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.
What is the Buddhist view about conditions like progeria?
cook99
Explorer
Sam Bern is born with progeria. Would Buddha say that he was born this way due to his karma?
0
Comments
Christians/Muslims believe that God made him like that.
Buddhist explanation is his karma.
The good and bad results that arise from kamma are not rewards or punishments. They are not imposed by any outside power. Actions produce their results naturally through the law of cause and effect working in the moral realm. This natural law is called "kamma niyama", the order of kamma, which functions autonomously. The Buddha explains how kamma is the cause of differences in the fortunes of people.
(a) Some people die prematurely because in the past they have destoyed life. The karmic result of killing is to be shortlived. Others live long because they were kind and compassionate, they had respect and reverence for life. (b) Some are sickly because they have injured and hurt other beings. (c) Those who were often angry and harsh become ugly, those who were patient and cheerful become beautiful. (d) Some are rich because they have been generous in the past, some are poor because they have been selfish. (e) Some are influential because they have rejoiced in the good fortunes of others. (f) Some are weak and powerless because they have been envious of the good fortunes of others. (g) Some are intelligent because they have been reflective and studious in the past, because they always enquired and investigated matters. Some are dull and stupid because they have been lazy and negligent, because they never studied and did not think. ~Bikkhu Bodhi.According to Wikipedia:
I don't understand much of what they're saying but I don’t see why Buddhists should think they know better.
Personally I wouldn’t drag in karma and rebirth, but if one chooses to do so, I think it is important to be a little careful about putting simplistic labels of “good” and “bad” to a particular type of rebirth.
I think it is quite possible to be rich and healthy but to be living in hell, as much as it is possible to be poor and disabled and to be living in heaven.
The relatively common view among Thai Buddhists would be that it was karma.
Not saying that's right or wrong, but that is the "old world" view of karma in Thailand.
For example, my ex has a serious heart condition and then developed hepititis from a blood transfusion when he was suffering from aplastic anemia, which also required radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and bone marrow transplant. He attributes it all to karma from a past life. And in case you're thinking he's a hick, no, earned B.S. and M.S. degrees in science from Thailand's most prestigious university, was a biology teacher in his early life, and is now fairly high up in the national Education Ministry.
I think @Citta addressed this type of question in a previous thread.
Are you saying that citta is the trusted expert on these matters?
Citta certainly isn't.
Even the Buddha said that to assume any particular condition is due to a specific cause was one of the 'Imponderables ' that led nowhere.
You might want to google the Niyamas. which looks at causes, karma is just one of them.
By the way, when you ask what "the Buddhist view" of almost anything is, you are fairly unlikely to get "a view". We are a diverse group.
If Progeria is indeed due to genetic factors its cause would come in to the catagory of Bija-Niyama.
No, but he made a good point; and he made another good point above. You may have well asked the question 'grog dryers fgva kcllssos? - it would have supplied the same meaningless answers.
What is the difference between 'old world' view and 'new world' view?
To really answer that question would require a treatise.
But let's say that "old world" Buddhist views are based more on traditions handed down. "New world" Buddhist views are more developed through intellectual practice with a Western slant.
Discussions on Reincarnation and Karma tie you up in knots.
When you self-express a law unto thyself, you are the law - and who is to judge you.
The fact that this person appeared out of this world in this particular form, and you expect 'buddhists' to judge him for his appearance, leaves a lot to be desired, in the sense that buddhists are meant to cultivate compassion, not judgement. let's rejoice in his appearance shall we, as much as we shall rejoice in you and your partners appearance.
In this case though its a strange one.
The idea that all that befalls us can be traced back in a simple way to karma vipaka was denied by the Buddha..
That was one of the ideas that were prevalent in his time...he said that the reaiity was more complex.
That there were various causes which came in a number of possible permutations *
It has nevertheless crept back in to western ideas of Buddhism, possibly due to confusion with " Hinduism "..
I did and it was a very interesting read indeed.
You say it's because of MY karma. You don't say to someone else "you are deformed to to YOUR karma". Am I right? I just think you should not tell anothers difficulties are karma, but it can be liberating to know that some of your problems etc are your karma.
I agree with you @Jeffrey. This is in a way a purgatorial compound, where people can work out their wicked views and karma, you are about to be liberated it seems - only 2343256 seconds left, whereas I've got about 234 million tears to go....
The statements in @hermitwin's post are part of the foundational text, the Lam Rim, of Tibetan Buddhism.
That is a very good point. For one thing, there are many schools of buddhism with many differing views. Besides that, buddhism is generally more of an inquiring, philosophical practice than it is a cemented dogma. In those inquiries, different people will find varying interpretations of the teachings depending on what is most relevant to them.
Personally, I'm agnostic on the issue of metaphysical karma/rebirth. I think that karma is true in the sense that ignoring the smell of your own bullshit only allows it to pile up in your bed, and rebirth is definitely true in the sense that everything reforms and transfigures all of the time. As for any kind of literal reality to past lives etc. I don't think that we can truly know for sure.
Of course, that's just my view on it. Lots of buddhists, lots of answers
"The Buddhist theory [of karma] has also to be distinguished from an Âjîvika theory which asserted that all present actions and experiences are strictly determined by previous karma. Karma according to Buddhism, while being non-deterministic, was one of many factors which conditioned the nature of the individual's experience of pleasure and pain" (K.N. Jayatilleke, The Message of the Buddha, p. 148).
In my opinion, he'd probably say something like, "'The body is afflicted, weak, & encumbered. For who, looking after this body, would claim even a moment of true health, except through sheer foolishness? So you should train yourself: 'Even though I may be afflicted in body, my mind will be unafflicted.' That is how you should train yourself" (SN 22.1).
Some Buddhists would no doubt like reincarnation, rebirth and the words of the Buddha to be taught in science class as an alternative to creationism and Darwin's crackpot theories (which have no overwhelming evidence . . . oh wait they do . . .)
What does your common, uncommon or any sense suggest? :buck: .
The different schools have different foundational texts. Which text is hermitwin from? My school's text is the Jewel Ornament of Liberation.
In any case the texts are for a person to read themselves and not preach against someone else.
Even if it is his kamma, it is still an article of faith until you can remember your "past lives". Even then one can't be absolutely sure but in the suttas the Buddha and others clearly recollected their previously lives for very long time. Unless you are one of those people, it may be better to put the question aside and consider the simplest formulation of kamma. Now, that is easier to understand.
http://www.buddhanet.net/dhammapada/d_twin.htm
Perhaps we are only seeing one side of the coin here. Can we really say who has good or bad karma? Who can make that judgement without seeing the full or total karma?
Isn't the Lamrim foundational to all 4 schools in TB?
Absolutely not @Dakini.
I looked up the Ajivikas. This, from Wikipedia:
_Having being extinct for a long time, what information is known about the Ājīvika movement is primarily from historical references left behind in Jain and Buddhist sources, that may therefore be hostile to it. According to some of these sources, the Ājīvikas believed that a cycle of reincarnation of the soul was determined by a precise and non-personal cosmic principle called niyati (destiny or fate) that was completely independent of the person's actions. The same sources therefore make them out to be strict fatalists, who did not believe in karma._
There seems to be more to the story than this ^^^. It sounds like they combined a belief in karma with a strict fatalism re: the fruition of the seeds of past actions. Some scholars say some Ajivika beliefs found their way into Buddhism, and that the Buddha spent a few years studying with the leader of that sect.
Well, that's very interesting. Apparently the Gelug do believe in a strict fatalism based on past actions, and maybe the other schools don't.
The Buddha's doctrine was focused on the truth of the inevitability of affliction and how to deal more satisfactorily with suffering.
You can fritter your life away by trying to figure out imponderables such as why this man was born with this illness.
What comes before and what comes after is not as important as what you choose to do about your present moment and situation at hand.
We all have our lot in life. Shall we use our circumstances to pine our life away or shall we make the most of our life despite our circumstances?
That is a more skillful reasoning.
Buddhism is a doctrine of possibilities, not of limitations.
I wouldn't feel able to comment on Gelug teachings @Dakini..but the LamRim corpus indicates one of the deepest fault lines in the Vajrayana..
Basically, and this is broadbrush, most schools /teachers follow either Padmasambhava or Tsongkapa.
The former represents the original Vajrayana as found in Tibet..unreformed and full on.
Its teachers may be monks, but they are certainly not required to be.
Many of its teachers are married women and men.
The latter represents reformed Vajrayana, which is very similar in some important respects to the other monastic centred paths like the Theravada.
Its monks follow the Vinaya and its lay people take the precepts.
The Lamrim teachings most commonly found come from the tradition of Tsongkapa. Who based them on the teachings of Atisha.
Thanks for reminding me, @Citta. I'd forgotten that bit of history. Well put.
There is a lam rim in all TB, but the text is different from each. Kagyu uses the Jewel Ornament of Liberation. That is the text a person studies on a three year retreat to become a Llama. I just read the chapter on suffering in samsara. The next chapter is karma and it's result; I will report back when I have read it or just PM you
The JoL was compiled by Gampopa who was the main student (one other) of Milerapa.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milarepa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gampopa
Gampopa studied the Lam Rim Kadampa teachings and also the yoga teachings of Milerapa. He brought those to together in the form of a Lam Rim text.
As in Cittas post the JoL is in the tradition of padmasambhava.
I'll report back when I have read the chapter as I said.
Actually the JoL is probably similar to hermitwin's post. It is from medieval Tibetan culture. I recall it says that people who lie will have bad breath. haha
No Lam Rim in Dzogchen or Maha Ati @Jeffrey.
@Citta, Khenpo Gyamptso Tsultrim Rinpoche Rinpoche says a lam rim text like the Jewel Ornament of Liberation is a preparation for his text: Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness. I guess that is mahayana text on emptiness.
And then that text, PSoMoE, is preliminary for my teachers text the Buddha Within which is a Maha Ati I think.
And then Lama Shenpen or perhaps her husband Rigdzin Shikpo teach that Mahayana and Maha Ati are inseparable and there is a union between Buddha Shakyamuni and Buddha Padmacara.
Padmasambhava or Buddha Padmacara: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padmasambhava (for others I'm sure Citta knows about Padmasambhava)
The Tibetans have a saying @Jeffrey.." Every valley has a Lama..and every Lama has a dharma "..
Well your teaching is also from a valley as is mine :P
Don't let such things age you prematurely.