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.
Deliberately Creating Good Karma
The Buddha taught that our ultimate goal is to move beyond the karmic realm altogether, to a state of being known as Nirvana, the "deathless state," free of the cycle of rebirth and suffering. And what a glorious day it will be when we reach that blessed shore!
But the process of attaining Buddhahood may take many lifetimes, and meanwhile we are bound to a karmic existence: our actions (positive and negative) reverberate from past into present, present into future, and the karmic cycle goes on.
It is clear that as long as we are bound to this karmic existence, the very best we can do is learn to master it: to bring our karma out of the realm of unconscious passivity, and into the sphere of deliberate intent. Since we know that negative thoughts and actions lead to negative outcomes, and positive thoughts and actions lead to positive outcomes, we should take control of that process: seize the ship's wheel and consciously steer our karma into good waters, by choosing positive thoughts and actions as often as possible.
Having observed this process in my own experience countless times, I am now (finally!) striving to cultivate the practice of "deliberate karma" in my own life. I hope to find kindred spirits in this community: people who, like myself, have awakened to the possibility of "taking the reins" and guiding our karma where we want it to go.
If this principle resonates with you, please share your thoughts about it here. We can encourage each other on the path, share ideas for practicing deliberate karma, and reinforce the empowering (and quintessentially Buddhist!) idea of taking control of our own destiny.
But the process of attaining Buddhahood may take many lifetimes, and meanwhile we are bound to a karmic existence: our actions (positive and negative) reverberate from past into present, present into future, and the karmic cycle goes on.
It is clear that as long as we are bound to this karmic existence, the very best we can do is learn to master it: to bring our karma out of the realm of unconscious passivity, and into the sphere of deliberate intent. Since we know that negative thoughts and actions lead to negative outcomes, and positive thoughts and actions lead to positive outcomes, we should take control of that process: seize the ship's wheel and consciously steer our karma into good waters, by choosing positive thoughts and actions as often as possible.
Having observed this process in my own experience countless times, I am now (finally!) striving to cultivate the practice of "deliberate karma" in my own life. I hope to find kindred spirits in this community: people who, like myself, have awakened to the possibility of "taking the reins" and guiding our karma where we want it to go.
If this principle resonates with you, please share your thoughts about it here. We can encourage each other on the path, share ideas for practicing deliberate karma, and reinforce the empowering (and quintessentially Buddhist!) idea of taking control of our own destiny.
0
Comments
I do agree that it's important to be mindful and conscious of our actions, and to create positive thoughts/actions that leave good imprints on our minds and others.
While I agree that all actions contribute to the cycle of karma (karma means action, after all), I'm wondering if the statement "virtuous actions only further entrap you" is in harmony with the Dharma?
The reason I ask this is because the Buddha taught his followers to avoid evil and practice virtue. Would he have taught this if the practice of virtue were just another version of the karmic "trap"?
It seems to me the path out of the karmic realm is a path of virtue: for no one can reach Nirvana without practicing virtue. This is why fully one-third of the Noble Eightfold Path concerns moral conduct.
My point is simply this: if we are bound by karma anyway, and everything we do has a karmic result one way or the other, then we should consciously utilize that principle, harness it, and by the practice of virtue, lift our karma upward.
The 'trap' of karma is that suffering often creates an illusion that the causes of suffering are externally arising. It might be more skillful to regard it as stilling the cycle of delusion, because even an enlightened one breathing with a still mind is karmically interconnected, speaking strictly.
On the other hand, zendo, I would consider the drive to collapse notions into good and bad to be unskillful in and of itself. It is better, in my opinion, to simply make it not a big deal... we act more skillfully because it is the right thing, it feels best, our hearts tell us where to place our feet and so we walk there. To say "I CULTIVATE THIS VIRTUE IN THE NAME OF ZENDO-KARMA" only leads to the solidification of a sense of self. From your post, it was unclear to me how you're approaching it.
With warmth,
Matt
If you have reached a point in your journey where virtue comes naturally to you--where you practice it because it feels right--then you have my admiration, and I agree you should follow your heart.
For me, I am aware of virtue, and the importance of practicing it, and I strive to do so: but I am often pulled in the other direction as well, into darker energies, with corresponding darker karmic results. For me, virtue is not yet a foregone conclusion: it's still a conscious and deliberate practice. Some days I act more virtuously than others; often I fall short.
So for me, the "don't make it a big deal" approach might be insufficient: with that mindset I might just as easily gravitate toward laziness, sexual impurity, and intoxication (vices), as productivity, purity, and clear-mindedness (virtues).
But I agree that what you describe is the ideal state, and worthy of striving toward.
What do you all think?
Your view certainly seems reasonable to me, I wish you luck and virtue.
Treeder,
My thought is: What?
With warmth,
Matt
Kamma is intention. Black kamma gives dark results and white kamma gives good results and a mix of black and white kamma gives mixed results.
Then there is the practice that leads to the end of kamma, namely the N8FP. Intention is preceded by desire or wanting. The path is an aspiration to achieve a state of no wants. One cannot desire to have no desires as that is also a desire, a catch 22 situation. Hence all the meditation training etc.
http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhism/B%20-%20Theravada/Teachers/Ven%20Payutto/Good,%20Evil,%20and%20Beyond/5_%20The%20Kamma%20that%20Ends%20Kamma.htm
I was directly quoting the first slogan from Training the Mind and Cultivating Loving-Kindness by Chögyam Trungpa. Here is the complete passage:
In practicing the slogans and in your daily life, you should maintain an awareness of [1] the preciousness of human life and the particular good fortune of life in an environment where you can hear the teachings of buddhadharma; [2] the reality of death, that it comes suddenly and without warning; [3] the entrapment of karma - that whatever you do, virtuous or not, only further entraps you in the chain of cause and events; and [4] the intensity and inevitability of suffering for yourself and for all sentient beings. This is called "taking an attitude of the four reminders."
mugzy,
I love chogyam trungpa, and his distinct ability to penetrate the western mind with buddhist context. I don't find the ideas to be distinctly opposed, but the consideration of what it means to be "in the chain of causes and events" as "entrapped" sounds distinctly like a moral teaching, and as this is the experienced thread, I think it can be examined more clearly.
We would not say that every breath further entraps us into the pattern of breathing. We would not consider that further eating and pooping deepens our reliance on the cycle of digestion. They can be examined that way, certainly, and some mindfulness could be cultivated from looking at them as cyclical trappings, but ultimately they are best accepted as part of the nature of being a living.
However, it is also important to keep in mind that the notion of karma that Trungpa uses is mental in nature, and is closer to 'mental imprint' than 'action' which is the more traditional description. In that, the more we project a solid meaning onto external form, the more we are bound to suffer the reactions of delusion and clinging. If we strip karma down to 'mental imprint' or 'projected solid meaning' then there is a paradox that arises when we say 'virtuous karma', as projecting solid meaning has no virtue, only demerit.
With warmth,
Matt
Thanks for that quote, mugzy.
In addition to quoting from the works of others (which is often very useful), I hope you will also share your own thoughts and experiences on the subject.
Buddhism is an experiential path, after all. Your own unique experience is as valid and important as anyone's.
What exactly do you mean here?
Thanks for sharing this pegembara, it is very instructive. "The karma that leads to the end of karma"--that's what I was trying to get at, though I hadn't formulated it in those words.
So then, there is a kind of karma that we do want to create, as it were. It is neither "black" nor "white," nor both black-and-white; it leads to the end of karma, and it is nothing less than the Noble Eightfold Path.
I don't fully understand it, but I enjoyed it.
Sometimes I think it's difficult considering how many words have no direct translation from Sanskrit to Tibetan to English, etc, so I feel this may be a factor in interpreting this passage.
I guess that depends on whether or not you want to transcend past the concept of breathing, eating, or gravity as per your earlier example. If (hypothetically and barring other factors) I wanted to fly, gravity would prevent me from flying off the world. So understanding and skillfully using gravity is fine, but it does keep me from my goal of flight. [Not a great analogy, but it's the best I can do right now.]
I understand what you're saying and see how this relates to the original question. I thought it may be useful to use the quote referenced in order to provide a deeper contemplation of karma and the cycle of samsara. It has certainly helped me, as I keep that first point of mind training on my door so I see it every time I leave my home.
I do not currently describe myself as Buddhist even though I study and practice Buddhist teachings. As I lack the formal training and education of an experienced practitioner I rely on the words of those who do to provide guidance and insight. Only with a proper guide can I hope to follow the teachings as authentically as possible, and contemplate them skillfully. I do give my personal opinion on some matters, but since I am only a novice there are many topics which I have not fully understood or studied yet.
I do relate to Trungpa's interpretation, and find your including the quote to be helpful in redefining our notions of karma specifically, and would consider looking at karma as 'mental imprints' to be especially useful to a western mind who is used to karma being equated to negative consequences of acting, or acting poorly.
I also think that as we examine what freedom from a cycle really means, the meaning can turn inward on itself, where we might uncover notions that freedom does not equate to the traditional meaning as though the force itself oppresses us, but would be much closer to 'avoiding automatic' or 'without confusion' or something.
In your analogy of gravity, I would consider the internal drive to fly a curious drive indeed. It might be that a close examination of gravity, learning its formation and constant qualities, gives us the insight to counterbalance it with other forces, such as air pressure and thrust. Its not that airplanes remove the effect of gravity, in fact, those who design them are fully aware of how it works and rely on its consistency.
In the same way, I don't think we are oppressed by karma, it is simply the impetus of development... no matter what seeds we've tossed. Building an airplane, however, well... the schematics are pretty much laid out at the 8FP.
With warmth,
Matt
LOL! Yeah like I said, it's not a great analogy
I was referring to a means of flight without outside influence, trying to make a parallel between "transcending gravity" and "transcending concepts"... and... I don't know. It's difficult to put into words.
Also, I didn't think of the concepts in my mind as being oppressing or burdening, just limiting. I do understand where you're going with that last statement though.
I agree with you, Zendo. However, I don't think the division between merit (practicing virtuous actions) and wisdom are quite so clear cut.
For example, say we perform an act of genuine generosity, which is a virtuous action. Yet, this action also sides with wisdom, since to give freely requires a temporary reduction of our self-grasping. As we cultivate virtue, we indirectly strengthen wisdom. As we cultivate wisdom, it outwardly manifests as positive actions.
I think your approach of performing virtuous actions while cultivating the wisdom that leads to release is a balanced and wise idea. However, I don't know how much control any of us can have with regard to the immediate future. The idea of taking control of our destiny is empowering and positive; yet there is a basic uncertainty to life that we should recall as well. Recalling the uncertainty of life is important too, so that we can develop detachment. If we could strike a balance between empowering ourselves and developing detachment, that would be excellent.
Perhaps, it is like balancing a scale. If our spirits dip, we could recall self-direction to give us courage and joy. If we are bouncing of the walls, we could recall the uncertainty of life to give us a calm detachment. In the middle, we could enjoy both optimism and serenity. Now, if only I could actually do this. Ha Ha.
Cheers,
P
Who is taking control of what exactly?
I think with effort and a direct view, we can eliminate accidentally or unknowingly going down or up... and therefore be free from any surprise that up happens or down happens.
When you say that good and bad karma co-arise, do you mean that by attaching the label to empty phenomena we polarize the experience into both camps? As in 'it is good to have it now, but bad because it fades" and/or "its bad to have it now, but good that it fades'?
We need an Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein of karma and, as Buddhism assimilates the post-Enlightenment western mind, I look forward to such work in the future.
What I notice, however, at the personal and anecdotal level is that most of the people I admire or wish to emulate found their lives in benevolence and virtuous action.
When you are standing at a street corner and the person in front of you absent mindedly steps out against the light, your hand reaches for his shoulder . This situation is all of a piece, no subject no object. Is that good karma as opposed to bad karma? Don't get me wrong, it's better to take good actions than bad, but in my experience no virtue is to virtuous to be pernicious when held. When I am awake, the situation evokes action, the action belongs to the situation. This is "goodness" without a hook.
I would notice this as a normal, compassionate action... but how does it relate to karma? Do you mean to say that if I identify the action as heroic or myself as a hero, then I am creating a hooked-goodness typed karma? Because I am strengthening my clinging to self while I do the virtuous deed?
I am a little confused about the distinction you're making... and what 'situation evokes action' means. Do you mean no individuation of the events?
When there is no subject and object every situation is a single gesture. No one gives, no one receives.
This isn't just theory, but it certainly isn't a continuous state of affairs either since I'm not enlightened. But when awake, it is like that. All the rest of the time my relative "goodness" will do, but that "goodness" is heavenly activity, not the activity of liberation. Heaven turns into hell, which turns into heaven again..... Samsara.
I took this perspective into some contemplation, and I think I realize where the differentiation is occurring that makes this notion so difficult to digest. I would consider any action, spontaneous or not, to have intention behind it. What it would be empty of is any expectation. In order to even move the hand, the brain must intend it to move. True spontaneity could only happen at the intention level, as there can be spontaneous intent, ie intent born of a view without self, but it cannot be action that is not tied to a long chain of intentions and connections.
Absent of an actor, however, there would be no anticipated response from the environment, only an open, luminous, awake observation. Remember that when we dissolve the notion of form, the red floor is still red. I would consider it a parallel that acting is still acting... it is not devoid.
I especially like this part: Exactly: it becomes a "virtuous cycle," where one good thing leads to another good thing, and another, and so on. Your whole karma gets lifted up, your life improves, you become a better person, etc. This is a great point, and I agree with you: life is a balance between self-determination on the one hand, and uncertainty on the other. Buddha says "With our thoughts, we make the world" (thus the power to create our reality lies within us), yet it's also clear that uncertainty is a factor in the universe.
I believe most of us allow too much of our lives to remain in the domain of uncertainty. We can take much greater control of our world, by waking up, bringing our thoughts onto our conscious radar, and taking the reins of our minds, to consciously guide our actions (karma) in a better direction.
This has been called karmic evolution, self-improvement, spiritual growth, self-actualization, expansion, self-mastery, etc. It's a clear and universal path, toward which all the sages and wise men of history have pointed us, including the Buddha: indeed, it seems to me that karmic evolution (i.e. progressing from suffering to Nirvana) is at the very heart of the Buddha's message.
Thanks again for sharing your very skillful thoughts.
This raises the issue of agency and intention in general. There is no agent who is generative of intention, there is an endless chain (if that) of movement or becoming. Through self view/contraction there is ownership of it, and proliferated around it. There is no karma for trees, or rivers, or people when they are awake.
Thats it just how it honestly looks from here. It is entirely consistent with the Dharma I have been taught and practice, but I will not on this subtle issue say "this is the Dharma" in the way I would be willing to say on the ABC's we all know and practice.
"Up" is indeed the direction I am suggesting we all go: "up" toward virtue, "up" toward wisdom, "up" toward freedom, etc.
For though in an absolute sense, "up" and "down" may be only abstractions (even illusions), in the karmic realm in which we currently find ourselves, these ideas are useful guideposts, and resonate in the human spirit.
This is why we have expressions like "lift up your eyes," "reach for the stars," "rise up," "stand tall," etc.: because on a deep level, humanity wants to ascend, to evolve. We want to reach something "higher," so to speak. We all know, on a fundamental level, that "rising up" (hope/inspiration/growth) is better than "sinking down" (despair/depression/regression, etc.).
As for whether the changing of our karma can be achieved with effort: that is the only way to achieve anything. We're all engaged in an effort here: the Buddhist path is all about making an effort. It's an experiential path. It's not like Christianity, where salvation is given by divine grace, and no effort of our own can achieve anything. On the contrary: it is through our effort that we achieve liberation. This is why the Buddha says "Work out your own salvation."
I don't suggest that "down" will be eliminated, but I do believe it's possible (indeed, essential) to convert our negative karma into positive. The path for accomplishing this is the path of virtue: for the more "good" seeds we plant, the better our future will be; and the fewer "bad" seeds we plant, the less suffering we will experience.
Your final question seems more rhetorical, so rather than answer it, I will instead meditate on it. Meanwhile, I look forward to reading more of your thoughts on the subject, for your skillful input is frequently helpful to me, for which I thank you.
No disagreement about making the effort to achieve liberation, only about the nature of liberation and the world. Liberation is freedom in all conditions, not a condition of freedom. Conditions will cycle through heaven and hell countless times. Have already done so.
"..the less suffering we experience..". No knocking this, but it is a relative and impermanent diminuation of suffering. This is ofcourse better than making life worse for people.
It is I think a question that cuts to the heart of this discussion.
This is a subject around which there is always backing and forthing. I know practitioners who speak of living with intention, and others who speak of living without intention. The former call the latter Taoists or (inappropriately) non-engaged, and the latter called the former caught up in self improvement. Maybe there is no right or wrong but where our honest insight and inclination takes us.
While it's clear the "maths" of karma cannot be precisely calculated, one thing is certain: karma is a very real and constantly active force in the universe--a "law" in fact, every bit as predictable as 1+1=2 (though not in quite the same way).
Take the following "equation," for instance:
b equals the practice of virtue and good deeds; and
c equals positive karma;
Of course, this "equation" is an oversimplification (as is often the case with "parables"); but it's also a real process, observable all around us, all the time. Consciously cultivating noble thoughts and skillful deeds moves our karma away from the "suffering" end of the spectrum, and toward the "happiness" end: that's how the law of karma works. The seed you plant determines the type of flower (or weed) you get.
The better we feel about ourselves and our lives, the wiser our decisions start to be; the more we want to practice virtue; the better we treat other people; etc. in a virtuous cycle, as Pearl mentioned earlier.
Since we're in a karmic cycle anyway, it seems to me we should make it a virtuous cycle: where we're growing, making progress, and evolving in a positive way. Short of Nirvana itself, this cultivation of nobility seems like the highest and most worthy road.
If so, that's awesome, and you have my admiration. For me, this statement is an abstraction--harder for me to relate to--but maybe I need to meditate on it a bit more, because I do recognize the value of the principle behind it.
To me, "deliberate karma" is a practical path, an experiential path. It's about utilizing the law of karma in a conscious way, to make faster progress in your growth. While "big picture" doctrines like "conditioned arising" certainly underlie the path, they also represent a step toward thinking, and away from doing. (That's just my take on it though; others might feel differently.)
Of course you're right, for all things are relative and impermanent--we live in a relative and impermanent universe. But the impermanence of diminishing suffering doesn't invalidate the good deed, does it? If it did, then the Buddha would not have talked so much about compassion. But he did, because compassion really does matter--even if it is relative and impermanent. The noble deeds Mother Teresa did, the lives she touched (and saved!), those things really mattered, even though (as you quite rightly point out) they were relative and impermanent.
The thing to do is avoid that back-and-forthing altogether. Once you set foot in that rushing river of endless opinion, it will begin to carry you away from the solid shore of your own experience.
Thanks again for your input, my friend--I will give some thought to what you shared.
I don't know a "big picture doctrine". That is not practice for me.
This is where you err, to suggest that I am speaking of something other than compassionate engagement.
I am not expressing opinion, I am describing my life, as you are expressing yours. I take you at face value Zendo.
...Now, there is a an 18ft chestnut prospector to mount atop a car. And I am gone.:)
With respect.
I think what Richard has expressed is actually very practical, and necessary, as a practicing Buddhist. Forget the "unlikely to attain nibbana in this lifetime" nonsense. You certainly won't if you approach it in that way.
I agree with your continued explanation that action minus an agent would result in action without karma. Which points me back toward the notion that intent might be differently defined between us.
I would consider the tree to have intent, or its leaves would grow randomly or only spontaneously. However, plants grow receptors toward light, as they intend to absorb. However, this intent does not mean they have a self-identity... or in your terms an agent, or even a hidden agent, but rather intention is part of the chain of action that sees a desire manifest. In the case of your description, the intent would be born of a spontaneous resonance in the moment, rather than an intention born of a formulated expectation.
Buddha ate, which means he intended nourishment. This does not mean the intention co-dependently arose with an agent or a hidden agent.
That is a terrible saying.
Thank you for your response, Zendo. I feared that my suggestion that karma should, like other processes in the universe, be subject to testing and, ultimately, mathematical examination would be antipathetic to those who prefer speculation and anecdote.
The notion of karma is so important to Buddhists and Hindus that I find it surprising that we have not yet been presented with any experimental schedule to demonstrate its reality. To date, it remains a matter of analogy and metaphor.
My own training in physics remains rudimentary but I can see quite clearly that, if we are to convince sceptics that karma is a universal reality and, perhaps, a prime driver of evolution itself, someone of the quality of a Newton or an Einstein needs to propose verifiable scientific observation and experiment which will result in peer-reviewed and accepted results. Until such a schedule exists, everything we say or choose to believe about karma will remain a matter of unproven and unprovable faith.
Oh?
"One should realize that one does not meditate in order to go deeply into oneself and withdraw from the world...There should be no feeling of striving to reach some exalted or higher state, since this simply produces something conditioned and artificial that will act as an obstruction to the free flow of the mind...Meditation is not to develop trance-like states; rather it is to sharpen perceptions, to see things as they are. Meditation at this level is relating with the conflicts of our life situations, like using a stone to sharpen a knife, the situation being the stone." - Trungpa Rinpoche
what about altruistic intention?
Precisely. That's why it's another b*ll*cks statement just like "We can't learn by other people's experience."
One that I saw somewhere is "We all learn from experiences, but if we can learn through another's experience, it costs less."
Not sure who said it, but it rang true to me.
Special thanks to kurra for the Trungpa Rinpoche quote, which I will meditate and reflect on.
SimonThePilgrim: with regard to your wish that a Newton or Einstein should arise and bend his formidable intellect toward the karma question: it seems to me Newton did formulate the law of karma, in the guise of his Third Law of Motion, which states:
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
That this pillar of Newtonian physics could be "staring us in the face," and yet karma still be regarded as a matter of "faith," testifies to the fragmented nature of our consciousness: the same law governs physics and metaphysics alike--yet we accept the one and doubt the other.
Have I ranted enough?