confused about karma

so karma is the buddhist idea of what goes around comes around basically? and yet buddhists dont believe in god or any higher forces? at least not openly or as apart of their so called practice, but i dont see how that could be argued without arguing that some kind of forces beyond the human eye exist in this world. aside from that, wouldnt doing for the sake of good karma make you just as heavy a weight on this world on the next guy, because then your asking for energy from these forces? assuming these forces have their work cut out for them in this beyond fucked up world and i imagine they do, wouldnt it make more sense for the truely good person to do right just for the sake of doing right? that is, without help from anything, or hoping for a reward for anything. i guess its a shitty unappealing idea really, doing good and working expecting nothing in return, but it seems like the thing that would pave the path to true liberation.

also, if buddhists believe the only moment is now, how could past lives be applied to karma??? wouldnt that make karma instant if the moment is the only thing that exists? wouldnt that also include some kind of divine intervention, as opposed to some record of good deeds that we assume are being written down or observed in a loving fashion in somehow.
another problem i have with karma is its so set in stone, and they claim that this path is the only path. they say you do this, and you will get this in return, but i dont think thats true really. reality is far more complex than a simple law like that, but i do think there is some law involved in there and loveing-compassion is very rewarding in itself, and in some divine ways as well. its just when we get to expecting the divine to fill our lives with miracles all the time, we become a heavier burden on the forces that be i think.

and if our fortune in this life is a result of past lives, how come rich football players are such twits and unevolved wastes of space on this earth? and how come me, who feels deeply evolved in his soul beyond the control of the so called i, am so fucking poor and fretting for money and survival all the time. seems lots of good souls are fortuneless in this way....

 

Is Karma a Buddhist precept or is it from Hinduism, like re-incarnation? Not that it really matters... It isn't a matter of "what goes around comes around". It is a matter of "any act done without full consciousness is a 'sin'."

It is not a matter that Buddhists don't believe in "God," but rather that one has to find out for oneself. To even say that there is no God and that nothing can gbe said about "It," is defining "God" negatively, so something is being said about "God," even if it is indirectly. "Gos" is an experience not a person, it is godliness, it is existential, like loving.

Why do you think that living is a "heavy weight"? Doing "good" with the full intent of earning good Karma is disengenious, it is cunningness. If you have a child and he or she is hungry and you feed it food, do you do the act with an eye to gaining good Karma? Do you see it as a drain on your life? Do you hate your children for being alive? No, you do what is right without fore thought. One does not get good karma by doing good but by not making the same mistake twice; only then is the bad Karma cancelled out.

Thinking about "forces beyond the human eye" is useless, it isn't existential. Yes, there may very well be forces beyond the human eye, but the human eyes can only see outward. It is only when they are turned inward that one can see one's place in the Universe and see the Universe for what it is, a Cosmos, not Chaos, not randomness, not cause and affect.

It isn't a matter of seeing that energy exists, but that recognising that they truly exist and wanting to not add to the negative energies in this world. The world is like a colouring book full of pictures and your life is but choosing which images to fill in, with the colours of the crayons the energies you release into the world. You can elect to see the world in black and white, create something ugly, paint something beautiful, or just see that what you see is seen because of the way you think. It isn't a matter of expecting a reward but rather looking inside one's self and accepting responsibility for one's actions, it is a matter of looking at one's thoughts while contemplating an action, while executing the action and afterwards. How has doing that action affected you and the world, the other?

One does not do good for the other, one does good for oneself. The other is one's self, the other person is yourself because just as "God" is you, "God" is the other person, the same Life that lives in him, lives in you. So when you do good for the other person you are doing good for yourself. This is not Karma, this is responsibility.

The only moment we have is now, but the mind is always in the past projecting into the future. So to be in the now you'd have to bypass the mind by watching it. Just as we acted in past lives unconsciously, reacting unconsiously, acting unconsciously, we act now unconsciously, react unconsciously, acting unconsciously. We lived without awareness before and we are now living without awareness. That is Karma. If we start to bring awareness into our lives every moment, with every thought, with every action, then we jump out of Karma.

Karma is like dropping a drop of black ink into a clear Ocean and seeing the whole ocean become black. If this moment is all that exists and you are not aware of this moment, then our unawareness contributes to Karma. The only one recording our acts is ourselfs, through thought and memory. As we think and do an act it causes a record in our brains. This record then tends to replay over and over, we get in a "record groove" and act just like we did the first time. So the brain associates pain and pleasure with an experience. If it was pleasurable we wish to relive it over and over, many times colouring present cituations with expectations, for wishes the same outcome. If it was unpleasureable it colours our thoughts with dread and trepedation, we see our minds replaying that unpleasurable experience over and over, thereby missing the present moment, the present circumstance, the present situation; we poison the present with ideas of the past, so again we are not in the moment.

Karma is set in stone only because you have set it in stone. Instead of believing in something find out if it is existential. This path is the only path because it is the only path we can see. One can decide to create their own path, but one must take full responsiility. To do that we have to have faith in existence, we have to become more sensitive to Nature. It isn't a matter of expecting the divine to fill our lives but to see the divine always. To see the divine outside oneself is to be engaged in Duality. "God" is everywhere and in everything, but one must experience this this-ness, it has to be existential. Then all is one big miracle.

Our present live isn't a result of our past lives, it is just making the same mistakes over and over again. Your desiring for better fortune just shows that you are not appreciating your present fortune. It is your "I" that is doing this desiring, so it is this "I" that is suffering. Your fortune will only change when your "I" changes, then the world will change because you will not see the world in the same way. This life has given us the opportunity to go beyond the "I," to go beyond the identification of Duality.

 

karma is not just buddhist, hindus also believe in it, and as you said, "what goes around comes around" is something that many people of many beliefs say. some buddhists have gods. i dont. karma is like a physical force, like gravity, or the theory of relativity. wouldn't it be nice if we could all just be good for the sake of being good? unfortunately, people are lazy and need motivation. how many times have you honestly stopped to help someone whose car broke down on the side of the road? would you be more inclined to do it if you knew you were to be paid $1000? you see, everyone needs a little motivation. well, if you think about it, the only moment is now. anything that happened in the past, no longer exists. it's not like you can take your past out of a box and suddenly be in the past. i dont know how to explain it, but a lot of questions like this can be answered through physics and that other science that i cant think of the name of right now... you are missing the point. if you care so much about money, then maybe buddhism isnt for you. buddhism, along with many other eastern philosophies/religions try to teach you not to be materialistic.

 

buddhism came about as a reaction to hinduism. hinduism believed in karma and reincarnation first, since its been around, in different forms, since about 1500 B.C.E. whereas buddhism came about i think in the 6th century B.C.E.

 

Ok I'm not going to do this too thouroughly because I've had a bad day - sorry if I repeat anyone.

So far so good, except the Hindus got there first in coining the phrase.

No - the "higher forces" are merely a part of conditioned existance, just a different part of it.

I'm not quite sure what you are saying. That's partly to do with the number of paragraph breaks you didn't have and my dyslexia.

Right - Karma does not need "higher forces" to work. It's actually common sense when you think about it. If you see someone punch someone you're going to threat them differently, probably negatively. Now think of that and amplify it to the levels of societies working here, it makes sense. It works on many levels.

On the selflessness thing, lets not confuse selflessness with threating yourself differently to others - a lot of people see selflessness as self-neglect, if you wouldn't neglect someone else you're being selfish to neglect yourself. Do you see what I mean?

I believe that's Zen you're thinking of, not Buddhism as such. I'm not aware of a specific doctrine about living in the present that Siddhartha said.

Karma is not such a high, noble thing - it's something that we need to get over to achieve enlightment, if we're bound to our Karma we're bound to the conditioned world and therefore preventing ourselves from achieving enlightenment.

No - see above. Karma isn't an immutable law, good people get what they don't deserve and bad people get away with it.

The bit about the set in stone - that's Hindu Karma, not Buddhist karma. And where did the bit about a single way come from???

True - Karma works, as I said, on many different levels.

I don't remember the divine coming into this - Buddhism is far to practical to teach miracles. The miracle comes from ourselves not from on high, that is why those who do their best to make the world a better place achieve the miracles and the people who sit on their arse waiting for god to solve all problems get nothing.

As I said, not an immutable law. Also, do you think the footballers are so happy with their nice houses, beautiful girlfriends and impressive bank-statements.

Blessings

Sebbi

 

Karma says that when you punch a wall your fist hurts. When you throw a ball in the air, it returns to the ground. When you kill, a part of you dies. Do all the laws of physics require a divine source?

Action out of love and compassion is the path of karma yoga, action without desire or attachment to the result. This is a sure path to enlightement.

As for saying the moment is now... you arent treating the concept in the context it was meant. The time is now, because now is when you can change. Not in the future or the past. The time is now because now is all you have to worry about. The time is now because the call to liberation is urgent and more important than anything else. The time is now because you may die the next moment. What happens to you now is your karma from the past. What you do with it shapes your future. But all you have is now.

 

According to the Vedic scripture Bhagavad-Gita there are three modes of material nature that operate in conjunction with karmic law...goodness, passion, and ignorance. For the sake of briefness, these will have to be self-explanatory for the moment. A person is born with material qualities..body, mind, intelligence, and ego...that are a carryover from the immediate previous life and before, and these qualities are influenced in an infinite number of ways by the three modes of nature. Also, outstandingly "pious"...generous, kind, spiritual, etc., behavior or "impious"...evil, violent, selfish, etc., behavior in a previous life or lives can have a large influence on the present life's circumstances. So, in the case of the football player, his athletic prowess and wealth are a result of pious past activities and his off-the-field behavior is a result of past activities heavily in the modes of passion and ignorance.

Wealth and genuine spirituality don't frequently go together...often, spiritually-minded persons don't have a natural inclination to money-making activities...the massive amount of bullshit involved is just an overload for them. But, one can also be born wealthy or have the natural ability or good fortune to gain wealth, and still be spiritually minded, because of previous pious activities.

A good quote...Krishna (God) is speaking:

"Sometimes, when I want to be especially merciful to someone, I take away all of his worldly possessions. His friends and relatives then reject this wretched and destitute fellow..." I don't remember the rest, but God is actually taking away the person's obstacles to complete participation in spiritual life. It's easier for "a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God", to quote another well-known source.

Bhagavad-Gita As It Is by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami explains all of this in elaborate detail...I recommend you read it.

 

Karma is a Hindu concept, that Buddism sets out to "escape" basically.

Buddists believe in Karama only so far as it is something that our
desires and conscience binds us to. If you have no "self" and
have no desire to the material, then you break the karmic
cycle (which doesnt really exist to them) and "blow out
the flame" or reach nirvana, and become one with it all.

 

Thats what Hinduism also says,a ctually. The concept of karma yoga (karma also means action) is to act, perform our duties towards others,, do whatever it is we have to do, without any desire or attachment. Shortcut to freedom.

 

That is the ascetic path correct? But the other paths are Love and Knowledge?

Not really well versed in the theology of Hinduism, but I understand
that concepts involved with reicarnation, and the buddhas teachings in
that regard.

It's pretty much a conscience thing.

 

Yes there are 3 paths, but they are not distinct from each other, they are 3 aspects of the spiritual path. According to each seekers preference, their way may lean towards one or the other, but there are always elements of all 3.

Karma Yoga - Path of Action: Here we are told to act, dedicating all our work, all our actions and results to God. Thus already all harmful actions are cancelled out. Since we are not attached to the results, there is no desire, so there is no disappointment, nor false pride.

Jnana yoga - Path of Knowledge: This is a path of inquiry, contemplation and meditation on truth. Starting with the question "Who am I?" we peel off successive layers, until we arrive at the firm conclusion that we are one with the universe. This is the inevitable end if logic is correctly followed. To experience that oneness, we need meditation.

Bhakti Yoga - Path of Love: In whichever form divinity is most clear to the seeker, be it Krishna, Rama, Buddha, Allah, Christ, the guru, etc. that form is meditated upon. Through constant contemplation of that divinity, we take on the qualities of that divine persona. We study their teachings, their lives and attitudes and imbibe them. Thus as love grows, it culminates in union, in oneness, nirvana.

All three are related. You cannot embark on the path of karma or jnana without bhakti. Only out of true love can one perform selfless action, only out of true love can one constantly contemplate on or meditate on something. The end also is the same, self-realization. And where there is love, selfless action is automatic. There is a desire to know about the beloved, to u derstand it, to be as close to it as possible. Thus really ultimately, all 3 paths merge into one.

 

I think that what you call "Love" the Budhha calls "Compassion." It's a minor point to those of us proficient in the terminology but many will only have the human love-lust as a reference.

 

Human love-lust is not truly love at all. It is still selfish. It makes demands and requires reciprocation. Cheap imitation of the real thing.

True love is more than compassion. Compassion is one effect of it. But there is also the sheer absolute joy of unconditional, all-encompassing love. Everywhere you turn, you see the beloved! You are constantly in that embrace! Such love brings freedom, we are not dependant on anyone else for our joy or fulfilment. It is fullness, it is peace.

 

Non-attachment its all you can strive for. Karma pushes and pulls. Whether its the buddhist concept or the hindu. Buddhism is usually thought of as refined hinduism. Without the post aryan sky god bullshit. The Creator, the sustainer, the destoyer. Hindu concepts apply to karma, it is created, it withstands, then destroys and destroying is the same as releasing, and releasing the same as returning. Just like that it was created by something real, it returns to something real.

 

Kindly refrain from referring to my religion as bullshit, when you so abundantly fail to understand its depth and meaning.

 

All I meant by bullshit, is that ascetic lifestyle, meditation and the theory of karma ARE NOT ARYAN. If you believe in the aryan invasion, which is what western history teaches. Kindly, why dont you stop attacking me over a stupid word like a jerk and then further explain your "meaning and depth to me". You obviously didn't understand the meaning of my post. I just applied the hindu concept of the trinity, which is unversal, CREATION, PERSERVANCE, AND DESTRUCTION. TO KARMA, as in you aquire karma, through actions, they then have a life span, and then they destruct and release the consequences of the original action. All that I said was bullshit, was the POST ARYAN stuff, including the forced caste, on the native dravidians making them dispose of feces and dead bodies. BELIEVING IN INDRA AND VARUNA, and war and sacrificing goats. These are to the western mind "aryan concepts" now from your name I can tell you are Indian, so from your perspective you could explain your eastern theory. If I didn't just explain myself right there.

And the whole fact that this is really about buddhism makes you a real jerk man. Why don't you keep your mouth shut next time instead of trying to threaten me. And enlighten me, instead.

 

Threaten, threaten dadidadoo dadidadaa
Tell me something bad Nimrod's apprentice, I would so enjoy it dadiduduu

To tell the truth I did not get your point either, do not become so mad if somebody doesn't understand you, I'm pretty ignorant. Do not blame my ignorance, I am doing my best. I'm sure Bhaskar won't mind if I say he is ignorant too, we are so sorry Nimrod's apprentice.
I'll try to act, as you said, cuz usually I lay in my bed all day long.
Peace
Ascetic lifestyle, meditation are practiced in christianity. Maybe it is not your point of you (if I got ur first sentence right).
Got a question I'll spell it capital letters, WHAT IS ARYAN? And what is this aryan invasion? (I am ignorant and knows not that much about Hindu history)

(I got blond hair and blue eyes, is it bad?)

Don't feel threatened please dadidaa dadiduu
Tell me something bad Nimrod's apprentice, I would so enjoy it Dadidaduu dada
Peace

 

Maybe the Aryan "Heresy" of the catholic church? (from the wikipedia...)

"Arius taught that God the Father and the Son were not always contemporary, seeing the pre-incarnate Jesus as a divine being but nonetheless created by (and consequently inferior to) the Father at some point, before which the Son did not exist. In English-language works, it is sometimes said that Arians believe that Jesus is or was a "creature"; in this context, the word is being used in its original sense of "created being.""

 

First of all, I am sorry if I said something horribly wrong by requesting you to show basic respect for my religion. Of course, I misunderstood your post, so I am definitely sorry for that. I agree that forced caste and animal sacrifice are bullshit. However I do believe in thunder and water, since they are things I come across fairly often.

Second of all, I did not threaten you.

Thirdly, I don't particularly believe in the aryan invasion theory so your questions are moot.

Fourth, I don't see how I was being a jerk by simply providing my point of view in answering a question. Yes, the question was about buddhism, yes I used hindu ideas. So? Buddhism grew out of hinduism and has a lot in common with it anyway.

I would enlighten you, but Im not enlightened myself. And anyway, I wouldn't go to someone for enlightenment and open my request by calling them a jerk.

Finally, why are you so angry? It was a simple misunderstanding, I didn't follow what you said in your post. I don't see why you needed to fly off the handle and start calling me names.

Chill out, be sweet.