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.
Does karma have limits?
The recent earthquake in Haiti caused a similar scale of destruction to the Asian tsunami of 2004. At that time, I remember that some Buddhists explained the tragedy in terms of karma. One explanation I heard was that because the population density of the affected area had increased, the density of bad karma had also increased to the point that it caused the disaster.
My understanding is that karma describes the law of cause and effect or, in other words, it states that actions have consequences. So, as a simple example, a person who is hostile to others will become the victim of other people’s hostility. To use a Christian expression, as you sow so shall you reap. Although this is simple in theory, in practice, because of our ignorance and our lack of insight, we can find it difficult to make the connection between our behaviour and its consequences, especially when there is a long period between our actions and the ultimate consequences. Because of this difficulty we may start to imagine connections that don’t actually exist and, in particular, we make two errors.<O:p></O:p>
Firstly, if karma is seen as punishment then there is be a tendency to link any misfortune to bad behaviour. But once a rational and automatic connection between actions and their specific consequences is lost then karma becomes superstition. It also raises a question about who or what is arranging the punishment. <O:p></O:p>
Secondly, because we have an ego we are egocentric, which means that we see everything with reference to ourselves so, for example, we imagine that a tsunami has something to do with our behaviour. Although Buddha described a universe in which everything is connected, karma is only relevant to human behaviour. In the case of the tsunami, the law of cause and effect still applies (the movement of molten rock in the Earth’s mantle caused the tectonic plates that make up the Earth’s crust to collide, which caused an earthquake, which in turn caused the tsunami), but this is confined to the physical world and it is oblivious to our existence and our karma.<O:p></O:p>
To get to the point, karma results in suffering, but not all our suffering is caused by karma. If we believe that we bring all our suffering onto ourselves then we unjustly add more suffering to our suffering. Sometimes we are just unlucky. We can be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Bad things happen to good people. <O:p></O:p>
I would be interested to hear what other people think about the influence of karma in our lives. <O:p></O:p>
My understanding is that karma describes the law of cause and effect or, in other words, it states that actions have consequences. So, as a simple example, a person who is hostile to others will become the victim of other people’s hostility. To use a Christian expression, as you sow so shall you reap. Although this is simple in theory, in practice, because of our ignorance and our lack of insight, we can find it difficult to make the connection between our behaviour and its consequences, especially when there is a long period between our actions and the ultimate consequences. Because of this difficulty we may start to imagine connections that don’t actually exist and, in particular, we make two errors.<O:p></O:p>
Firstly, if karma is seen as punishment then there is be a tendency to link any misfortune to bad behaviour. But once a rational and automatic connection between actions and their specific consequences is lost then karma becomes superstition. It also raises a question about who or what is arranging the punishment. <O:p></O:p>
Secondly, because we have an ego we are egocentric, which means that we see everything with reference to ourselves so, for example, we imagine that a tsunami has something to do with our behaviour. Although Buddha described a universe in which everything is connected, karma is only relevant to human behaviour. In the case of the tsunami, the law of cause and effect still applies (the movement of molten rock in the Earth’s mantle caused the tectonic plates that make up the Earth’s crust to collide, which caused an earthquake, which in turn caused the tsunami), but this is confined to the physical world and it is oblivious to our existence and our karma.<O:p></O:p>
To get to the point, karma results in suffering, but not all our suffering is caused by karma. If we believe that we bring all our suffering onto ourselves then we unjustly add more suffering to our suffering. Sometimes we are just unlucky. We can be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Bad things happen to good people. <O:p></O:p>
I would be interested to hear what other people think about the influence of karma in our lives. <O:p></O:p>
0
Comments
Blessings to all. _/\_
P.S. I like the wolf in sheep's clothing photo (I'm not sure what you're trying to say about yourself though)
ii) the person who have committed many negative karma who experiencing a sudden windfall, likelihood is preparing for that evil person an even longer in duration and far greater suffering than one could imagine . because the person negative karmic debt is so great and heavy, the normal natural warning starts to fail to warn this person , and the karmic weight drove this evil person to an extremely very difficult return path
In Mahayana there is this term as collective karma shared by a group of individual, or these group of similar karmic weight are pull together to experience sort of similar phenomena effect
As I understand it, actions have effects, consequences are interpretations of effects. This is true of mental/moral(karmic) correlates and less human causalities.
That doesn't really work with Karma. karma isnt about merit and punishment, though later Buddhist schools certainly make it so. to Thai Buddhists Kama is like tokens that can be traded... quite peculiar.
I agree:) Which is a flaw in the merit view of kama:)
Well... you need be careful here. There is no distinction in buddhist ontology between human and non human. Karma is the same kind of casual system as billiard balls and quarks but its about the mental and moral systems rather than the "purely" physical.
Karma isnt majic. Its not "stuff" its just the many to many causal relationships and how they effect human experience in vast and intricate and subtle ways.
Mat
Hi Citta
I personally find the idea of "ripening" to be mysterious and missleading to me. It connotes this idea of our volitions leaving us to return as one somehow unified reprocussion, good or bad.
This view differs from the idea of the interconnected causal framework of our lives in a constant sense of feedback.
If I steel from you there will be many karmic payloads of that act. Some immediate and others down the line. Some direct, others indirect. I don't see that there is this singular consequence waiting to come and drop its unwholesome payload upon me:)
What do you think?
Mat
For example, I befriended someone who was untrustworthy, thinking my motivations as totally pure. I was betrayed. From my own ignorance, the karma later ripened.
Maybe, if you are talking a bunch of grapes rather than one big melon as it often gets construed:)
I was thinking as I sent that "maybe that's a bit lame!":)
The idea is some may think that there will be a big singular vipaka wheras one just needs to look to DO to see how that cant be, it will me lots of little ripenings throughout our lives.
I guess sometimes those grapes can be as big as melons!
Mat
What is vipaka?
Never mind I just googled it.
The mental/moral/spiritual payload of our actions, good or bad.
You don't get melons from planting grape seeds. Take care in what you cultivate.
The suttas use karma (kamma) as an explantion for why people are born a certain way on in a certain place.
Is everything in life a result of karma?? I don't know. I have been told that it isn't.
Nios.
Karma is not punishment and it doesn't involve sins.
That's pretty much what I was trying to get at.
Did you not read my post properly?
No worries
Isn't this really just the the Bramen/Hindu notion?
Mat
I'd like to second that. Great post and an important point :uphand:
Oh I like that:) Where is that from please? As in which sutta?
Ya. Another mystery for me and Buddhism:)
Here is one I've known personally:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagdud_Tulku_Rinpoche
It's possible. I know little of Hinduism, but from what I understand, their view of karma is slightly different to buddhists but there a few paralells.
Nios.
OK, but as I understand it the differences are mystical not structural??
Mat
Well for a start Nios the Vedic ( Hindu ) view is that there is a soul ( atta) which is born into a new body . The Buddha taught that there was no atta...hence the "an atta" (no atta ) doctrine. Because they accept the atta doctrine Hindus tend to ascribe a clear one to one action and reaction nature to karma. You give someone a black eye, and so you are born with birthmark etc etc.
Not sure what you're asking there? Care to clarify in laymens terms?
Thank you Citta.
We all have preferences; likes and dislikes....attachment and aversion.
Yes, Karma in Buddhism is a structural framework that links causation with experience and experience with all aspects of reality.
in Hindusim, and some takes on buddhism, Karma has mystical accoutrements such as merit and punishment and, as cita pointed out, things like souls and deities.
So I wanted to know if structurally (as opposed to mystical) the Hindu take on Karma is different from the Buddhist take.
Mat
Supposed to be a joke.
NOOOOOOO!
Please!
Lets not start bickering!
Keep our dogmas in de kennels!:)
PEACE
And I have practiced alongside quite a few Vajrayana students who do not accept the whole tulku concept skydancer. If it speaks to you, fine. Ironically my root teacher was very dubious about the tulku industry as he called it. I sometimes wonder what he would think of the fact that there are two rival tulkus of him!
I have my own experience just like you do.
This is a perfect example of karma ripening. I make a statement and it starts an argument rather than clearing something up.