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.
Some questions on karma
Mountains
Veteran
Thanks again to all for the kind responses to my questions thus far. Karma vexes me somewhat. I understand that the law of karma is not akin to the Judeo-Christian-Muslim concept of a vengeful God smiting us for our sins. That I get. It's more like a bank account that has debits and credits. But my question is, if something horrible happens to me in this life (let's say for example I get a very painful type of cancer), is that, or could that be a result of debits from my "karma account" from a previous life? Likewise, if this life is utterly blissful, happy, fulfilled and otherwise great, does that mean that in a previous life I did some really stupendous things that were credits to my "karma account"? It's difficult not to see it as a tit-for-tat kind of thing. My reading on this hasn't made it a lot clearer to me.
Thanks!
Mtns
Thanks!
Mtns
0
Comments
This is superstitious and not kamma as the Buddha taught it. If you drive drunk and get into a car accident that leaves you paralyzed... that's the result of kamma from this very life, from the choices you made that lead to that situation. That's what you know, and that's what's useful to practice. But kamma isn't simply cause-and-effect.
For kamma as the Buddha taught it, I would suggest these sources:
http://www.suanmokkh.org/archive/arts/message/kamma1.htm
http://www.unfetteredmind.com/articles/karma.php
http://www.unfetteredmind.com/articles/explain.php
Intentional actions rooted in greed, hatred or delusion produce painful feelings, while intentional actions rooted in non-greed, non-hatred and non-delusion produce the opposite. And then there are acts rooted in both that bring mixed results (AN 4.235). By bringing kamma to an end, however, the mind is said to become free and undisturbed.
Intention (cetana) is a product of the aggregate of mental formations (sankharakhandha). The cause by which kamma comes into play is contact (phassa). Furthermore, according to Nyanatiloka's Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines, vipaka is "any ... mental phenomenon (e.g. bodily agreeable or painful feeling, sense-consciousness, etc.), which is the result of wholesome or unwholesome volitional action (karma, q.v.) through body, speech or mind, done either in this or some previous life."
Essentially, intentional actions of body, speech, and mind produce results that are said to have the potential to ripen during this life-time, in the next birth or in later births. This can be taken literally (i.e., ripening in the form of a pleasant or unpleasant rebirth in an external realm of existence), or metaphorically (i.e., ripening in the form of various pleasant or unpleasant mental states). In the words of S. Dhammika:
Therefore, I think that in certain contexts, it would 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. This is especially true in regard to psychological reactions considering that vipaka is limited specifically to "mental phenomena."
The results of karma (called kamma-vipaka formally) are one of the four imponderables ie unconjecturable, and only known by a Fully Awakened Buddha, as I recall it.
There is no tit for tat, but surely what we do has effects. We can see this just by making breakfast in the mornings
Peace, dear Mountains
brian
Forget everything I said above. Kamma is actually quite simple. As Thanissaro Bhikkhu puts it, "It's simply the fact of action—you do something unskillful, it's going to come back in an unpleasant way." In the same way, if you do something skillful, it's going to come back in a pleasant way.
is there 'anything' called Karma Bhava?
But at the same time, we need to realise the relationship of the cause of this present moment with the rest of the effect.
hence karma means the great positive energy we have in the present moment that we can totally change the effects of all the manifesting phenomena, as our mind is writing the history of our own life
so if negative things happened, we have the opporunity to do repentance & reflect of our past deeds , resolved to do any correction in our way/persception towards life and other fellow beings / enviroment . Do our Buddhist practices , prayer here means to resolve / pledge to the direction you have visioned and put all this into action in your life
"Physical, verbal or mental acts that imprint habitual tendencies in the mind."
The more I observe my own suffering, the more that makes perfect sense to me.
Very good. Thanks. And likewise the imprints reverberate in the physical realm creating, creations, creating. Something like that
That definition seems to make karma deterministic, which doesn't really fit with my understanding of Karma or the wider dharmic casual system.
On that view an action seems to go out into the world and it will return at some later time with its ripe fruit, wholesome or unwholesome. Not only is this deterministic it also seems to bestow intelligence upon the karma?
As I understand it our actions for, mundane reasons, increase or decrease the probability of some return karmic consequence in the future but also start delivering their consequences the moment the action is cast.
If I slander someone, then that action will increase the chance of later unwholesome consequences for me. But also, from the moment of the slander, the karmic effects will be negativizing within me and those involved, eg guilt, mental conditionings from the activated defilements, social negativity and so on...
I see karma more as a currents and ripples sea of moral and mental possibilities rather than these "heart seeking missiles" that hunt us down with their payload, good or bad as it may be.
mat
No, it's simply the basic principle of kamma. There's a cause and effect relationship between our actions and how they're experienced. We can't undo past actions, but we can mitigate the impact they have on our mental state, and we always have choice in the present moment, so I fail to see how this is deterministic.
I guess the lack of clarity is in "it's going to come back in an unpleasant way"
Does that mean it will come back or it may come back?
If the former, its deterministic, if the latter its probabilistic
Which do think he means?
I find that hard to make sense of. Does that mean that for 40+ years The Buddha was not bound by Karma? That his actions and intentions were somehow outside of the moral and mental world of his peers?
Thanks:)
Mat
I'd like to think of karma as merely cause and effect.
Outside of Buddhism kamma is often defined this way. But the Buddha certainly was never beyond cause-and-effect.
This view point is too empiracle for me. I see Karma as more than the experience but less than majic.
The Buddha lived half his life as... a buddha. He was beyond causes and their effects? That's interesting. How does one live beyond cause-and-effect?
by being a Buddha.
Or did he not fart at all, because the cause for the fart was not there to begin with either, because he was da Buddha?
Cause-and-effect is like gravity. You can't live beyond cause-and-effect.
You can live beyond kamma.
then liberation and Buddhahood are also impossible.
And no I dont think Buddha farted anymore.
A truly "unconditioned" mind is free of causality.
Out of curiosity, do you think there is a difference between a Buddha and an arhat? And if so, what is the difference?
That's ridiculous, farting is a natural bodily function whether one is a Buddha or not.....or do you think an enlightened being emits rainbows instead ?
.
actually yes.
His unicorn would propel him into the sky first though and then he would shit jellybeans down upon the arhats.
A delicious alternative to imaginary garbage in the mind of the observer, perhaps !
.
Wow, not the dreaded 'Hell Realms' for we OB's ? Relative reality at last !
.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->
Physical pain is different from dukkha. "Suffering" is not close to an adequate translation of "dukkha." Dukkha is clinging and craving for things to be or not to be. Dukkha has to do with the mind. See the Sallatha Sutta, Nakulapita Sutta, Maha-parinibbana Sutta, etc.
From the beloved Access to Insight:
But the Buddha also taught that our actions have effects that extend far beyond our present life, determining the quality of rebirth we can expect after death: act in wholesome, skillful ways and you are destined for a favorable rebirth; act in unwholesome, unskillful ways and an unpleasant rebirth awaits. Thus we coast for aeons through samsara, propelled from one birth to the next by the quality of our choices and our actions.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sagga/loka.html
THIS is superstitious and speculative. Not everything is kamma. And even if the Buddha said that the above quote is true, it would still be superstitious and speculative. It's not useful for actual practice, to wonder, "I just developed lung cancer after smoking three packs a day for 40 years; did I do something in my past life to deserve this?" or "A freakin' anvil just fell from the sky and landed on my head; did I do something in my past life to deserve this?"
How can we dismiss the op's question as speculative and superstitious when there is relevant information in the quote that I just posted to support some of the things h/she is curious about?
Sure the idea of an "karma account" is off the mark but your original answer to the op was extremely simplistic and completely glanced over the question.
lots of people here try to deny this.
No. If that were the case then Tibetan tulku's dying from cancer or getting serious illness in their lives and having operations and various treatments, must have done terrible things in a previous life!
Oh...no, wait, sometimes their students say they're deliberately 'manifesting illness' in order to teach others how to deal with it !
.
.
actually, thats exactly what it means, among other things.
And your way of proving this is........?
.
there isnt way to prove it.
commentaries are littered with stories like this though.
Does the world end when we die?
The quote you just posted is just that, a quote. You quoted a piece of commentary. Had the Buddha himself said it, it would still not matter. The OP asked if something shitty happens to him, if it's the result of a "bad deed" from a past life. You cannot possibly answer this with absolute certainty - can you? Even within the Abhidhamma, it states that not all is a result of kamma. Niyama Dhammas. His questions cannot be answered, it is pure speculation, and unhelpful in practice. Everything has a cause, not everything is kamma.
No, it does not. Again, the Tipitaka does not even support this. Dhamma Niyama and Biija Niyama come to mind. Or do you know for certain it was the result of a "bad deed" in a past life?
Thus... it is speculative... XD
Of course "the world" doesnt end when we die. Where are you trying to go with that one?
But is a dismissal of the question helpful?
but is it "superstitious"?
Mundus wasn't dismissing the question, just pointing out that its impossible to answer it accurately.
.