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.
How Karma Functions?
Joshua
Veteran
Hey,
I've been reading some conflicting statements from the Berzin Archives sporadically and really need some help clarifying the general way that karma functions. (As I anticipate a few's usual reproach I feel it's necessary to preemptively say that I'm aware of the four unconjecturables and that karma is empty, it's not real and simply a conventional description of causal phenomena/urges/tendencies/potentials/etc. of the mindstream.)
My question is whether the degree to which an action affects another is a factor for how much positive or negative potential is added to a subject's mindstream? E.g. If I switched my failure of an essay with somebody's better one in college whom I didn't know was on academic probation which unknowingly resulted in their expulsion from university would I only face the karmic repercussions of "taking that which was not freely given" or would I also face the penalty of ruining his or her life? (For those naysayers I know the semantical implications of words like penalty and repercussion, please ignore it for me.)
The first scenario implies that only what I experience first-hand will affect my mindstream, it is a very scientifically sound theory. The second implies that our mindstreams are interacting in ways that turn karma into a sort of system of justice where karma literally becomes an engine of sorts. Though to go off subject a bit, in mind-only schools like the very little I know about chittamatra one could say that if all of the reality of form is projected by mind, and all our mindstreams have co-interacted infinitely then perhaps in ways I can't understand, on some quantum level beyond time and space, karma is no engine and exacts no justice?)
The real issue is this: With the first scenario a psychopath could kill without any or very little literal remorse; therefore, does he have much karmic aftermath? What about T. Boon Pickens who has publicly stated that he did lobby to change Texas law so that he could have access to North America's largest aquifer--Ogallala and sell the water back to us (with added chemicals) regardless of environmental damages or human casualties; or the Bushes buying the Guarani Aquifer in South America where, due to the lower GDP and average household income, many more families will die without conscience? The first scenario says that a psychopath would face little literal karmic repercussions for much like an animal, they both are naive of the results, whereas with the second scenario they will be taking a long and unpleasant trip to Avici.
Pickens says:
Another issue is:
In fact, Berzin has also supplied a third scenario to my logic which even once prompted me to make a post:
I'm getting a bit confused as you can see, and please as much as I greatly appreciate your help refrain from telling me that my questions, being pedantic, are keeping me from liberation and such and such. Only with correct understanding will I be able to make proper sense of things and especially to help my friends and to better gauge the effects to-be of causes.
Thank you if you've managed to get through this wall of text!
Josh
I've been reading some conflicting statements from the Berzin Archives sporadically and really need some help clarifying the general way that karma functions. (As I anticipate a few's usual reproach I feel it's necessary to preemptively say that I'm aware of the four unconjecturables and that karma is empty, it's not real and simply a conventional description of causal phenomena/urges/tendencies/potentials/etc. of the mindstream.)
My question is whether the degree to which an action affects another is a factor for how much positive or negative potential is added to a subject's mindstream? E.g. If I switched my failure of an essay with somebody's better one in college whom I didn't know was on academic probation which unknowingly resulted in their expulsion from university would I only face the karmic repercussions of "taking that which was not freely given" or would I also face the penalty of ruining his or her life? (For those naysayers I know the semantical implications of words like penalty and repercussion, please ignore it for me.)
The first scenario implies that only what I experience first-hand will affect my mindstream, it is a very scientifically sound theory. The second implies that our mindstreams are interacting in ways that turn karma into a sort of system of justice where karma literally becomes an engine of sorts. Though to go off subject a bit, in mind-only schools like the very little I know about chittamatra one could say that if all of the reality of form is projected by mind, and all our mindstreams have co-interacted infinitely then perhaps in ways I can't understand, on some quantum level beyond time and space, karma is no engine and exacts no justice?)
The real issue is this: With the first scenario a psychopath could kill without any or very little literal remorse; therefore, does he have much karmic aftermath? What about T. Boon Pickens who has publicly stated that he did lobby to change Texas law so that he could have access to North America's largest aquifer--Ogallala and sell the water back to us (with added chemicals) regardless of environmental damages or human casualties; or the Bushes buying the Guarani Aquifer in South America where, due to the lower GDP and average household income, many more families will die without conscience? The first scenario says that a psychopath would face little literal karmic repercussions for much like an animal, they both are naive of the results, whereas with the second scenario they will be taking a long and unpleasant trip to Avici.
Pickens says:
Pickens insists his plan is not about making money for himself, says he's strictly acting as a patriot. After all, he says, he's 80 years old and worth $4 billion. But if you really think his motives are unselfish, consider just one example: Pickens has bought up ground water rights for 200,000 acres in one Texas county for $75 million, estimating his investment will someday be worth over $1 billion."I know what people say -- water's a lot like air. Do you charge for air? 'Course not; you shouldn't charge for water," Pickens said to CBS News two years ago. ."Well, OK, watch what happens. You won't have any water."What will happen to Pickens?
Another issue is:
The Second Law of KarmaHere this seems to inflate the likelihood of scenario two, that another's experience of our actions, regardless of our knowledge of them will still serve to give us worse karmic aftermath, meaning T. Boon Pickens is going to hell. Again, the implications here are deep in metaphysics and beyond logic.
The second law of karma is the increase of results. The usual analogy is that from a small seed, a very large tree grows. The longer we go before we try to purify ourselves of having committed some negative deed, the stronger the force of its karmic legacy becomes and the stronger its results. For example, if we have a misunderstanding with our partner, the longer we leave it without apologizing, the more it grows and the worse it gets. On the positive side, huge consequences could come from attending one Dharma lecture.
In fact, Berzin has also supplied a third scenario to my logic which even once prompted me to make a post:
In Buddhism, karma refers to impulses. Based on previous actions we have done, impulses arise in us to act in certain ways now. Karma refers to the impulse that comes into someone's mind to invest in a stock the day before it crashes or before it rises in value. Or, someone may have the impulse to cross the street at just the moment when he or she will be hit by a car, not five minutes earlier or five minutes later. The arising of the impulse at just that moment is the result of some previous action or actions the person did. In a previous life, for example, the person might have tortured or killed someone. Such destructive behavior results in the perpetrator experiencing a shortened lifespan as well, usually in another lifetime. Thus, the impulse to cross the street arose at just the moment to be hit by a car.The implications here to my logic are that karma functions as a system of justice, which is interesting because in all the archives I've thus far read Berzin never makes another insinuation like this and he constantly expressedly eschews the use of the term "karmic justice" as it's apparently a western misnomer.
I'm getting a bit confused as you can see, and please as much as I greatly appreciate your help refrain from telling me that my questions, being pedantic, are keeping me from liberation and such and such. Only with correct understanding will I be able to make proper sense of things and especially to help my friends and to better gauge the effects to-be of causes.
Thank you if you've managed to get through this wall of text!
Josh
0
Comments
Many Buddhists strongly disagree with the ideas of Berzin. Certainly, from the viewpoint of the Tripitaka, the Lord Buddha himself did not hold such rigid deterministic ideas about karma.
Allow me to offer some questions for your wise consideration.
1. When the Chinese invaded Tibet and slaughtered, tortured & persecuted many Tibetans, including monks, was this the result of the Tibetan's previous evil actions?
2. If "yes" to the above, was not the Chinese invasion of Tibet simply the administration of "justice"?
3. When the Chinese invaded Tibet and forced members of Tibetan families to have sexual intercourse with eachother, was this the result of the Tibetan's previous sexual misconduct?
4. If "yes" to the above, was not the Chinese invasion of Tibet simply the administration of "justice"?
5. When the Chinese conquered and acquired Tibet, was this the result of the Chinese having performed more wholesome past karma than the Tibetans?
6. If "yes" to the above, was not the Chinese invasion of Tibet simply the administration of "justice"?
7. When the Chinese invaded Tibet and slaughtered, tortured & persecuted many Tibetans, including monks, was this the result of delusion in the minds of the Chinese soldiers?
6. When the Chinese invaded Tibet and forced members of Tibetan families to have sexual intercourse with eachother, was this the result of delusion in the minds of the Chinese soldiers?
7. If "yes" to the above, was not the Chinese invasion of Tibet unrelated to Berzin's notion of "karmic justice"?
8. When the Chinese conquered and acquired Tibet, was this the result of the Chinese being better equipped with better (unwholesome) weapons than the Tibetans?
9. If "yes" to the above, was not the Chinese invasion of Tibet unrelated to Berzin's notion of "karmic justice"?
10. When a small child suffers abuse at the hands of adults, is this the result of the child's past karma or simply the result of delusion in the minds of the adults?
I look forward to your replies.
Kind regards
Which Buddhists disagree with Berzin? I'm not denying your claim, I'm curious if it's his forty years of Vajrayana monkhood or simply Vajrayanin ideals that you reject? Humans are often victims of folly but his resume combined with his friendship of the Dalai Lama, another human of course (though a student of my favored Gelug school), is what causes me to deeply consider what he's saying.
I disagree with several things in the Berzin Archives. Punishment-system karma is just one of them. Another is 'Dharma Lite', another is the attitude towards sex in the secondary Bodhisattva vows.. and so on.
Kind wishes,
D.
Imagine telling a small child they were abused due to their past actions? How horrific!
The Buddha said: For example, in the Theravada tradition (unsure of it is sutta), when Maha Moggollana was murdered, despite his psychic clairvoyance, the Buddha attributed it to Maha's past karma. (Maha used to crush other sects in debate often.) The Buddha did not make an excuse for Maha because Maha was an arahant and one of his two chief disciples. The Buddha applied the laws of karma to Maha the same as to all.
The Buddha said: The Buddha was fully enlightened. The Buddha did not encourage bewilderment. The Buddha encouraged human beings protect their lives via wisdom.
Regarding Tibet, my opinion is the monks were the government, contrary to the Dhamma-Vinaya. The Dhamma-Vinaya of the Buddha forbids a monk to engage in politics. As the Tibetan monks were the political foe, naturally, according to Dhamma Law, they & Buddhism were attacked by political enemies.
If the Tibetan monks followed the Dhamma-Vinaya and stayed out of politics, these horrible things would have probably not occurred.
The Tibetans were certainly heirs to their unskillful karma. They created a theocracy without a secular govt and left Tibet in a feudal dark-age & unprotected.
Even the Dalai Lama has conceded this point somewhat.
All the best
..
I've been thinking and I'm describing two systems. According to my OP we've allegedly eliminated scenario three--that of karmic justice. Scenario one as I just elaborated on in the post before this seems to be common sense and I believe it's true. So scenario two is what's really in question; that to what extent does scenario two operate as an extention of scenario one?. Let me stress and bid somebody to answer my question on Moggollana, it seems more complicated than manifestations throughout the psyche appearing as urges and tendencies, for, unfortunately, it appears to be a bit engaged in justice?
China, historically, has been a peaceful nation.
However, during the 19th century, the British committed many violent atrocities in China. Even worse violent atrocities were committed by the Japanese in the 20th century.
So after WWII, the Communists gained power in China, as a natural response to the atrocities of Western imperialism. Naturally, they would act to secure their natural geographical borders to the Himalaya, to protect themselves from the West.
Sadly, during invasion & war, bad things happen. It is even worse when the Dalai Lama sided with the West and the CIA (instead of practising renunciation).
To me, the Tibetan situation simply & sadly was the escalation of bad karma started by Western imperialists, such as the British Empire. When violence starts, it is very hard to stop.
I pray political relations between the West & China improve. I pray the Dalai Lama stops demonising the Chinese. I pray the political war with China ends, so China & Tibetans can live in a humane relationship.
Personally, I feel the Chinese have a historical & innate capacity to act humanly.
To end, my point is the causes of karma can be identified & known.
This is why a modern society has a legal system. It attributes cause to civil or criminal acts of damage & harm.
Where as a feudal slave society will attribute cause to the unknown. This is how such a society & its leaders & priests enslave & control people.
As the Lord Buddha said, to adhere to the views of Berzin is to remain stuck in inaction.