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.
R: Yes it is all one gesture. However I would propose that this dividing is not arbitrary, but also part of the gesture.
S9: Could you say that a little differently for me, please? I am not understanding your point, sorry. The word gesture esp. isn’t working for me.
The experienced division, and the awakening from that division are one movement that is ownerless and alone. The karma of delusion, the karma of awakening.
R: It is both. The endless dis-equilibrium of Samsara and timeless equilibrium of Nirvana are one. From one side there appears to be control, from the other no control. Both are honored.
S9: I would say rather that it is seemingly both. You see…I don’t see samsara and nirvana as two sides of one coin. I see them as two perspective of the ‘One,’ one perspective is a misunderstanding of the Actual. Do you see this differently?
The samsaric perception of agency is a misunderstanding , yet we still, conventionally speaking, decide to eat lunch here and not there. This is honoured.
The endless disequilibrium of the world, and timeless equilibrium of Nirvana are one. Nirvana is not primary to samsara, and samsara is not primary to nirvana, anymore than left is primary to right, or right is primary to left. That recognition in inherent in Bodhisattva vow as I understood it.
R: Yes. This is why Bodhisattva vows are to liberate beings from the wheel and not just lead them to the nice parts.
S9: Quite so, but is this done by combining the two of these (samsara and nirvana), or is it actually done by dis-identifying with the incorrect view?
Correct view, leading to the above realization. What is unbound? what is released? Not a "self". It is the karma that is unbound and released! through the realization that it was originally already unbound, as you stated in your first post.
It isn't that a self is liberated from conditions, it is conditions that are liberated from self-seeming. It is samsara that is liberated. Bodymind and world are realized as originally ownerless and one with the unobstructed unfolding of the world. Everything is alone.
R: We stand completely aside as it plays out by itself and play it out at as fully invested actors, at the same time.
S9: There is a contradiction in this statement. Can you see it? How does one stand COMPLETELY aside and yet at the same time identify as the doer. Granted there is a doer in this dream (aka samsara), but are we the doer?
yes put into words it is a complete contradicton. we are absolutely non identified with body mind and world, and at the same time nothing but bodymind and world. " a million tons yet weightless"
S9: One last statement and I’ll stop flapping my lips. ; ^ )
In zazen when we meditate without an object, I believe that we must be very careful not to make 'objectless-ness' or the void into an object in itself, because of the habitual mind’s ongoing tendency to get away with such things just beneath our radar.
I would agree though do not really know what "the void" is
"You cannot change the shape of your karma anymore than you can change the shape of your nose, you can only know it, make it clear".
Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
there are two things to know, kamma and kamma-vpaka
karma is good or bad kamma-formation (vacci sankhara) that we have done in the past because of our ignorance
we were not be mindful and we made good or bad deed, speech, thought in the past
we can not change the past now so we can not change the past kamma
the result of the past kamma-formation is the kamma-vipaka we experience now (with any of the six faculties, eye, ear etc.)
we can not change our present kamma-vipaka
but
we can change our future kamma-vipaka by being mindful to the present experience (kamma-vipaka)
cause is kamma, effect is kamma-vipaka
if we are wise, not ignorant, by being mindful to the present moment (present experience) we can avoid the present kamma-vipaka (effect) become a kamma (cause) for the future kamma-vipaka (effect)
in short,
because of our ignorance
always our present moment become effect/cause--->effect/cause--->etc. and continues the samsara
cause is kamma, effect is kamma-vipaka
if we are wise, not ignorant, by being mindful to the present moment (present experience) we can avoid the present kamma-vipaka (effect) become a kamma (cause) for the future kamma-vipaka (effect)
Squaring this Zen teaching with a Theravadin schema would be interesting but might not work. The principle could be lost in the distinctions of the Theravadin view.
The teacher was pointing to the fact that there is no transcendent agent (self) above kamma making a skillful choice. The very choice to be mindful, the skillful volition, is itself kamma, skillful kamma perhaps, but kamma. Thats all.
Squaring this Zen teaching with a Theravadin schema would be interesting but might not work.
so you are not sure about it?
but
it does work
The very choice to be mindful, the skillful volition, is itself kamma, skillful kamma perhaps, but kamma. Thats all.
exactly
that's why i said 'effect become itself a cause' (effect/cause--->effect/cause) for us (unenlightened ones)
mindfulness of unenlightened ones is still with ignorant,so they make skillful kamma when they are mindful and unskillful kamma when they are not mindful
mindfulness of enlightened ones is without ignorance so they do not make kamma,
S9: If you are speaking of infinite Mind, as many do, than I could agree with this statement. If however you are speaking of finite mind, well this is not the case IMO. Finite mind is complications on top of complications, as it divides itself against itself, (aka duality).
Perhaps this is why another name for samsara might easily be “problems.”
C: Half the time I have no clue what Zen is getting at.
S9: Very good grasshopper. ; ^ )
I think many times this is exactly what Zen is trying to point out, that our discursive mind is not always the correct tool for understanding that outruns the mind.
Isn’t that why we are cautioned, “Don’t look at my finger, but where my finger is pointing.”
(Said slightly differently: Don’t look at my words, as they can only dance around the Ultimate Truth. Look directly at where my words are pointing).
S9: I am always happy to see you come and visit Upekka. : ^ )
U: cause is kamma, effect is kamma-vipaka
if we are wise, not ignorant, by being mindful to the present moment (present experience) we can avoid the present kamma-vipaka (effect) become a kamma (cause) for the future kamma-vipaka (effect).
S9: Are all present moments created equally? Or said slightly differently, is the Present Moment actually contained within time (aka finitude)?
Are time, and its separate conceptual moments (past, present, and future), actually a fiction?
Going further, if past, present, and future are in fact a fiction, than where exactly is karma created and for that matter, where exactly does it travel to. Not to mention where could it possibly change?
U: in short,
because of our ignorance
always our present moment become effect/cause--->effect/cause--->etc. and continues the samsara.
S9: I think that samsara is in ignorance of the Eternal Immediate Moment (some call Nirvana) that is Immutable (aka changeless).
S9: I am always happy to see you come and visit Upekka. : ^ )
thanks and same here S9
S9: Are all present moments created equally? Or said slightly differently, is the Present Moment actually contained within time (aka finitude)?
Are time, and its separate conceptual moments (past, present, and future), actually a fiction?
if one is in the present moment is there any future relating to it? is the said present moment become a past to the one who experiencing it?
Going further, if past, present, and future are in fact a fiction, than where exactly is karma created and for that matter, where exactly does it travel to. Not to mention where could it possibly change?
when we talk about day today language we talk as kamma and kamma-vipaka (sammatha dhamma- conventional truth)
when we talk about absolute truth (paramaththa dhamma) we talk as cause and effect, dependent origination, five clinging aggregates
when we mix them together and try to understand Buddha's Teaching we get confused
S9: I think that samsara is in ignorance of the Eternal Immediate Moment (some call Nirvana) that is Immutable (aka changeless).
Last evening I was told by a teacher (Kwan Um Zen) that "You cannot change the shape of your karma anymore than you can change the shape of your nose, you can only know it, make it clear". I have found that trying to change my unskillful karma, trying to alter those undesirable impulses never truly works, and amounts to getting caught up in self improvement. Yet I do not want to give license to them for obvious reasons.
It seems to me that awareness has a transformative nature, that things find their proper place in the light of awareness, full awareness, and this is what the teacher is pointing to.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? What is your experience? What do you think the teacher pointing to?
Thanks.
.....and please, no glib Zen nuggets.
OK, how about this- Emptiness and reality coexist, so emptiness does not refute reality and reality does not refute emptiness. What about the self then, the self and emptiness coexist, the self exists merely in the context of apparent reality. So I do not see any problem with "self improvement" in the context of apparent reality. In fact if someone denied self improvement due to over involvement in ultimate reality, or emptiness, or whatever else you want to call it, then I would call this erring on the side of nihilism. The way I see it, your mind stream is a transient phenomenon and as such is obviously subject to change. If it is subject to change then you can change it in a positive way, a neutral way or a negative way. So self improvement can be vastly beneficial and I would say is vital to any aspiring Boddhisattva. Mind you this all happens in the context of the understanding that the absolute self is non-existent. How do Buddha's generate all their skilful means? When they achieve Arya stage do the skilful means just appear due to their wisdom? I don't think that this is the case. I think that the Boddhisattvas have to learn how to be compassionate and how to deal with others skilfully and incorporate these traits into their mind stream. They could be the most caring being in the world but if they have no people skills noone would listen to them. They need to work on their own self improvement to develop the interpersonal communication skills.
My guess, no Zen experience so its probably completely wrong:
The form (shape) of the nose is a mental formation. You can see others' noses but not your own. You can only see the shape of your nose when you look in the mirror, the rest of the time it is merely a conceptual remembrance. You cannot change the shape of your nose because it doesn't have any shape. Such is karma, shapeless, formless, non-existent.
U: If one is in the present moment is there any future relating to it? Is the said present moment become a past to the one who experiencing it?
S9: It is my understanding that when we speak of the “moment,” in order to be correct in our analysis, we must speak of the moment/Moment on multiple levels. There is both the conceptual moment within time, or finitude, and there is the Immediate Immutable Moment beyond time, or outside of time (aka Eternity). In other words, our concepts of this imaginary time (moment) are allowed to swim in the Immediate Eternal Moment.
The Immediate Moment is Ever-Present, whereas a time moment are impermanent, or temporary much as our thoughts are temporary and empty of any real essence. This is of course because finite time and her imaginary moments are only temporary thoughts.
Anyone who looks very closely at that moment of time that we call now, in any real detail, will soon discover that time 'now' is practically if not essentially nonexistent. Where does the past really end, and where does the future actually begin? Is not this space in imaginary time, conceptual now, infinitesimal in dimension? Can the mind actually get the moment now in its grubby little hand and hold onto it?
Time after all is not like the tide, after all, with a high tide, a low tide, and a clear ebb tide in between. The process of time actually has no still place in between that we can call now.
The way that I see this whole scenario is with the Ever- Present Immediate Now as the canvas on which the dreams of time are allowed to paint their ongoing dance. This is not a bad thing. But it is merely play acting.
I will speak to the rest of your post as personal time allows. Busy days here on my farm. : ^ )
C: Half the time I have no clue what Zen is getting at.
S9: Very good grasshopper. ; ^ )
I think many times this is exactly what Zen is trying to point out, that our discursive mind is not always the correct tool for understanding that outruns the mind.
Isn’t that why we are cautioned, “Don’t look at my finger, but where my finger is pointing.”
(Said slightly differently: Don’t look at my words, as they can only dance around the Ultimate Truth. Look directly at where my words are pointing).
Q: Lin Chi: “Look…Look!”
Peace and love,
S9
LOL
See for me this is no good at all...i need some precise words in order to set out my destination.
I'm not sure if this would be true of karma, but my teacher says that anger for example cannot be found. We cannot locate the essence of what anger is. I think its related to awareness not being able to take awareness itself as an object. Nonetheless awareness has qualities which are ungraspable which my teacher breaks down into clarity, openness, and sensitivity.
Because the nature of our awareness is clarity we are able to realize what leads towards and away from true vision and non-suffering.
So in that sense we can improve our karma. Because the nature of awareness is clarity.
In scripture (writings) this clarity openness and sensitivity are sometimes referred to as clear luminous (sensitive) and unimpeded (open)....
I also found this true right from the beginning, and the answer from Richard H met the exact thought of mine.
Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset;"> Originally Posted by seeker242 I read it like this: "You can't stop being a human being, but you can see what a human being really is and put an end to suffering"
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
I think this is pretty good. It seems to me that changing our karma (and by karma I mean action of body mind) with hope of changing results, is itself karmic action follwing the same principle as all other volitional impulses, namely maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. Maybe there is in the back of my mind a fear that if I truly am "one with" causality, truly keep hands off, I'll go to seed. But it appears that the unskillful behaviour arises in the first place from division and non-awareness. The "fix" is no fix. Things follow virtue when unmolested.
I am not sure that we can change the consequences of our kamma(if that is what you are talking about)but I believe that virtuous actions can decrease the consequences of non virtuous kamma.This does not mean that there will be no consequences,they may just be lessened.The statement that you can not change kamma I think I would disagree with.If kamma is intention,then since following the buddhist path,my kamma has definitely changed.
I used to intentionally get stoned,get drunk,pick fights-now I practice compassion,avoid getting stoned and drunk and keep my fists to myself.
With metta
I am not sure that we can change the consequences of our kamma(if that is what you are talking about)but I believe that virtuous actions can decrease the consequences of non virtuous kamma.
From the perspective you are speaking from this is true, and it is not denied by the OP. The OP is referring to another perspective that has been described in the thread.
By the time we are tasting the fruit of the karma (say, emotionality) we have also digested the seed, and will therefore replant the seed. We cannot change what plant will be born of that seed, its already sewn. The law of nature sculpts that (DO if you will) from seed to fruit, karma will unfold. By the time we collapse the perception we are in the cycle, and it cannot be changed.
What we need to do is catch the perceptions before they solidify into conceptions and step aside. As in, not eat the fruit. If you eat the fruit, you have the sensual experience, and replant the seed. You cannot change what happens with the cycle, only in what you eat. You cannot change the results you experience, only the actions.
In my experience, the chain of DO can be broken at any of the twelve points. What prevents stepping aside once a conception has formed, in your experience?
In my experience, the chain of DO can be broken at any of the twelve points. What prevents stepping aside once a conception has formed, in your experience?
This is true. At anytime we can step off the wheel, and remove ours selves from creating any more karma. But, sometimes we need to stick with the messiness of dealing with confusion and ignorance. To stay engaged so that the karma exhausts itself. Sometimes the situation requires this. I think one must try to stay aware that this process is occurring, and sometimes it can be quite messy. But we need to get involved in situations where the possibility of things getting confused or miscommunication arises. I do not think we incur more karma by staying aware of our actions, and by always doing the best we can to convey compassion.
In my experience, the chain of DO can be broken at any of the twelve points. What prevents stepping aside once a conception has formed, in your experience?
I guess this is metaphorically similar to the gradual path, you can use skillful means to step aside at any point in the process but as the practitioner progresses the closer the side step is performed to the root of DO. If the motivation takes me, I might follow this line of reasoning through, to see if there is any correlation there with the gradual teachings. It would be interesting if there was. Of course everyone else probably already knows this, I'm usually the last to know these things.
But isn't DO meant to be transcended rather than side stepped? If there is no actor then the chain is broken. No actor, no volition, no aggregates, no entrances, no elements, etc. It must be weird to exist and yet not consist of aggregates, what would such a being be made of, light or maybe space or both? Sorry mental diversion to silly land here. So the question becomes how can one act yet not be an actor? I have a term I like to use to refer to karma that popped into my mind one day: "Shit happens" (hope this doesn't violate terms or anything like that). We use(d) the term down here (in Australia) as a generic, non specific description, sort of like "stuff", but "stuff happens" doesn't have the same sort of edge and duplicity that I like with the previous phrase. It has some nice layers of meaning and if it happens to jump into your mind at some point in the future then the object is actually the subject as well, so in that respect it also represents nonduality and karma as well! :crazy:
In my experience, the chain of DO can be broken at any of the twelve points. What prevents stepping aside once a conception has formed, in your experience?
Because the conception has already formed, of course. You can't step away from a painting you've created as though you didn't paint it... that is just ego-lying... instead, if you want to stop the burden of carrying around paintings, you turn away from the paintbrush. In the same way, you don't stop creating volitional impulses through turning away from what is already in the cycle.
I understand what you're pointing at, that DO can be transcended at any point along its turning. My attempt wasn't to point out a specific place upon the wheel, but how I see the stepping aside process occur at any given place. However, when we watch karma traverse the chain, there appears to be an impetus to its motion. We cannot sidestep that impetus once the emotion/thought has arrived, because by then it has exhausted itself as the experience. Instead, we can use right view to penetrate the illusion of the impetus and step aside, before it 'causes' us to form the next link in the chain, so to speak.
Stepping aside is when we use our mindfulness to recognize the chain of cause and effect that is in motion, which will prevent any notions of self arising in response to observing the environment of our minds and bodies.
For instance, if I was in my office and distracted/deluded/confused, I might leave one of the desk drawers open, which later I smack into with my knee and feel pain. You could say that if I am mindful, I could close the drawer in the first place. I would not consider that stepping aside, as there isn't the presence of painful conditions. Said in a different way, there isn't the deviation that precludes the pain. Rather, the place where we would step aside is in the banging of the knee, because as we encounter that moment with mindfulness, we can avoid the distraction/delusion/confusion that it causes. That's not to say we do or don't bang our knee, but when whatever we do, we do so without hatred, greed or delusion.
in my nifty belief, you can change karma but you cannot cheat it, i don't know otherwise than that because i only know so much or so little. the self lies in secret, inside the larger gelatinous samsara self, which is the tiddled tide of the greater self, the self with a capital Se, which is in relation to the self and the soul which sticks and juices with things through the spirit , which is like the own juices of your own soulhood in the house of the Self, which can be god. and you can't with that spirit's karma change things sometimes in the riptide of Samsara, a devil's lurch, because the self gets blinded and de-souled like a virgin is raped and karma has a gigantic gravitational pull at times depending on how negative the storms are in that soul's season. but i don't know..... haHA HA!!!
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited August 2010
One day you'll astonish us all by posting something coherent, sensible, relevant and pertinent.
Until then.....:rolleyes:
Why can't mindfulness work in the same way with the arising of a concept? It's just another experience, the same as a banged knee.
In my opinion, it works the same no matter what is arising... we catch it in the 'happening' not in the 'happened'. We cannot unthink a thought, and we cannot de-concept a concept. The stepping aside happens preconception, not post, because in the moment we are post-conception we have allowed our connection between the knee and drawer (for instance) to produce confusion, and there is no going backwards.
I think this is getting to the root of what was being mentioned in the OP, that we cannot change the resulting phenomena, only 'step aside' when we are encountering results. Disidentification as in "there is no solid quality to this happening" rather than a denial of the meaning of the phenomena. "This phenomena has no meaning to me" is a common attempt at resolving the karma in my opinion, and ineffective.
Besides the topic "can't change karma" is wierd. First karma is always changeable. I don't even know why we are talking about this. A more appropriate question not a statement would be How can we change our karma? and this is already stated in another post. The things that are being argued about are just plain wierd. If i have an original thought what does that say about the thinking of the buddha. I don't think that when it comes to dharma we should interpret it through convolutions upon convolutions. This makes the truth real contorted. I like to stick to the sutras and shastras but as far as my own oppinion , what does that matter at all?
Besides the topic "can't change karma" is wierd. First karma is always changeable. I don't even know why we are talking about this. A more appropriate question not a statement would be How can we change our karma? and this is already stated in another post. The things that are being argued about are just plain wierd. If i have an original thought what does that say about the thinking of the buddha. I don't think that when it comes to dharma we should interpret it through convolutions upon convolutions. This makes the truth real contorted. I like to stick to the sutras and shastras but as far as my own oppinion , what does that matter at all?
My friend, the title of this thread actually is a question, though it is "disguised" as a statement.
I totally agree with you that karma can be changed, and I think the question "How can we change our karma?" is a great one to meditate on.
I'm not 100% clear on what you mean by the rest of your post, though I believe you're talking about using insight (rather than cognitive thinking) to interpret the Dharma, which is an enlightened approach.
Im talking about words vs. meaning. The meaning of speech for me is buddha speech. I don't think that its valid for me to say things that i am not sure the buddha would agree with. I know this is crazy talk but i am elucidating that using my samsaric mind to impress others with delusions of granduer ( which is the implication by stating ones oppinion) is more hurtful than any other act. It messes with the view of an individual and therefore motivates thier thinking and speaking and acting. I don't like to think of being even remotely responsible for a persons "bondage" due to my need for distinction and approval. Thats what i know about superflouous speach. Its one of the verbal nonvirtues.
My friend, the title of this thread actually is a question, though it is "disguised" as a statement.
I totally agree with you that karma can be changed, and I think the question "How can we change our karma?" is a great one to meditate on.
I'm not 100% clear on what you mean by the rest of your post, though I believe you're talking about using insight (rather than cognitive thinking) to interpret the Dharma, which is an enlightened approach.
It was a statement Zendo. It was made in the context of an evening of practice directly to me. It was a statement. He was not saying the fruit of karma, he was saying karma. Make of it what you will.
It was a statement Zendo. It was made in the context of an evening of practice directly to me. It was a statement. He was not saying the fruit of karma, he was saying karma. Make of it what you will.
The title of this thread is a statement?
Okay, my bad. I saw the question-mark, and I thought: "He's asking a question."
But you may have had a different meaning for that mark, and I shouldn't have assumed.
Last evening I was told by a teacher (Kwan Um Zen) that "You cannot change the shape of your karma anymore than you can change the shape of your nose, you can only know it, make it clear". I have found that trying to change my unskillful karma, trying to alter those undesirable impulses never truly works, and amounts to getting caught up in self improvement. Yet I do not want to give license to them for obvious reasons.
It seems to me that awareness has a transformative nature, that things find their proper place in the light of awareness, full awareness, and this is what the teacher is pointing to.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? What is your experience? What do you think the teacher pointing to?
Thanks.
.....and please, no glib Zen nuggets.
The teacher is correct. The point is that there is no essential difference between the nature of Shakyamuni Buddha and the nature of all other human beings. Shakyamuni Buddha simply understood his nature, the law of causality and directed his body energy and actions towards the highest good.
Sogyal Rinpoche says " wisdom is the view we work for, compassion is what we actually do with that view".
I love that statement. It says you can get you head as far in the buddhafield as you want, but when interacting with others, you'd better be as practical as you can. Awesome quote.
Sogyal Rinpoche says " wisdom is the view we work for, compassion is what we actually do with that view".
I love that statement. It says you can get you head as far in the buddhafield as you want, but when interacting with others, you'd better be as practical as you can. Awesome quote.
Yes I would have to agree. The correct practice is to apply the highest wisdom in accordance with ever changing circumstances. The correct object of wisdom is the ground of reasoning applied by the Buddha at each thought moment.
<hr style="color: rgb(192, 192, 192); background-color: rgb(192, 192, 192);" size="1"> <!-- / icon and title --> <!-- message --> Last evening I was told by a teacher (Kwan Um Zen) that "You cannot change the shape of your karma anymore than you can change the shape of your nose, you can only know it, make it clear".
The only thing that seems to be missing in this very profound teaching is that who you are is not your karma whatever it may be at this moment. Good deeds or self improvement are mind's misinterpretation of aligning with the way things actually are - who you actually are. So, changing karma is impossible - interupting the flow of karma - redirecting patterns of karma - is possible and allows for what happens now to happen later. Creating not changing karma can happen.....
Comments
The samsaric perception of agency is a misunderstanding , yet we still, conventionally speaking, decide to eat lunch here and not there. This is honoured.
The endless disequilibrium of the world, and timeless equilibrium of Nirvana are one. Nirvana is not primary to samsara, and samsara is not primary to nirvana, anymore than left is primary to right, or right is primary to left. That recognition in inherent in Bodhisattva vow as I understood it.
Correct view, leading to the above realization. What is unbound? what is released? Not a "self". It is the karma that is unbound and released! through the realization that it was originally already unbound, as you stated in your first post.
It isn't that a self is liberated from conditions, it is conditions that are liberated from self-seeming. It is samsara that is liberated. Bodymind and world are realized as originally ownerless and one with the unobstructed unfolding of the world. Everything is alone.
yes put into words it is a complete contradicton. we are absolutely non identified with body mind and world, and at the same time nothing but bodymind and world. " a million tons yet weightless"
this koan http://www.ibiblio.org/zen/gateless-gate/2.html ..deals precisely with this.
I would agree though do not really know what "the void" is
Once again, I would say it is precisely both.
there are two things to know, kamma and kamma-vpaka
karma is good or bad kamma-formation (vacci sankhara) that we have done in the past because of our ignorance
we were not be mindful and we made good or bad deed, speech, thought in the past
we can not change the past now so we can not change the past kamma
the result of the past kamma-formation is the kamma-vipaka we experience now (with any of the six faculties, eye, ear etc.)
we can not change our present kamma-vipaka
but
we can change our future kamma-vipaka by being mindful to the present experience (kamma-vipaka)
cause is kamma, effect is kamma-vipaka
if we are wise, not ignorant, by being mindful to the present moment (present experience) we can avoid the present kamma-vipaka (effect) become a kamma (cause) for the future kamma-vipaka (effect)
in short,
because of our ignorance
always our present moment become effect/cause--->effect/cause--->etc. and continues the samsara
mindfulness to the present moment is the trick
The teacher was pointing to the fact that there is no transcendent agent (self) above kamma making a skillful choice. The very choice to be mindful, the skillful volition, is itself kamma, skillful kamma perhaps, but kamma. Thats all.
so you are not sure about it?
but
it does work
exactly
that's why i said 'effect become itself a cause' (effect/cause--->effect/cause) for us (unenlightened ones)
mindfulness of unenlightened ones is still with ignorant,so they make skillful kamma when they are mindful and unskillful kamma when they are not mindful
mindfulness of enlightened ones is without ignorance so they do not make kamma,
T: The true nature of mind is not so complicated.
S9: If you are speaking of infinite Mind, as many do, than I could agree with this statement. If however you are speaking of finite mind, well this is not the case IMO. Finite mind is complications on top of complications, as it divides itself against itself, (aka duality).
Perhaps this is why another name for samsara might easily be “problems.”
Peace and love,
S9
C: Half the time I have no clue what Zen is getting at.
S9: Very good grasshopper. ; ^ )
I think many times this is exactly what Zen is trying to point out, that our discursive mind is not always the correct tool for understanding that outruns the mind.
Isn’t that why we are cautioned, “Don’t look at my finger, but where my finger is pointing.”
(Said slightly differently: Don’t look at my words, as they can only dance around the Ultimate Truth. Look directly at where my words are pointing).
Q: Lin Chi: “Look…Look!”
Peace and love,
S9
S9: I am always happy to see you come and visit Upekka. : ^ )
U: cause is kamma, effect is kamma-vipaka
if we are wise, not ignorant, by being mindful to the present moment (present experience) we can avoid the present kamma-vipaka (effect) become a kamma (cause) for the future kamma-vipaka (effect).
S9: Are all present moments created equally? Or said slightly differently, is the Present Moment actually contained within time (aka finitude)?
Are time, and its separate conceptual moments (past, present, and future), actually a fiction?
Going further, if past, present, and future are in fact a fiction, than where exactly is karma created and for that matter, where exactly does it travel to. Not to mention where could it possibly change?
U: in short,
because of our ignorance
always our present moment become effect/cause--->effect/cause--->etc. and continues the samsara.
S9: I think that samsara is in ignorance of the Eternal Immediate Moment (some call Nirvana) that is Immutable (aka changeless).
Peace and love,
S9
if one is in the present moment is there any future relating to it? is the said present moment become a past to the one who experiencing it?
when we talk about day today language we talk as kamma and kamma-vipaka (sammatha dhamma- conventional truth)
when we talk about absolute truth (paramaththa dhamma) we talk as cause and effect, dependent origination, five clinging aggregates
when we mix them together and try to understand Buddha's Teaching we get confused
Could be all wrong though,
Cheers.
The form (shape) of the nose is a mental formation. You can see others' noses but not your own. You can only see the shape of your nose when you look in the mirror, the rest of the time it is merely a conceptual remembrance. You cannot change the shape of your nose because it doesn't have any shape. Such is karma, shapeless, formless, non-existent.
Cheers,
U: If one is in the present moment is there any future relating to it? Is the said present moment become a past to the one who experiencing it?
S9: It is my understanding that when we speak of the “moment,” in order to be correct in our analysis, we must speak of the moment/Moment on multiple levels. There is both the conceptual moment within time, or finitude, and there is the Immediate Immutable Moment beyond time, or outside of time (aka Eternity). In other words, our concepts of this imaginary time (moment) are allowed to swim in the Immediate Eternal Moment.
The Immediate Moment is Ever-Present, whereas a time moment are impermanent, or temporary much as our thoughts are temporary and empty of any real essence. This is of course because finite time and her imaginary moments are only temporary thoughts.
Anyone who looks very closely at that moment of time that we call now, in any real detail, will soon discover that time 'now' is practically if not essentially nonexistent. Where does the past really end, and where does the future actually begin? Is not this space in imaginary time, conceptual now, infinitesimal in dimension? Can the mind actually get the moment now in its grubby little hand and hold onto it?
Time after all is not like the tide, after all, with a high tide, a low tide, and a clear ebb tide in between. The process of time actually has no still place in between that we can call now.
The way that I see this whole scenario is with the Ever- Present Immediate Now as the canvas on which the dreams of time are allowed to paint their ongoing dance. This is not a bad thing. But it is merely play acting.
I will speak to the rest of your post as personal time allows. Busy days here on my farm. : ^ )
Peace and love,
S9
LOL
See for me this is no good at all...i need some precise words in order to set out my destination.
Because the nature of our awareness is clarity we are able to realize what leads towards and away from true vision and non-suffering.
So in that sense we can improve our karma. Because the nature of awareness is clarity.
In scripture (writings) this clarity openness and sensitivity are sometimes referred to as clear luminous (sensitive) and unimpeded (open)....
This probably comes from the Chinese cultural idea of destiny, which is heterodox to Buddhism.
I also found this true right from the beginning, and the answer from Richard H met the exact thought of mine.
I used to intentionally get stoned,get drunk,pick fights-now I practice compassion,avoid getting stoned and drunk and keep my fists to myself.
With metta
This is true. At anytime we can step off the wheel, and remove ours selves from creating any more karma. But, sometimes we need to stick with the messiness of dealing with confusion and ignorance. To stay engaged so that the karma exhausts itself. Sometimes the situation requires this. I think one must try to stay aware that this process is occurring, and sometimes it can be quite messy. But we need to get involved in situations where the possibility of things getting confused or miscommunication arises. I do not think we incur more karma by staying aware of our actions, and by always doing the best we can to convey compassion.
I guess this is metaphorically similar to the gradual path, you can use skillful means to step aside at any point in the process but as the practitioner progresses the closer the side step is performed to the root of DO. If the motivation takes me, I might follow this line of reasoning through, to see if there is any correlation there with the gradual teachings. It would be interesting if there was. Of course everyone else probably already knows this, I'm usually the last to know these things.
But isn't DO meant to be transcended rather than side stepped? If there is no actor then the chain is broken. No actor, no volition, no aggregates, no entrances, no elements, etc. It must be weird to exist and yet not consist of aggregates, what would such a being be made of, light or maybe space or both? Sorry mental diversion to silly land here. So the question becomes how can one act yet not be an actor? I have a term I like to use to refer to karma that popped into my mind one day: "Shit happens" (hope this doesn't violate terms or anything like that). We use(d) the term down here (in Australia) as a generic, non specific description, sort of like "stuff", but "stuff happens" doesn't have the same sort of edge and duplicity that I like with the previous phrase. It has some nice layers of meaning and if it happens to jump into your mind at some point in the future then the object is actually the subject as well, so in that respect it also represents nonduality and karma as well!
Cheers,
Because the conception has already formed, of course. You can't step away from a painting you've created as though you didn't paint it... that is just ego-lying... instead, if you want to stop the burden of carrying around paintings, you turn away from the paintbrush. In the same way, you don't stop creating volitional impulses through turning away from what is already in the cycle.
I understand what you're pointing at, that DO can be transcended at any point along its turning. My attempt wasn't to point out a specific place upon the wheel, but how I see the stepping aside process occur at any given place. However, when we watch karma traverse the chain, there appears to be an impetus to its motion. We cannot sidestep that impetus once the emotion/thought has arrived, because by then it has exhausted itself as the experience. Instead, we can use right view to penetrate the illusion of the impetus and step aside, before it 'causes' us to form the next link in the chain, so to speak.
For instance, if I was in my office and distracted/deluded/confused, I might leave one of the desk drawers open, which later I smack into with my knee and feel pain. You could say that if I am mindful, I could close the drawer in the first place. I would not consider that stepping aside, as there isn't the presence of painful conditions. Said in a different way, there isn't the deviation that precludes the pain. Rather, the place where we would step aside is in the banging of the knee, because as we encounter that moment with mindfulness, we can avoid the distraction/delusion/confusion that it causes. That's not to say we do or don't bang our knee, but when whatever we do, we do so without hatred, greed or delusion.
Until then.....:rolleyes:
In my opinion, it works the same no matter what is arising... we catch it in the 'happening' not in the 'happened'. We cannot unthink a thought, and we cannot de-concept a concept. The stepping aside happens preconception, not post, because in the moment we are post-conception we have allowed our connection between the knee and drawer (for instance) to produce confusion, and there is no going backwards.
This is the arguement that Nagarjuna refutes in motion and mover.
So fine, yes ...... "you" can "change" karma.
I totally agree with you that karma can be changed, and I think the question "How can we change our karma?" is a great one to meditate on.
I'm not 100% clear on what you mean by the rest of your post, though I believe you're talking about using insight (rather than cognitive thinking) to interpret the Dharma, which is an enlightened approach.
It was a statement Zendo. It was made in the context of an evening of practice directly to me. It was a statement. He was not saying the fruit of karma, he was saying karma. Make of it what you will.
Okay, my bad. I saw the question-mark, and I thought: "He's asking a question."
But you may have had a different meaning for that mark, and I shouldn't have assumed.
The teacher is correct. The point is that there is no essential difference between the nature of Shakyamuni Buddha and the nature of all other human beings. Shakyamuni Buddha simply understood his nature, the law of causality and directed his body energy and actions towards the highest good.
The highest good is the object of Wisdom realized by the Buddha.
Sogyal Rinpoche says " wisdom is the view we work for, compassion is what we actually do with that view".
I love that statement. It says you can get you head as far in the buddhafield as you want, but when interacting with others, you'd better be as practical as you can. Awesome quote.
Yes I would have to agree. The correct practice is to apply the highest wisdom in accordance with ever changing circumstances. The correct object of wisdom is the ground of reasoning applied by the Buddha at each thought moment.
The only thing that seems to be missing in this very profound teaching is that who you are is not your karma whatever it may be at this moment. Good deeds or self improvement are mind's misinterpretation of aligning with the way things actually are - who you actually are. So, changing karma is impossible - interupting the flow of karma - redirecting patterns of karma - is possible and allows for what happens now to happen later. Creating not changing karma can happen.....