Buddhism and karma

[David19]

Does anyone know how karma works in Buddhism, it's just i've heard that it's very different to the modern, western, new age, fluffy version, but i don't know what it is in Buddhism (and Hinduism, is it different or the same?).

Also, i know that karma is about if you do something 'bad', it'll come back (or is it different in Buddhism and Hinduism), but does it always come back, like say, you kill in self defence, or someone takes out a pediphile because they touched a kid close to them (or something like that), would it still come back to you, in a negative sense or is there some sort of 'cosmic fail safe'.

I hope that made sense :).

[Cerulean_damselfly]

1. This might be helpful, as there are different views in different paths:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma

2. A very good teacher who was answering a question in a Western-taught class smiled when one of the students asked, "So what does it mean when someone says 'that's their karma' to someone else?" She said that when she heard it said in the Western world, especially the U.S., she believed people are talking about:

-a term of 'what's coming back to the person is what they deserve'--that is, a judgement, just desserts.

-a term for destiny.

Her idea was not to postulate on the theoretical and to do the best you can to not immediately project one's own judgment on a situation that might first appear to warrant negative reaction.

3. I've never thought of the exact situations you described in context of recommendations of behavoir from Buddhist paths...the Four Noble Truths suggest suffering is part of life

http://buddhism.kalachakranet.org/4_noble_truths.html

and negative actions arising from anger, etc...are seen as part of the illusion in this world.

http://buddhism.kalachakranet.org/delusion_introduction.html


4. So when you say 'fail-safe' I cannot quite pinpoint how to answer your examples of how the divine in different paths or faiths might view karmic questions and reasons of another individual's actions.

5. I know that myself as a human being might judge 'justifiable self defense' or 'righteous anger' in the examples you provided different than a scholar or long-term practioner of the faiths/paths you mentioned.

Hope that's a start for you! If I come across something closer to your examples, I'll post...sorry if this isn't what you are looking for now.

Cerulean_damselfly

[Garm]

If my reading of the Baghavid Gita is anything to go by it's not just what you do, it's how you relate to it.

Karma sticks to ego like flies to dogpiles

If you do what you have to do with not out of personal anger but simply because it has to be done your just an instrument of the universal will.

If you do it because that's how get your jollies the accounting will work out differently.

Total detachment in action confers liberation from the fruits of karma.

[Salanthos]

I don't know about buddism, but in hinduism, karma is just the method for the lessons that need to be learned. someone's actions are only important in that they reveal what the person needs to learn, their thoughts and ego are wht needs correction, so what is in the mind is far more closely related to what happens karmicly.

So if something bad happens to a person, it is not because they are being punished, it is because there is something to learn from it, and all the good deeds will not change this. Any diffrence between karma for "good" and "bad" people would be that those who are stubborn, willfull, cannot let go of the ego, and such, which often charictarizes selfish (bad) people, would mean a harder or more pointed lesson is needed to teach the same lesson.

As for 'Karmic failsafes', or rather, for not getting punished for something in the grey areas, it is noted not even the Gods can command that someone neglect their dharma (duty) or punish them for it. So any action that is needed, that is done not for gain, cannot be held against someone. If someone kills because it is his dharma to protect, it is counted as a positive deed. if it is because they are using the reason of protecting someone as an excuse to kill, it is negative. but this isn't exactly karma, it is just consequence - which is similar, but not the same.

[Rin Daemoko]

The idea of karma in Buddhism relies on the idea of cause and effect. Every action, thought, and spoken word is a cause which yields a result. That's the bare essential nature of karma in Buddhism. Every action has a re-action.

The Law of Return, which is popular in the West, contains the idea of "if you do good, you will receive good in return." Karma is not the same as this, since karma does not work with metaphysical ideas such as "good" or "evil." Karma would say that if you do something that you consider to be good, there will be a result of that action - whether or not that result is "good," "evil," or whatever is not something that exists out in nature. What happens is empty of these things. It simply happens.

If you leap off something, gravity will pull you down. There is no good or evil here, it is simply the consequence to your action. The gravity does not judge your actions as being moral or immoral, it simply does what it does. This is karma.

Now, of course there's quite a bit of talk of accumulating "merit." Wherein you do helpful and beneficial acts in order to generate "good karma." To understand this requires not knowing the metaphysics, but just the intentions there. If one gains merit, then the results of one's own actions are considered to be more conducive to helping one attain buddhahood for the benefit of others. It's much easier to practice the dharma if you're in a situation that is conducive to your practice, than it is to practice if you're in a situation that distracts you. (Which, depending on who you are or where you are, that may itself be a good situation to be in.)

[David19]

The idea of karma in Buddhism relies on the idea of cause and effect. Every action, thought, and spoken word is a cause which yields a result. That's the bare essential nature of karma in Buddhism. Every action has a re-action.

The Law of Return, which is popular in the West, contains the idea of "if you do good, you will receive good in return." Karma is not the same as this, since karma does not work with metaphysical ideas such as "good" or "evil." Karma would say that if you do something that you consider to be good, there will be a result of that action - whether or not that result is "good," "evil," or whatever is not something that exists out in nature. What happens is empty of these things. It simply happens.

If you leap off something, gravity will pull you down. There is no good or evil here, it is simply the consequence to your action. The gravity does not judge your actions as being moral or immoral, it simply does what it does. This is karma.

Now, of course there's quite a bit of talk of accumulating "merit." Wherein you do helpful and beneficial acts in order to generate "good karma." To understand this requires not knowing the metaphysics, but just the intentions there. If one gains merit, then the results of one's own actions are considered to be more conducive to helping one attain buddhahood for the benefit of others. It's much easier to practice the dharma if you're in a situation that is conducive to your practice, than it is to practice if you're in a situation that distracts you. (Which, depending on who you are or where you are, that may itself be a good situation to be in.)

I think for me, that makes a lot more sense than the New Age version, so basically, if we're talking about magic and karma (cause and effect), would casting a spell be the cause, and the result (more money, love, whatever, etc) be the effect, and not necessaryily be about 'good' and 'bad' coming back to you.

Is that right?.

Thanks.

[Rin Daemoko]

I think for me, that makes a lot more sense than the New Age version, so basically, if we're talking about magic and karma (cause and effect), would casting a spell be the cause, and the result (more money, love, whatever, etc) be the effect, and not necessaryily be about 'good' and 'bad' coming back to you.

Is that right?.

Thanks.
That's the basic idea, yes. It is, of course, a bit more complicated than that since it's not usual for a cause to have a single effect. In casting a spell, a number of things result from that. It could be that your spell is successful and you get what you want, or it could be that the spell doesn't work and you learn that it wasn't something you really needed in the first place or you learn what you did "wrong" and take steps to correct it and try again, or any number of possibilities.

The point is that everything has a cause, and everything creates an effect. This means that nothing is independently existing because everyting exists dependent upon other causes. This is what is meant by "emptiness" in Buddhism - things are "empty" of independent existence.

[Garm]

I think for me, that makes a lot more sense than the New Age version, so basically, if we're talking about magic and karma (cause and effect), would casting a spell be the cause, and the result (more money, love, whatever, etc) be the effect, and not necessaryily be about 'good' and 'bad' coming back to you.

Is that right?.

Thanks.

No.

From the point of view of magick as I have studied and practiced it the karma would not be the desired results but instead the side affects of the spell you were casting. Nothing is for free and all energy expenditure has to be compensated for one way or another.

Or at least I have gotten used to defining the first wave of desired effect as results or success, and the second wave of unintended consequences as the Karma and in practice it does "feel" like a wave hitting a wall and then rolling back on you.

Roll back, Karma, Recoil, it's hard to define but Karma has the advantage of sounding more special and it's useful for drawing the line between intended and unintended consequences

[Rin Daemoko]

No.

From the point of view of magick as I have studied and practiced it the karma would not be the desired results but instead the side affects of the spell you were casting. Nothing is for free and all energy expenditure has to be compensated for one way or another.

Or at least I have gotten used to defining the first wave of desired effect as results or success, and the second wave of unintended consequences as the Karma and in practice it does "feel" like a wave hitting a wall and then rolling back on you.

Roll back, Karma, Recoil, it's hard to define but Karma has the advantage of sounding more special and it's useful for drawing the line between intended and unintended consequences

I do not meant to criticize your magical paradigm, but I just wanted to draw attention to your use of the word "karma." I really don't know how much you know about the word or the idea itself, and it could be that I am missing your point entirely, so I apologize if I make assumptions that are simply not true.

I know that the word karma (kamma in Pali) means "action," and refers to not only actions but their immediate and secondary results. The idea of karma is not intended to be viewed as a side-effect. I think that may be a little unhelpful as the idea of side-effects suggests that they can somehow be skirted or avoided altogether with the proper precautions - but karma does not work like that. It is not at all like the side-effects of, say, over-the-counter medication.

Again, I don't know if your personal view of karma is deeper than what you've posted here, so I apologize if I've assumed incorrectly of your paradigm.

[Garm]

Rin when Dave brings up the topic of casting spells he really has redefined the terms of discusion and the notion of karma becomes what our admittedly illegitmate borrowing has made of it.

I don't think it is a good idea to extrapolate too much from Buddhist teachings to magical practice especialy given the fact that Westerners have wrenched the idea out of it's original context.

[Cerulean_damselfly]

Does this discussion help anyone?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma

I'm checking out 'related threads' noted here to see if there's more specific information...

Regards,

Cerulean_Damselfly