Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Worms

edited September 2012 in Buddhism Basics
A human being can consciously perform good deeds and thereby gain good karma, and subsequently get good future births etc.. But a worm, for instance, cannot perform good karma at least consciously, so what happens to its fate? Does that mean once you start taking birth as anything other than human, you're finished (since it's only going to be a downward spiral from there)?

Comments

  • PrairieGhostPrairieGhost Veteran
    edited September 2012
    A worm could be seen as performing good karma, for instance, improving the quality of the soil.
  • A worm could be seen as performing good karma, for instance, improving the quality of the soil.

    What I mean is, it won't be consciously performing good or bad karma. It is not like the worm says to itself: I have a noble desire to improve the quality of soil, so let me do this good deed. It functions on instinct, not intentions.
  • PrairieGhostPrairieGhost Veteran
    edited September 2012
    As I see it, intention is a figure of speech, because there's no self to intend. The illusion of volition leads to actions which cause suffering: so dark karma is still causing the suffering of beings, and causing the happiness of beings is bright karma.

    That's why it's hypocritical to shun Burakumin.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burakumin

  • edited September 2012
    yes worms do have an important function! Worms are NO. 1

    youtube.com/watch?v=hy3X0A8kYxY

    From "what on earth evolved" by Christopher Lloyd. GREAT BOOK!
  • PrairieGhostPrairieGhost Veteran
    edited September 2012
    What karma's link with volition means for us is that intention, even good intention, should be discerned as empty, thus ending ignorant actions, which are based on the faulty premise of a self that intends, and thus inevitably destructive, akin to wandering through a minefield in the dark, with clown shoes on.

    p.s. This is my view, rather than the orthodox view, which as far as I can tell doesn't equate actual harm/good with karma. I take the teaching of the Buddha on karma/volition as a teaching rather than an ontological truth.
  • Are you a worm?

    If not, why is this question important to you? :p
    federicaI_AM_THATThailandTomwebster26
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    as this is yet another question on how karma works, how it's processed and what it applies to, be aware that this comes under the heading of "an unconjecturable".... and this discussion will either rapidly go off-topic (in which case I will close it) or border on the ridiculous (in which case, i will close it.)

    carry on.
    OneLifeFormThailandTom
  • Worms are beneficial to the earth, this is a fact.
    But if all you're "programmed" to do is your "job" and it is beneficial how can you go wrong?

    In my understanding, Karma needs to ripen for it to be "played out".
    A precious human birth is our only chance to learn, practice and share the Dharma.
    In doing so we have a greater chance at another precious human rebirth, and to learn, practice and share instead of other realms where we are not able to do the above mentioned.
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran

    A worm could be seen as performing good karma, for instance, improving the quality of the soil.

    I thought it was based on intent.

  • There's two kinds of karma: the good karma of building a house gives us shelter.

    The good karma of building a house out of love for our family lets us enjoy that shelter.

    The worm is, by being part of the self-sustaining natural cycle, building a better existence for itself, that it can one day learn the latter way of karma, as we are doing.

  • There's two kinds of karma: the good karma of building a house gives us shelter.

    The good karma of building a house out of love for our family lets us enjoy that shelter.

    The worm is, by being part of the self-sustaining natural cycle, building a better existence for itself, that it can one day learn the latter way of karma, as we are doing.

    What about bacteria, mosquito etc? I just considered the worm as an example. My point is that if intent is lacking (and hence no karma is created), how will any lower form of life have the chance to get a human birth?
  • Why the judgement on the worm? The only thing we should be concerned about is our own thoughts, our own actions. Let everything else be...

    However there are many things you can learn, just by observing the worm and how it goes about it's life.

    There is only one Karma... it's neither good or not good... it just is...
  • By being part of things, which in itself is good.

    When Buddhists say there is no god and no divine plan, I understand this to mean no separate god or plan.
  • Sorry, my post was in response to music's last one. Should've quoted.
  • personperson Don't believe everything you think The liminal space Veteran
    There's a teaching by the Buddha about the rarity of human rebirth and one where you encounter and are able to practice the Dharma
    "Monks, suppose that this great earth were totally covered with water, and a man were to toss a yoke with a single hole there. A wind from the east would push it west, a wind from the west would push it east. A wind from the north would push it south, a wind from the south would push it north. And suppose a blind sea-turtle were there. It would come to the surface once every one hundred years. Now what do you think: would that blind sea-turtle, coming to the surface once every one hundred years, stick his neck into the yoke with a single hole?"

    "It would be a sheer coincidence, lord, that the blind sea-turtle, coming to the surface once every one hundred years, would stick his neck into the yoke with a single hole."

    "It's likewise a sheer coincidence that one obtains the human state. It's likewise a sheer coincidence that a Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened, arises in the world. It's likewise a sheer coincidence that a doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world. Now, this human state has been obtained. A Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened, has arisen in the world. A doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world.

    "Therefore your duty is the contemplation, 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress.' Your duty is the contemplation, 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.'"

    http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.048.than.html
    So I think there is some basis to think that Buddhism might agree with your OP.

    Best to practice now while you at least know for sure you're able.
  • karastikarasti Breathing Minnesota Moderator
    edited October 2012
    I have no answers for you, but I run into the same questions myself :) If I royally screw up this life, and am reborn as a mosquito, how is there even the possibility of a chance that I can "earn" my way up the reincarnation ladder to get another human birth? I'm still learning about it, but I don't right now buy a literal explanation that bad people reincarnate into animals. It just doesn't make logical sense to me. I think people reincarnate in some way, but only people to people, to experience all life has to offer. I can see if you are a "bad person" you might reincarnate into an unfavorable life to learn the lessons that caused you to be a "bad person" in the previous life. Ie: if you were greedy in this life, perhaps you will be reborn into a life of poverty and struggle in the next life. Even that doesn't always make sense to me, but more sense than cross-reincarnation between species. To me it seems that reincarnation as animals was told as a story to encourage people to treat animals kindly, because "you never know if that bug you squashed was your grandma reincarnated!" just to give people some comparison. I don't take it literally, and I don't see myself ever believing that people can reincarnate into "lower" life forms. There would be nothing to transfer. If your consciousness transfers at rebirth, but mosquitoes don't have consciousness, then were does it go? Just a circular argument, like I said I have no answers :) But I know what you are talking about, and I wonder the same things.
  • FoibleFullFoibleFull Canada Veteran
    My teacher (one of the Dalai Lama's monks) tells us that it takes many lifetimes of being a worm (or any other animal for that matter) before those karmas are used up and the being moves on to some other realm of rebirth.

    I only suspect that I accept rebirth ... I'm not 100% convinced.
  • JasonJason God Emperor Arrakis Moderator
    edited October 2012
    music said:

    A human being can consciously perform good deeds and thereby gain good karma, and subsequently get good future births etc.. But a worm, for instance, cannot perform good karma at least consciously, so what happens to its fate? Does that mean once you start taking birth as anything other than human, you're finished (since it's only going to be a downward spiral from there)?

    No, not necessarily. Assuming postmortem rebirth takes place, and a beginning point to the cycle of birth and death can't be found, with beings ceaselessly 'wandering on,' then each being has a wide array of kamma that can potentially express itself when the conditions present themselves since rebirth is influenced by the results of both past and present actions. So a worm can theoretically die and be reborn as a human being or deva, even without having preformed any skillful deeds in their present life, due to the arising of some past skillful kamma from a previous existence.
    Sile
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    :coffee:
  • Jason, if I understand you correctly, is it something like this: I may perform good deeds and still take birth as a worm owing the stock of previous karma. In other words, it won't be linear - karmic seeds from 50 births ago could germinate in my next birth. Or something like that.
  • JasonJason God Emperor Arrakis Moderator
    edited October 2012
    music said:

    Jason, if I understand you correctly, is it something like this: I may perform good deeds and still take birth as a worm owing the stock of previous karma. In other words, it won't be linear - karmic seeds from 50 births ago could germinate in my next birth. Or something like that.

    Theoretically, yes. For example, in Theravada, kamma is understood to be non-linear, and there are different types of kamma mentioned in the commentarial literature, hence the difficulty in determining the precise working out of the results of kamma (AN 4.77).

    With regard to time, there's kamma ripening during the present (dittha-dhamma-vedaniya kamma), kamma ripening in the future (upapajja-vedaniya-kamma), and kamma ripening later than that (aparapariya-vedaniya-kamma). With regard to function, there's productive kamma (janaka-kamma), supportive kamma (upatthambhaka-kamma), suppressive kamma (upapilaka-kamma), and destructive kamma (upaghataka- or upacchedaka-kamma). And with regard to priority, there's weighty kamma (garuka-kamma), habitual karma (acinnaka- or bahula-kamma), death-proximate kamma (maranasanna-kamma), and stored kamma (katatta-kamma).
    driedleafmusic
  • Thanks, Jason. Could you recommend a place on the net where I could read all this, not only the issue of karma but generally? Second, reg. karma ... Lets say I have certain habits which are almost impossible to overcome. Would it be fair to assume that karma is working itself out (hence my inability to overcome said habit)? Could I just assume these habits will vanish as soon as karma is worked out, maybe in subsequent lives? Not just habits, but situations and things beyond our control.
  • JasonJason God Emperor Arrakis Moderator
    edited October 2012
    music said:

    Thanks, Jason. Could you recommend a place on the net where I could read all this, not only the issue of karma but generally?

    Not really. There's stuff scattered all over the net, and I pick up most of my knowledge about stuff like this from a combination of online and hard copy resources. Access to Insight is usually the first place I check online, though.
    music said:

    Second, reg. karma ... Lets say I have certain habits which are almost impossible to overcome. Would it be fair to assume that karma is working itself out (hence my inability to overcome said habit)? Could I just assume these habits will vanish as soon as karma is worked out, maybe in subsequent lives? Not just habits, but situations and things beyond our control.

    I'd say that certain habits can definitely be the result of kamma; and I think that in certain contexts, it'd be appropriate to think of kamma as 'habit energy' in the sense that the potential effects of an action can be to condition and even strengthen certain physical and psychological reactions.

    As for the rest, it may be that such habits will possibly disappear on their own after the underlying kamma has 'worked itself out'; however, I wouldn't count on that myself since indulging in them can also serve to strengthen them and perpetuate them farther into the future. Things may be beyond our control, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to put up resistance whenever we can, which itself can have positive and cumulative effects even if they're not immediately perceivable.
    person
  • oceancaldera207oceancaldera207 Veteran
    edited October 2012
    IMO the principles of karma and rebirth are far too meaningful, mysterious and complex to be discussed in such a way. .. it is best to admit that you cannot really know such things, yet.... we can perhaps have a general idea.
    I think that attempting to force any literal conceptual structure in this area is harmful and not practical. I think when it comes to karma and rebirth, one should accept the that the universe is supremely intelligent and there is a higher meaning in the cycle of karma and rebirth. IMO actualizing psychic capability goes a long way to aid in the understanding that the universe is common sense and brilliance at once.. this usually helps to address the nuts and bolts of why and how [physical being]. Also, my intuition says our own higher essence of has a great deal of influence on the direction of our experience.
  • Hi music:

    Yes, habits work themselves out, but your striving is karma too. You can't assume things will work themselves out, you have to keep trying, even though your trying is karma. You can't sit outside life watching and never get involved; that's a misinterpretation of Buddhism.
  • PrairieGhostPrairieGhost Veteran
    edited October 2012
    karasti:
    I don't right now buy a literal explanation that bad people reincarnate into animals
    Not bad people - it's based on your habit energies. Someone territorial might be drawn to an existence as a dog.

    As I said before on another thread, it's like water finding its level. You know when people have a ambition and say 'I just have to do this'? And people say 'let him go, he just has to get it out of his system.'

    The worm or even bacterium is part of this trend to increasing entropy too. Fuel only burns for so long. But these are just metaphors for how we are living.
    music
  • We cannot tell you the inner workings of karma, we can tell you cause and effect, simple. If you want to investigate it further meditate on it, observe the world around you and then you may realise that the worms do not matter so much in this sense. Operate in the now, now now and now. You can dilute your negative past karma in this way and generate positive karma in the now as well. Forget about the worms, that is their problem not yours.
    federica
  • music said:

    Thanks, Jason. Could you recommend a place on the net where I could read all this, not only the issue of karma but generally?

    I just got up to Kamma & the Ending of Kamma in Wings to Awakening. Judging from what I've read so far, it will be an excellent overview. Skimming ahead with respect to your question, I'd guess that it will not answer your question, but suggest that for the purposes of Buddhist practice, your question is ill-posed. The point of his teaching is a way to bring an end to kamma and the suffering which results from it, and the way the teaching works is that you focus on the experience of kamma, suffering, etc. in the present moment.
    music said:

    Second, reg. karma ... Lets say I have certain habits which are almost impossible to overcome. Would it be fair to assume that karma is working itself out (hence my inability to overcome said habit)? Could I just assume these habits will vanish as soon as karma is worked out, maybe in subsequent lives? Not just habits, but situations and things beyond our control.

    A habit is karma.
  • SileSile Veteran
    edited October 2012
    music said:

    A human being can consciously perform good deeds and thereby gain good karma, and subsequently get good future births etc.. But a worm, for instance, cannot perform good karma at least consciously, so what happens to its fate? Does that mean once you start taking birth as anything other than human, you're finished (since it's only going to be a downward spiral from there)?

    In the Buddhist tradition, you can absolutely spiral up. There are past karmas that can ripen--i.e. you can go from human to worm to human--and, according to many teachers, merit can be acquired even without volition. So, one can benefit animals and other non-humans by reciting mantras within earshot, taking them around stupas, and otherwise exposing them to dharma. Lama Zopa Rinpoche has a lot of advice on this - links to it, and a lot of other great information on this topic, can be found at KhandroNet under the section Animal Merit.

    Excerpt:

    "It is a common devotional act for Buddhists, Hindus and the members of other belief systems, to perform circumambulation or kora (the Tibetan word.) That is, to walk round and round a stupa (Tib. chörten,) a temple or other shrine, usually in a clockwise direction.

    Ribur Rinpoche relates:

    Before the old house-holder Pelgye took ordination from Buddha Shakyamuni, Buddha checked if he had the merit to take ordination and saw that once, when this old man was born as a pig, a dog chased him around a stupa. The pig went around the stupa to save his dearly cherished life, not having any faith, but with this merit he was able to take ordination.

    Khenpo Chokey Gyaltsen of Pullahari, Nepal adds that the animal even went around the wrong way, in a counter-clockwise direction. The point is that Buddhists consider that there is merit whether it is the result of conscious intent or not. Such an act by an animal can lay the foundation for a future link with the Dharma.

    He added that the 12 or so dogs living at the Jamgon Kongtrul Monastery daily perform koras. And he added incidently, that there was no need to feel distress at the fact that my own dog had eaten a copy of Milarepa: Yogi of Tibet. Perhaps the animal was somehow moved to try and internalize the lessons that were in it. In other words, in his view some animals can have the inclination to connect with dharma."

    http://www.khandro.net/animal_about.htm

    Once I got a stray, mildly-feral cat to follow me 95% of the way around the Deer Park stupa. Just before completion he lay down to sun himself and refused to budge further. I always wondered if the almost-kora counted ;)





    person
  • BeejBeej Human Being Veteran
    Worms enrich the soil. Is that not good karma towards farmers or gardeners or other insects or animals that use the soil? Look a little closer. There is good in everything.
    Sile
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    ^ Oh, so it's not intent that matters?
  • SileSile Veteran
    vinlyn said:

    ^ Oh, so it's not intent that matters?

    It could be that past good intent on the part of the farmers is what drew helpful worms to their fields. We see our personal karma as arising in a chain, of course, but in practical application, that chain is actually a web interconnecting all other beings and their karmas.

    But I think--I have to check--the answer is that intent does matter, a lot, but karma doesn't come from intent alone. I think we're confusing karma and merit here, also. One can collect good merit, even while in unwitting animal form, due to past good karma ripening. Hence the worm who is taken around the stupa may not have woken up thinking, "I want to be taken around the stupa," however he/she may have the ripening karma of encountering a kind human who takes him/her around the stupa and thereby collects merit:

    "...with each circumambulation you are giving the insects that many causes of enlightenment, liberation from samsara, and happiness in future lives. You are creating the cause for their purification and for them to collect merit. Along the way, you also create these things for yourself..." (Lama Zopa Rinpoche, http://www.lamayeshe.com/index.php?sect=article&id=333)
  • What makes anyone think worms aspire to be humans?
    vinlynRebeccaSBeej
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Sile said:



    It could be that past good intent on the part of the farmers is what drew helpful worms to their fields. We see our personal karma as arising in a chain, of course, but in practical application, that chain is actually a web interconnecting all other beings and their karmas.

    But I think--I have to check--the answer is that intent does matter, a lot, but karma doesn't come from intent alone. I think we're confusing karma and merit here, also. One can collect good merit, even while in unwitting animal form, due to past good karma ripening. Hence the worm who is taken around the stupa may not have woken up thinking, "I want to be taken around the stupa," however he/she may have the ripening karma of encountering a kind human who takes him/her around the stupa and thereby collects merit:

    ...

    You may believe what you wish. But you have no evidence of this.
    I may believe what I wish. But I have no evidence.
    And although I wish I could think of a more sophisticated way of saying this...I think this is pure fantasy.

  • SileSile Veteran
    vinlyn said:

    You may believe what you wish. But you have no evidence of this.
    I may believe what I wish. But I have no evidence.
    And although I wish I could think of a more sophisticated way of saying this...I think this is pure fantasy.

    Why do you think it's pure fantasy?

  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    ^^ Can you show me some evidence that "past good intent on the part of the farmers is what drew helpful worms to their fields"?
  • SileSile Veteran
    vinlyn said:

    ^^ Can you show me some evidence that "past good intent on the part of the farmers is what drew helpful worms to their fields"?

    Can you show me some evidence that it's not? ;)

    Not really trying to be difficult - just saying what the Buddhist perspective teaches on this. One is free to reject these perspectives, but that's what the perspectives are, nonetheless.

    Personally, I see the earth as for all practical purposes a giant organism, so the idea that it has evolved to support its own existence (i.e. that existence tends to perpetuate itself, whether through the existence of worms aerating the soil or the sun continuing to shine) logical. But regardless of my personal fantasies, the OP's question was whether from a Buddhist perspective lifeforms reincarnate in a downward spiral, and the answer (from a Buddhist perspective) is no.
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Thank you for admitting it is your fantasy...which is what I said.
  • SileSile Veteran
    vinlyn said:

    Thank you for admitting it is your fantasy...which is what I said.

    The fantasy part was the "earth as an organism," which is not exactly the Buddhist depiction, for what it's worth.

    I have no problem with differing opinions, but I do have to ask what the point is, on a Buddhist forum, of denigrating people who are discussing Buddhist concepts? At the least you could be a bit more polite in voicing your alternate opinion, and then explain what the basis of your opinion is. At the moment, you haven't offered anything other than that it is merely your opinion that the Buddhist opinion is wrong.
    karasti
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    music said:

    A worm could be seen as performing good karma, for instance, improving the quality of the soil.

    What I mean is, it won't be consciously performing good or bad karma. It is not like the worm says to itself: I have a noble desire to improve the quality of soil, so let me do this good deed. It functions on instinct, not intentions.
    Yes, I don't think a worm is sentient.
  • SileSile Veteran
    "While primarily chosen because of the ease of genetic analysis, interest in C. elegans [a worm] was redoubled when it became the first animal to have its whole genome sequenced. The genome revealed much about the basic machinery of being an animal, and the specifics of being a nematode. One of the greatest surprises was the discovery of over 1,280 putative chemoreceptor genes. This exuberant repertoire (even dogs have only approximately 1,200 olfactory and chemoreceptor genes) suggests that the nematodes' wild environment must be extraordinarily complex." ;)

    http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/10/57
  • Sile said:

    "While primarily chosen because of the ease of genetic analysis, interest in C. elegans [a worm] was redoubled when it became the first animal to have its whole genome sequenced. The genome revealed much about the basic machinery of being an animal, and the specifics of being a nematode. One of the greatest surprises was the discovery of over 1,280 putative chemoreceptor genes. This exuberant repertoire (even dogs have only approximately 1,200 olfactory and chemoreceptor genes) suggests that the nematodes' wild environment must be extraordinarily complex." ;)

    http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/10/57

    Sorry @Sile. a bit late for me and it's been a long day, can you dumb it down a bit and cut the fat please...
  • SileSile Veteran
    edited October 2012

    Sile said:

    "While primarily chosen because of the ease of genetic analysis, interest in C. elegans [a worm] was redoubled when it became the first animal to have its whole genome sequenced. The genome revealed much about the basic machinery of being an animal, and the specifics of being a nematode. One of the greatest surprises was the discovery of over 1,280 putative chemoreceptor genes. This exuberant repertoire (even dogs have only approximately 1,200 olfactory and chemoreceptor genes) suggests that the nematodes' wild environment must be extraordinarily complex." ;)

    http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/10/57

    Sorry @Sile. a bit late for me and it's been a long day, can you dumb it down a bit and cut the fat please...
    Worms are more complex in some respects than dogs ;)
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Sile said:

    vinlyn said:

    Thank you for admitting it is your fantasy...which is what I said.

    The fantasy part was the "earth as an organism," which is not exactly the Buddhist depiction, for what it's worth.

    I have no problem with differing opinions, but I do have to ask what the point is, on a Buddhist forum, of denigrating people who are discussing Buddhist concepts? At the least you could be a bit more polite in voicing your alternate opinion, and then explain what the basis of your opinion is. At the moment, you haven't offered anything other than that it is merely your opinion that the Buddhist opinion is wrong.
    I will step back slightly here, because I looked up the definition of the word which, I think, is bothering you so much about what I said -- fantasy. I was using the word fantasy as being something which is not supported by evidence. I was being too broad in my use of that word.

    So I'll go back to my other statement from above: Can you show me some evidence that "past good intent on the part of the farmers is what drew helpful worms to their fields"?

    And just so you'll no that I am not attempting to denigrate your viewpoint -- I believe in God. I can't prove that, any more than someone else can prove God does not exist. So, I am using the same standard for my belief that I am using for your belief.

    Can you show me some evidence that the number of worms in a farmer's field is dependent on whether a farmer developed negative or positive karma?

  • BeejBeej Human Being Veteran
    Evidence? It's not an episode of CSI. Karma has no tangible trail of evidence. It's a jazz riff. You can either listen to the notes being played and make a choice about the music or you can listen to the notes and the spaces in between the notes and then make a choice about what you heard. If you approach Karma as if it were a science experiment, eventually you will determine that you simply don't have a powerful enough microscope.
    PrairieGhost
  • Sile said:

    Sile said:

    "While primarily chosen because of the ease of genetic analysis, interest in C. elegans [a worm] was redoubled when it became the first animal to have its whole genome sequenced. The genome revealed much about the basic machinery of being an animal, and the specifics of being a nematode. One of the greatest surprises was the discovery of over 1,280 putative chemoreceptor genes. This exuberant repertoire (even dogs have only approximately 1,200 olfactory and chemoreceptor genes) suggests that the nematodes' wild environment must be extraordinarily complex." ;)

    http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/10/57

    Sorry @Sile. a bit late for me and it's been a long day, can you dumb it down a bit and cut the fat please...
    Worms are more complex in some respects than dogs ;)
    A wrist watch is more complex than some of the things I say, go figure.
    Sile
  • SileSile Veteran
    edited October 2012
    vinlyn said:

    Can you show me some evidence that the number of worms in a farmer's field is dependent on whether a farmer developed negative or positive karma?

    By the Buddhist definition of karma--which is that it is sort of an infinite, intricate web of connections--I think that proving where one specific ripening came from would be hard. It would be kind of like asking, "Prove that your great-great-great-grandfather is responsible for you being at your workdesk this morning at 9:10 a.m." Well--my ggg-grandfather is responsible in some way for that, but how would I prove he has anything to do with my exact location at the current moment, which has been affected not only by his procreation, but a million other causes and effects?

    But one could say, "Based on the genealogical evidence, you are likely the genuine descendent of Mr. Jones," and then one could say, "Well, at the least, I know he's probably genetically responsible for me existing." There's at least some connection--not completely provable (unless you have genetic evidence from your ggg-grandfather), but evidence exists in favor of it.

    Similarly, Buddhist philosophers feel evidence exists for karma, and treatises exist on the subject of karma and how it works. The treatises present evidence for the existence of cause and effect, and for the second concept that the kind of cause is related to the kind of effect. I.e. when one puts ones' finger in a flame, ones' finger gets hot--the moon doesn't turn to blue cheese. As a very crude and basic logical point, then, we can propose that if cause is related to effect, then a positive effect is most likely to have come from a positive cause. Health wormy field = previous positive cause.

    One can definitely reject any theory; but one would in this case be in the difficult position of trying to show that cause is not related to effect, which takes more effort in my experience than showing that cause is related to effect. Occam's Razor would be in favor of a relationship between cause and effect, I believe.

  • A worm may not be able to perform good deeds, but when the worm dies the karma and the effects of karma that it carried with it, may have at last been completed.
Sign In or Register to comment.