know is that skillful actions lead to blissful states, and unskillful actions lead to states of woe.

federica

Kamma is intention.
your intention is all that matters....
to try to work out the intricate details of kamma goes against the Buddha's recommendations, and should not be pondered upon.
there's no point, you'll never get there....you'll go mad first....

Talisman

Kamma is intention.
your intention is all that matters....
to try to work out the intricate details of kamma goes against the Buddha's recommendations, and should not be pondered upon.
there's no point, you'll never get there....you'll go mad first....

yep

jll

This is from Dhammapada,
While residing at the Jetavana monastery in Savatthi, the Buddha uttered Verse (1) of this book, with reference to Cakkhupala, a blind thera.

On one occasion, Thera Cakkhupala came to pay homage to the Buddha at the Jetavana monastery. One night, while pacing up and down in meditation, the thera accidentally stepped on some insects. In the morning, some bhikkhus visiting the thera found the dead insects. They thought ill of the thera and reported the matter to the Buddha. The Buddha asked them whether they had seen the thera killing the insects. When they answered in the negative, the Buddha said, "Just as you had not seen him killing, so also he had not seen those living insects. Besides, as the thera had already attained arahatship he could have no intention of killing and so was quite innocent." On being asked why Cakkhupala was blind although he was an arahat, the Buddha told the following story:

Cakkhupala was a physician in one of his past existences. Once, he had deliberately made a woman patient blind. That woman had promised him to become his slave, together with her children, if her eyes were completely cured. Fearing that she and her children would have to become slaves, she lied to the physician. She told him that her eyes were getting worse when, in fact, they were perfectly cured. The physician knew she was deceiving him, so in revenge, he gave her another ointment, which made her totally blind. As a result of this evil deed the physician lost his eyesight many times in his later existences.

Kamma is intention.
your intention is all that matters....
to try to work out the intricate details of kamma goes against the Buddha's recommendations, and should not be pondered upon.
there's no point, you'll never get there....you'll go mad first....

federica

What's your point, please?

Zero

Cause and effect are evident in every moment - doesnt take too much effort to extrapolate.

Karma beyond this life sounds like a warning of 'hell'.

Some need negative reinforcement or the threat thereof.

ImmersedOne

Karma IS environmental factors and genetics

AMH

Here is my point, one of the key things the Buddha said was after listening to experience for yourself and make that more important than any teaching or doctrine, even including what he said. So whether reincarnation was in the beginning or added later is rather immaterial. No one is required a belief to be Buddhist.

I do believe in reincarnation however I think we have to follow the scientific model more by not looking at the result, ie a handicapped child, and thinking we have any clue as to the cause beyond physical. There is the idea that to be handicapped or in a different caste means you did something horrible, it can also mean that you chose a certain life to learn or teach specific lessons. So there is no cause for judgment in how you are doing in this life even if you do believe in reincarnation.

Jeffrey

@jll, could you clarify what you mean by deserve? For me a lot of it is about ignorance. So if you have never fished and you don't know any of the good fishing holes it is karma not to have a high probability of catching a fish. But the word 'deserve' for me means that a fish is a reward? I guess it is in some sense, but I think it can also be a grounds for being cruel or unfeeling to those who are non-healthy as opposed to 'I feel your pain'.

federica

Here is my point, one of the key things the Buddha said was after listening to experience for yourself and make that more important than any teaching or doctrine, even including what he said. So whether reincarnation was in the beginning or added later is rather immaterial. No one is required a belief to be Buddhist.

I do believe in reincarnation however I think we have to follow the scientific model more by not looking at the result, ie a handicapped child, and thinking we have any clue as to the cause beyond physical. There is the idea that to be handicapped or in a different caste means you did something horrible, it can also mean that you chose a certain life to learn or teach specific lessons. So there is no cause for judgment in how you are doing in this life even if you do believe in reincarnation.

So what's your take on re-birth, as opposed to, or in contrast to, Reincarnation?
What to you distinguishes one process from the other?