Merit Making - Buddhism Or Animism

[Abandon]

Well, this is my 500th post. I don’t feel like a newbie anymore. Over the months there have been a few threads about rites and rituals, and how animism has been combined with many Buddhist ceremonies. So I thought to start a thread on ‘merit-making’.

Merit Making

Thais use the word ‘merit’ because they have been told that it is the translation of the Pali word ‘punya’ (in Thai it is pronounced ‘boon’), but in English ‘merit’ is not such a nice word – it brings up the feeling of your primary school teacher giving you ‘brownie points’ for making a nice caterpillar from an old egg carton.

There are three main ‘fields of punya’ in Buddhism : Dana – generosity; Sila – keeping the moral precepts; and meditation. Practising these increases the integrity, the uprightness of the mind, and makes ones heart at ease which fosters wisdom. One is supposed to do each of these acts on three levels – to plan it; do it, and rejoice in it. This is the way that karma is made, and that includes bad karma. Also, with generosity, one is supposed to present the offering with ones own hand. Giving includes any kind of giving – giving to your family, friends, beggars, charities, cancer research, temples or whatever. Just so long as it is something that you feel good about.

Christian values

Many of us Westerners have certain Christian values even if we do not count ourselves as Christian, and one of these is relevant to making punya (merit). In Christianity if you do a good deed you are not supposed to feel good about your self; you should be on guard against the Deadly Sin of Pride. But note above that the Buddha recommended that you should rejoice in your action – you should make it bold and clear, and take pride in it. He said that if you dwell on the bad things or problems of life, you will feel bad. If you dwell on the good things you have done, then you will feel happy and at ease. Straight forward psycho-dynamics ! Not a religious dogma. This is the reason behind the ubiquitous yellow buckets – they are a way of making the abstract feeling of ‘boon’ into something concrete and physical that you can easily relate to.

Objective/Subjective Action

Many of you have probably been dragged to the temple and made to take part in the handing over of these buckets, but it is the inner feeling of punya that you are being invited to share in. In one temple we would buy the bucket and then go and offer it to the monk in a little ceremony, followed by ‘gruat nam’ water pouring. This water pouring is a Brahmic symbol, but the sharing of the merits that it represents is perfectly Buddhist. You are inviting your friends, family, the devas etc.. living or dead, to share in the inner feeling of punya.

I noticed on one occasion that the monks would afterwards take the bucket out the back, and round to the front again for sale to the next person. I felt a bit outraged. What a con! I confronted the monk in my bad Thai but fortunately he had a good understanding of Western thinking, and he explained. The monks were not keeping the buckets for themselves, but considered the whole cycle to be a way for the lay people to make donations to the temple as a whole.

“In England you just put a bit of money in a box and hope no one sees you doing it” he said.

Good point. That is not the way to ‘rejoice’ in your good deed. And also is not a way in which you can easily recall what you have done. After that I thought what the heck and spent the rest of the afternoon carrying the buckets back round to the stall where they were bought. Obviously the Thai’s saw me doing this, and found it hilarious. Interesting to note that they all knew what was happening to the buckets but no one found it at all odd. They have an innate understanding that what is really going on; what is really important is the inner feeling of punya.

'Punya' - we don't even have a word for it.

Identifying the Abstract

In ‘Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus’ John Gray suggests that people (especially men) should tell their partner that they love them at least 4 times every day. He said that not only does it make your partner feel appreciated, it also gets you in touch with the feeling of love; makes it more accessible to your daily life and thoughts. It is the same with Tam Boon – by making trips to the temple, and by making strong physical gestures of giving, it brings the religion to life inside. Other rites too, such as getting your new car blessed with holy water, are the same – it is not so much superstition or animist rites, but a way of keeping contact with the inner feeling of being in touch with religion. The more one makes intentional actions around temples, the more that one can get in touch with that inner feeling. Many of us Westerners are so utterly object orientated that we completely miss the inner subjective reality. I know I did when I saw those buckets being re-sold. I could only see what was going on objectively; and saw nothing of what was happening on the inner subjective realm. And again – this is true for all kinds of giving, be it to your wife, family or whoever.

Something the Thai Culture Knows

Dair is a small pretty Thai woman, with an English husband. She is fiery and bold, and always speaks her mind. She puts water and food at the foot of the Buddha image in the street every morning before eating breakfast. She also is pretty harsh talking about monks.

“They are not good these days, not like my parents time”

In front of me her husband asks,

“Well why do you put the food and water out every day – the Buddha doesn’t eat it. It is an old tramp that comes and eats it?”

She just laughed and laughed. She is fully aware that the Buddha does not eat the food. She said it is boon, something I do in the heart.

He says, exasperated,

“ but you don’t even like the monks, and you always complain when you go to the temple”

“yes I know,” she replies, “ but it feels good inside”

[camerata]

Also, with generosity, one is supposed to present the offering with ones own hand. Giving includes any kind of giving – giving to your family, friends, beggars, charities, cancer research,  temples or whatever. Just so long as it is something that you feel good about.

I've never really got a consistent answer from Thai friends about the difference between tam boon and tam taang. Part of the idea of tam boon seems to be that the merit goes to friends or relatives (often dead) and monks are the intermediary who can make that happen. At least, that's what one friend said.

I noticed on one occasion that the monks would afterwards take the bucket out the back, and round to the front again for sale to the next person. I felt a bit outraged. What a con! I confronted the monk in my bad Thai but fortunately he had a good understanding of Western thinking, and he explained. The monks were not keeping the buckets for themselves, but considered the whole cycle to be a way for the lay people to make donations to the temple as a whole.

This reminds me of the weird logic of releasing animals to make merit. The fact that the animals were captured for this purpose doesn't bother Thais at all. The way they see it, they create good karma by releasing the animals, and the animal catchers create bad karma by catching them. The vendor's bad karma is his own business.

[meadish_sweetball]

Pandit, apart from your post being quality writing, it's also a very thought-evolving new perspective to the mysteries of "boon" for me.

Not sure what I am supposed to reply to, since I don't have much hands-on experience with temples in Thailand... Anyway, you inspired me to take my girlfriend to the temple for some brownies when I get back.

Up until now, she has been getting right into my philosophy of giving to charities instead of the temples, since my utilitarian line of thinking says these are likely to create more good. But maybe they don't in actuality...?

One question though - might the inner feeling of tam boon in the manner you describe not make you feel you have filled up your "do-gooder" quota and make you less inclined to do good in other ways?

[Abandon]

Thanks both of you - I was feeling a little forlorn here all alone in the thread

I've never really got a consistent answer from Thai friends about the difference between tam boon and tam taang. Part of the idea of tam boon seems to be that the merit goes to friends or relatives (often dead) and monks are the intermediary who can make that happen. At least, that's what one friend said.

You are right in a way - the monks are an intermediary, but so is any one, or any charity that you choose - the important thing is to make it a bold, clear action that you can rejoice in and remember. For that of course, it must be something that you feel good about. There is no special 'power' whereby the monks transfer the punya for you, it is you yourself that dedicates to the relatives/friends.

If you are a Buddhist, then usually the place that you feel the best about supporting is the temple and the monks. By so doing you are providing for the continuence of the religion which represents the path to the highest good (summum bonum) - enlightenment. But punya is not dependent on the Buddhist faith. Any kind of giving that you feel good about is making punya.

One time I sat down to eat a pack lunch behind some houses, and a boy came to watch. I was real thirsty, but spontaneously I gave him my can of coke. I felt so happy seeing his little face light up. That event has given me more happiness than if I had drunk the coke myself. That's punya.

This reminds me of the weird logic of releasing animals to make merit

That one is really bizaare. Yes the Thai's are focussing on their own deed and ignoring the fact that it encourages the capture of the animals. I notice that very few temples permit the sale of animals (which is against Right Livelihood anyway) within the temple grounds. Same as monks offer metta (loving kindness) to all beings, even mosquitoes. And have chicken for lunch (well they didn't kill it )

[Abandon]

since my utilitarian line of thinking says these are likely to create more good. But maybe they don't in actuality...?

I'd have to agree with you there, there are lots of charities providing focussed good for people. But the objectifying, the analysing which monk is good and which not, which charity spends the money better etc... kind of makes me lose touch with the inner feeling. The Buddha said make giving a habit. This is all day every day as and when the inspiration takes. To your wife/husband/friends/tramps whoever.... Making giving a habit; setting about it deliberately; and rejoicing in it - makes you happy. Punya.

Now I don't worry so much if giving to a begger is better for him; or making society worse ... Analysis kills love. Better to focus on the inner punya - it makes everyone happy.

Does this then give you the excuse to do all kinds of mis-deeds as you have built up a bit of good karma? Well, the next level up of punya is keeping the moral precepts.....

[camerata]

You are right in a way - the monks are an intermediary, but so is any one, or any charity that you choose - the important thing is to make it a bold, clear action that you can rejoice in and remember.

For that of course, it must be something that you feel good about. There is no special 'power' whereby  the monks transfer the punya for you, it is you yourself that dedicates to the relatives/friends.

What I've been told by Thais is that they feel that the monks can help them pass the merit they make to deceased relatives. For example, one of my staff went into the monkhood for a week after his mother died. It probably made him feel better, but the idea was to help his mother in whatever realm she had gone to. I wonder if this type of dedicating merit to others was originally a Theravada idea, or is a left-over from Thailand's pre-14th century Mahayana Buddhism?

Personally, I think that the main beneficiary of punya is the giver/doer himself, no matter who he dedicates it to. I wonder if there is any support in the Pali scriptures for the idea of passing punya to another being simply by volition?

If you are a Buddhist, then usually the place that you feel the best about supporting is the temple and the monks. By so doing you are providing for the continuence of the religion which represents the path to the highest good (summum bonum) - enlightenment. But punya is not dependent on the Buddhist faith. Any kind of giving that you feel good about is making punya.

Yes, I agree with that, but it's interesting that Thais don't seem to like giving to charities because they aren't sure what happens to the money. They feel much more comfortable giving directly to monks or temples.

Incidentally, my GF likes us to tam boon together as this apparently increases the likelihood of us being together in some future life.

[sabaijai]

The idea of merit (puñña) as growing out of sila (practice of morality or virtue), dana (practice of generosity) and pañña (wisdom or discernment; sometimes mentioned as bhavana or mental development instead) is well substantiated in the Suttanta.

The idea that the merit earned is 'stored' is embodied in the concept of puññakkheta, or 'field of merit'.

My guess is that most Thais choose to make merit via dana because it's much easier than practicing sila or developing pañña.

The commentaries list ten kinds of meritorious action (puñña-kiriya):

1) morality (sila)

2) generosity (dana)

3) mental development (bhavana)

4) reverence (apaciti)

5) service (veyyávacca)

6) transference of merit (pattánuppadána)

7) rejoicing in others' merit (abbhánumodana)

8) expounding the Doctrine (desaná)

9) listening to the Doctrine (savana)

10) rectification of views (ditthujukamma)

(Atthasálini Tr. 209ff)

Selected Pali verses:

Puññakammaani karontaana.m vaa.nijaana.m dhana.m atthi.

Merchants who perform meritorious deeds have wealth.

Kusalakammaani karontaa sappurisaa sama.nehi dhamma.m ugga.nhissanti.

Good men doing meritorious deeds will learn the dhamma from monks.

As can be seen in the above two examples, the English 'merit' is sometimes used interchangeably for both puñña and for kusala.

The opposite of puñña, it might be useful to note here, is pāpa (evil; sin, etc).

I realise this post contains a lot of Pali terms, but as long as we're talking about the role of 'merit' in Buddhism (and any assumed association with animism, although I see no obvious relation) I think it's important to be clear about where the concept come from and what it means.

[Abandon]

For example, one of my staff went into the monkhood for a week after his mother died. It probably made him feel better, but the idea was to help his mother in whatever realm she had gone to

As I interpret it becoming a monk is just another way to access that inner quality of punya, like giving or keeping morality. And can be dedicated in the same way. The monk gains no special powers where he can help his deceased mother, other than his (hopefully) increased purity.

The idea that the merit earned is 'stored' is embodied in the concept of puññakkheta, or 'field of merit'

Interesting angle - I never thought of it as a 'storage field' but as in a 'field of action' More like 'the field of voluntary work' the 'field of physics'. Especially as it is called the Punya kiriya vatthu - emphasising action

The ten kinds of punya - these are from the commentaries. I'm never keen on the commentary additions (though they are valid) preferring to stick to the original suttas where 3 punya are listed generosity-morality-meditation. Just trying to keep it fairly simple.. I wonder if the last 3 of the 10 clauses were added to justify the monks existence.....

But anyway - I was hoping to steer the thread in the direction that Camerata was going - to try and get into the mind of the Thai people, and show that these are not really animist rites, or a Buddhist superstition, but a genuine part of Buddhism. The Thai people have an innate appreciation of punya (IMO) and are the most generous people I have ever met.

Maybe I should have posted in the General or Expat life section, but I'm guessing that cross posting is frowned upon.

[sabaijai]

I think your topic is perfect for this branch, and I for one am glad you posted it here. I just wanted to add further support to your idea that merit-making has its foundation in canonical Buddhism.

May I suggest that without the last three of the 10 puñña-kiriya, Buddha's original followers could not have received the Buddhadharma?

[bina]

U R NOT ALONE....

just reading not replying but could u guys take a look over at the lang. thread for luck etc i stuck there? there seems to be a mix of luck, karma etc which we discussed here but now there are teh thai words for the different ones, maybe u all have some comments....

bina

[sabaijai]

U R NOT ALONE....

just reading not replying but could u guys take a look over at the lang. thread for luck etc i stuck there?  there seems to be a mix of luck, karma etc which we discussed here but now there are teh thai words for the different ones, maybe u all have some comments....

bina

Bina, I gave it a shot.

[Suthep_Steve]

This is a lovely topic.

I'm interested to hear about what Theravadians think about setting a correct motivation as a precursor to creating merit. I know that for many Mahayanists setting a good motivation first is more important than the actual physical, verbal or mental act of making merit. Then once the deed is done is it common to dedicate and what is the purpose of this dedication? In the Mahayana it is described as a sealing in of the merit which would otherwise be destroyed by the mind of anger.

In one way what I have written sounds very mechanical but if you work at it and gain experience I think that it helps you to improve your inner experience of merit.

Oh by the way I'm talking about the motivation of the maker not of the receiver. We can never know others motivations unless we are a Buddha so we may as well just focus on our own.

[sabaijai]

This is a lovely topic.

I'm interested to hear about what Theravadians think about setting a correct motivation as a precursor to creating merit. I know that for many Mahayanists setting a good motivation first is more important than the actual physical, verbal or mental act of making merit. Then once the deed is done is it common to dedicate and what is the purpose of this dedication? In the Mahayana it is described as a sealing in of the merit which would otherwise be destroyed by the mind of anger.

In one way what I have written sounds very mechanical but if you work at it and gain experience I think that it helps you to improve your inner experience of merit.

Oh by the way I'm talking about the motivation of the maker not of the receiver. We can never know others motivations unless we are a Buddha so we may as well just focus on our own.

Intent is everything in core Theravada as well.

Dhamma teachers in Thailand often give their beginner students examples of apparently identical actions (for example, two different monks, each leaving a stack of used monk's robes next to a rubbish bin) and ask them how they might differ even when they appear to be the same.

[suegha]

Just a couple of things here, Christianity encourages 'good acts' and the feeling good about them. However, "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward..." (Matthew 6:1) The point is that you don't do them to impress others. Likewise "Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward." (Matthew 6:2)

The Christian teaching is that you don't think that you will be somehow saved by your works. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

And finally on the right mind, Christianity encourages the right frame of mind for holiness. "...whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things..." (Philippians 4:8)

Grace & Peace to all of you.

เสือ

[Abandon]

Excellent post suegha.

The Buddha was coming from a different angle in that some kings and wealthy merchants would order their servants to make donations of food, and then forget all about it. The Buddha was saying that if they don't go to any effort, or give the offering with their own hand, then the punya would be little. Thus came the tradition of making physical offerings by ones own hand - which is why Thai's all like to hold each other physically as their family member offers something.

Of course, as stated, punya does not come from giving to temples only.

Westerners tend to prefer slipping a donation in a (charity, temple..) box unseen rather than make a bold action out if it. Though I labelled that 'Christian', I should perhaps have labelled it 'Western culture'. You really put that in perspective.

Even comparing the cultural approach, it's not so much that one is better than the other, but just trying to show a bit of Thai culture from the Thai perspective that I think many Westerners miss.

PS, nice new avatar SabaiJai

Edited March 24, 2005 by pandit35

[camerata]

Westerners tend to prefer slipping a donation in a (charity, temple..) box unseen rather than make a bold action out if it. Though I labelled that 'Christian', I should perhaps have labelled it 'Western culture'. You really put that in perspective.

Well, I wouldn't want to defend Western culture, but we Westerners do tend to think that talking about money or displaying it is vulgar. For Thais, it's the opposite - displaying the cash just proves that you built up some good karma in the past and are now a person to be respected. There's an element of social acceptance in donating publicly.

I found a relevant observation in one of John Blofeld's books. He is describing poor Mongolian pilgrims making donations to a temple on Wu T'ai mountain in the 1930s, and in a parenthetical aside (he is writing in Thailand in the 50s) he says:

"Incidentally, the belief that the gift itself matters much more than what is done with it accounts for the scarcity of organized charities in Buddhist countries, which now causes some of the younger Asian Buddhists to reflect; yet in Burma and Siam, even today, many more people are willing to devote money to the building of unnecessary temples in places where temples abound, than to the upkeep of hospitals, schools and clinics."

Edited April 2, 2005 by camerata

[sabaijai]

Good point, camerata.

[Oleg_Rus]

the charity issue is pretty interesting in LOS. every week I can see those "trees with money" in offices and streets - what is the purpose of that, I might I ask?

Raw cash goes to nobody knows where? Or to show how faithfull owner is?

in the mean time, some christian charity building schools and camps up North, helping tribals in their everyday life.

btw, how christian can do charity for other religion group? isn't it wierd, and against it? interesting, though...

[spencerdharmagrafix]

the charity issue is pretty interesting in LOS. every week I can see those "trees with money" in offices and streets - what is the purpose of that, I might I ask?

Raw cash goes to nobody knows where? Or to show how faithfull owner is?

in the mean time, some christian charity building schools and camps up North, helping tribals in their everyday life.

btw, how christian can do charity for other religion group? isn't it wierd, and against it? interesting, though...

Well firstly - to put your mind at rest; The money on the trees, or sticks even or donations to temples, goes mostly in the building of schools, hospitals, and bridges as well as other charitable actions and projects. a part of it goes to cover the costs of the temple also of course. Bhikkhus (monks), are not permitted by the Vinaya to make their own food, not even pluck the fruit from a tree, and so rely on the community in the surrounding region for their upkeeping. The Bhikkhu should remain in solitude most of the day, but even when on tudong, and is sleeping and meditating under his grod (parasol and mosquito net), must he be within walking distance of the village, in order to make pintabata (mendigation/begging) for his food. Sometimes a Bhikkhu may go 2 or 3 days without food becaus of this, whilst on tudong.

As to making Bun (Punya)If you consider the Noble Dhammas (truths/natures) of Emptiness and Impermanence in its deepest aspects, then you will see that dhana (giving of alms or metta - the selfless compassion for all other living beings) is a practise of one attempting to attain the realisation of non-self, through practising non-attachment and metta. Giving is one of the ways in which you can apply your inner metamorphosis - but io would like to quote a teaching of the Bhuddha to Venerable Ananda. T

"A friend endowed with these three qualities is worth associating with. Which three? He/she gives what is hard to give, does what is hard to do, endures what is hard to endure. A friend endowed with these three qualities is worth associating with."

What is hard to give.....

Its not always money, think about it; to admit one was wrong to somebody and say sorry for it. To bestow gifts upon those who you often think about, instead of just thinking about it. To help those in need with compassion, and to spend time thinking about people in need in order to develop such compassion.

Unfortunately, not all Thais, nor other nations, due to the level of education as far as Bhuddhist philosophy goes, go much further than making a physical offering of food or money without understanding what transformations should be practised in the process of giving.

A dedicated study and practise of the dhamma along with samatha and 40 Vipassana gamatana methods will lead any person to full understanding of the meaning of Dhana, and all other natures (dhammas). Dhana is not about giving and knowing if the money is going to be used right or wrongly, you just gove indiscriminately just as the sun shines on all beings, good and bad, flowers and weeds alike. That is Metta and Dhana

Edited December 8, 2008 by spencerdharmagrafix

[fabianfred]

wow..this is an old thread..

I would say that most Thais do not have a full understanding of merit-making, and sometimes this is the fault of some monks who simply encourage the first type which is Dana...or giving...being donating money, giving food, giving robes, etc. and many Thais think they have to be spending money in order to make merit.

Actually, the second type which is sila or precepts is much harder to do and earns consequently much more merit. i have heard it said that one who takes the trouble to keep the eight precepts for a single day and night earns more merit than one who builds a dozen temples.

If an action is more difficult it earns more merit..... and the most difficult of all is the practice of Vipassana which therefore earns merit at a huge rate.

[chutai]

I quite like this quote of Nichiren Daishonin's, which I think sums up perfectly the nature of giving and the ambiguous benefits accrued according to the intent and place.

" I have received the various gifts that you were kind enough to send.

The roots of good fortune are not determined by whether one’s offerings are large or small. Depending upon the country, the person and the time, the merit gained will differ in various ways. For example, even if one dries dung, breaks it up, passes it through a sieve and forms it into the likeness of a sandalwood tree, or of a woman, a heavenly goddess or a Buddha, when it is burned, it will give off no other fragrance but the stink of dung. Similarly, if one kills or robs others and takes from them the first fruits of the harvest, then even if one should offer one’s gains with the intent of acquiring merit and good fortune, that offering will instead become an evil deed.

The wealthy man Sudatta was the richest person in all of India. He built the Jetavana monastery as an offering and invited the Buddha there. Yet his monastery burned down and not a trace of it remained. This rich man originally gained his wealth by catching and selling fish, thus depriving them of life, and therefore in the end this monastery disappeared.

In the same way, the donations made by people today may seem impressive, but they are offerings of fiefs won in battle or of wealth gained by heedlessly oppressing the people. Though these gifts appear to be great acts of devotion to the Buddha, not only will the people who offer them fail to attain Buddhahood, but their contributions will vanish without a trace.

Again, even if one does no harm to others and honestly strives to make offerings, there will be cases in which one does not attain Buddhahood. To illustrate, if one plants good seed in a bad field, the seed itself will be ruined, and one will in turn suffer loss. Even if one is sincere, if the person to whom one makes offerings is evil those offerings will fail to produce benefit; rather, they will cause one to fall into the evil paths.

Your own offerings were not made to me, Nichiren, but to the Lotus Sutra. Therefore we must leave it to Shakyamuni Buddha, Taho Buddha and all the other Buddhas of the ten directions [to fathom the greatness of] the resulting benefits."

[camerata]

From Access to Insight:

"It is said to be more meritorious to feed one person with right view, a stream-enterer (sotapanna), than to give great alms such as that given by Velama. It is more meritorious to feed one once-returner than a hundred stream-enterers. Next in order come non-returners, arahants, Paccekabuddhas and Sammasambuddhas. Feeding the Buddha and the Sangha is more meritorious than feeding the Buddha alone. It is even more meritorious to construct a monastery for the general use of the Sangha of the four quarters of all times.* Taking refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha is better still. Abiding by the Five Precepts is even more valuable. But better still is the cultivation of metta, loving-kindness, and best of all, the insight into impermanence, which leads to Nibbana."

* I believe this is why Thais like to donate to the building of new temples.

[Brucenkhamen]

While I understand the Buddha setup a two tier system whereby those who weren't able to follow in his footsteps could still be involved by supporting those who could financially, I don't think he ever intended to setup a frequent flyer programme.

Thais seem to believe that if the accumulate enough points (aka merit) they'll qualify for a free trip to heaven.

This is a crying shame because it places in the mind of many people a gaining idea, the idea if I do this and that I'll get something in return, wheras giving should be iout of desire to support those on the path, or out of compassion for those in need.

I'm not sure what happens with frequent flyer points accumulated by doing things with a gaining idea and for the wrong reasons, but the most important aspect of generosity is it's ability to change your heart.

[fabianfred]

sure they gain merit....and help themselves get a better rebirth, either in a human life in better circumstances or a rebirth in one of the higher realms....but all this happened before the Buddha taught the dhamma....and happens when it is lost again

..but it needs more than this to achieve liberation and the safety from rebirth in the lower realms afforded by becoming a Noble one..... a Sotapanna

those beginning upon the path are attracted by the making of merit...hoping to achieve better rebirth...or fear the punishment of rebirth in the lower realms....but those more advanced will start to do good, merely for the love of good, without any desire for reward ...this is called making neutral karma...neither black or white...and is part of the path to Ariyahood