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.
Of course "the world" doesnt end when we die. Where are you trying to go with that one?
Yes, of course it doesn't. Thus I don't deny:
But the Buddha also taught that our actions have effects that extend far beyond our present life
But is a dismissal of the question helpful?
I didn't dismiss his question. I explained that the conclusions he seemed to be gravitating towards were speculative and superstitious and that we should look at our actions in this life and see how they affect us, which is something we can see with certainty. I provided references that explained kamma as the Buddha taught it as well.
Yup, to assume that all the bad things that happen to us in our lives is a result of an action in a past life, while being unable to provide any proof, is indeed superstitious in my books.
I dont think anyone was making that assumption.
The op was asking a question.
I didn't dismiss his question. I explained that the conclusions he seemed to be gravitating towards were speculative and superstitious and that we should look at our actions in this life and see how they affect us, which is something we can see with certainty. I provided references that explained kamma as the Buddha taught it as well.
Is there a problem here? :wtf:
no problem.
Your blanket statements about superstition etc. completely dodged the question in order to allow you to set up links to references that you agree with or deem not superstitious and speculative. I hardly think that is a complete or accurate answer to the questions.
The discussion that we are currently having is directing us to a more thorough answer to the questions that inspired the thread.
Is that what those squiggly lines with dots on the bottom at the end of his sentences meant?
I know he was asking a question. And I did my best to answer it.
I dont think anyone was making that assumption.
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!
actually, thats exactly what it means, among other things.
I'm off. Not sure what I did that got your knickers in a knot with my initial response, but I apologize.
Your blanket statements about superstition etc. completely dodged the question in order to allow you to set up links to references that you agree with or deem not superstitious and speculative. I hardly think that is a complete or accurate answer to the questions.
Shengpen, dear. You said your statements cannot be proven. Thus they are speculative and superstitious by definition. You agree that a definitive answer cannot be given. If you disagree with the links I posted, and feel they're speculative and superstitious, you're free to refute them as well.
Shengpen, dear. You said your statements cannot be proven. Thus they are speculative and superstitious by definition. You agree that a definitive answer cannot be given. If you disagree with the links I posted, and feel they're speculative and superstitious, you're free to refute them as well.
just because something cannot be "proven" does not mean it is superstitions (in the pejorative use of the word).
The use of superstitious in this way is what I have a problem with.
I dont think its "going dukka". Debate and disagreement leads to new ideas and ways of approaching the topics that we discuss. Even if it boils down to a single word, in this case, the pejorative use of superstitious in regards to that which cannot be proven.
The cointelpro statement is pretty funny though.
I think we have to consider what it means to be beyond karma. It means the reaction that causes suffering is no longer operating. It doesn't mean being beyond cause and effect in the phenomenal world.
I think it means being beyond the causes of suffering.
I think we have to consider what it means to be beyond karma. It means the reaction that causes suffering is no longer operating. It doesn't mean being beyond cause and effect in the phenomenal world.
I think it means being beyond the causes of suffering.
'everything' is not kamma
but
everything we experience is our own 'kamma vipaka' (effect of a previous cause -our own cetana)
because we are not mindful or deluded
from the same 'kamma vipaka' we create new kamma (cause- cetana for future kamma vipaka-effect)
cause/effect/cause->effect/cause->effect/cause
Buddha and Arahnts also experience effects (kamma vipaka) but there is no creation of cause out of effects
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.
Okay, so tell me how that's not tit-for-tat, or some form of punishment for my unskillful acts. Whether it's "God" doing the punishing, or the universe doing the punishing, or my own consciousness doing the punishing, it's still a negative result to my unskillful act. If I act unskillfully in this life, and the result of that in my next life is negative (I'm reborn as a cockroach, or I get a painful kind of cancer and suffer for months), how does one not see that as "punishment" for the unskillful act committed in this life? I'm sure I'm not the only one who must see it that way, am I? I suppose it depends on how you define "punishment", but in the end, it's a negative result (that's not the right word, is it?) to an unskillful act.
"Ah, yes. Ajaan Khao is finally done with the burden of hauling his sankharas around. I visited him four years ago and saw all the difficulties his physical sankharas were giving him. He had to have other people looking after him all the time. As for me, I have no bad karma with regard to the body. But as forbad karma associated with the body, even noble ones — no matter what the level of their attainment — still have to contend with these things until they're finally released from them and no longer involved with them. The normal state of the mind is that it has to live with things of this sort. But as for the mind that's well-trained, when these things arise it can immediately let them go and maintain its peace, without worries, without attachments, free from the burden of having to be involved with them. That's all there is."
It was only then that I understood what Luang Pu had meant when he said that he had no bad karma with regard to the body.
For even though he had reached his 96th year, his body was strong, spry, clean, and calm. Always fully mindful and alert, he suffered no senility or forgetful lapses at all.
When the time came for him to die, he died quietly with no signs of pain or difficulty. He caused no trouble, mental or physical, for those who were looking after him: no waste of doctors, no waste of medicine, no waste of anyone's time.
"What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.
"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant... completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.
Comments
Yes, of course it doesn't. Thus I don't deny:
I didn't dismiss his question. I explained that the conclusions he seemed to be gravitating towards were speculative and superstitious and that we should look at our actions in this life and see how they affect us, which is something we can see with certainty. I provided references that explained kamma as the Buddha taught it as well.
Is there a problem here? :wtf:
I dont think anyone was making that assumption.
The op was asking a question.
Ooooh ! Lets have a fight then, I'll throw down my wooly mitten !:p
:viking:
.
Your blanket statements about superstition etc. completely dodged the question in order to allow you to set up links to references that you agree with or deem not superstitious and speculative. I hardly think that is a complete or accurate answer to the questions.
The discussion that we are currently having is directing us to a more thorough answer to the questions that inspired the thread.
I know he was asking a question. And I did my best to answer it.
I'm off.
Shengpen, dear. You said your statements cannot be proven. Thus they are speculative and superstitious by definition. You agree that a definitive answer cannot be given. If you disagree with the links I posted, and feel they're speculative and superstitious, you're free to refute them as well.
that might be the first emoticon that I have actually liked.
i wish i had some knickers.
no reason to apologize. If it seems like my proverbial knickers are bunched i apologize as well.
just because something cannot be "proven" does not mean it is superstitions (in the pejorative use of the word).
The use of superstitious in this way is what I have a problem with.
Metta not bicker!;)
mat
The cointelpro statement is pretty funny though.
"cointelpro" are plants working for the feds who would infiltrate counter culture groups to cause trouble.
Used in a humourous sense in this sense.
Now I get it. Good one!
I think it means being beyond the causes of suffering.
'everything' is not kamma
but
everything we experience is our own 'kamma vipaka' (effect of a previous cause -our own cetana)
because we are not mindful or deluded
from the same 'kamma vipaka' we create new kamma (cause- cetana for future kamma vipaka-effect)
cause/effect/cause->effect/cause->effect/cause
Buddha and Arahnts also experience effects (kamma vipaka) but there is no creation of cause out of effects
Okay, so tell me how that's not tit-for-tat, or some form of punishment for my unskillful acts. Whether it's "God" doing the punishing, or the universe doing the punishing, or my own consciousness doing the punishing, it's still a negative result to my unskillful act. If I act unskillfully in this life, and the result of that in my next life is negative (I'm reborn as a cockroach, or I get a painful kind of cancer and suffer for months), how does one not see that as "punishment" for the unskillful act committed in this life? I'm sure I'm not the only one who must see it that way, am I? I suppose it depends on how you define "punishment", but in the end, it's a negative result (that's not the right word, is it?) to an unskillful act.
Mtns
It was only then that I understood what Luang Pu had meant when he said that he had no bad karma with regard to the body.
For even though he had reached his 96th year, his body was strong, spry, clean, and calm. Always fully mindful and alert, he suffered no senility or forgetful lapses at all.
When the time came for him to die, he died quietly with no signs of pain or difficulty. He caused no trouble, mental or physical, for those who were looking after him: no waste of doctors, no waste of medicine, no waste of anyone's time.
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books/Ajaan_Atulo_Dhamma_Legacy.htm
"What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.
"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant... completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.