Karma

[ade100]

This discussion started in another string on Western Buddhists:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=104645

As the discussion we were having was off topic but very interesting, I thought it best to start a new thread.

The question is: do all thoughts, words and actions create karma?

I am of the opinion that they do. I would say we can’t so much as make a phone call, drive to work or read the newspaper without creating karma.

Some possible examples of non-karma generating actions have been put forward:

“Neutral actions” like going to the supermarket (chutai)

The actions of the enlightened (chownah)

An unintentional action like treading on someone’s toe (ade100)

So what do you think? Is creating karma a part of every day life or not? Can we do things without creating karma?

[camerata]

You might want to read this topic on Karma and Free Will in which intention was discussed in detail.

[ade100]

Thanks. A very interesting read and very thought provoking.

I think my question is not so much to do with freewill as to do with the extent of "karma creating" actions. One of the examples discussed in this thread was that of throwing a rock and accidentally killing someone. Discussions on karma often focus on examples of killing people :-)

What I am more interested in is whether the way we behave in every day situations, at work, with our family and friends (while not killing them) creates karma. I say it does. I think some believe that these are all neutral actions and do not impact our karmic storehouse.

[chownah]

What I am more interested in is whether the way we behave in every day situations, at work, with our family and friends (while not killing them) creates karma. I say it does. I think some believe that these are all neutral actions and do not impact our karmic storehouse.

I think that most people are pretty much constantly acting through intention but this doesn't mean that it is impossible to act without intention I guess. I think you are correct that some people are not aware of the intention involved with their actions...I'd say that probably most people are not aware of it most of the time...and often what they see as their intention is really a superficial understanding and does not reflect an understanding of the roots of the intention......"I intend to excell in football"...or is it really "I intend to impress the girls" or is it "I intend to boost my ego by being better than someone else"...or is it "............

Chownah

[PoorSucker]

Thanks. A very interesting read and very thought provoking.

I think my question is not so much to do with freewill as to do with the extent of "karma creating" actions. One of the examples discussed in this thread was that of throwing a rock and accidentally killing someone. Discussions on karma often focus on examples of killing people :-)

What I am more interested in is whether the way we behave in every day situations, at work, with our family and friends (while not killing them) creates karma. I say it does. I think some believe that these are all neutral actions and do not impact our karmic storehouse.

You shall never feel good about yourself, it should only be the natural way.

The hardest thing to do...., when you do something good, you do should never feel good about it.

Making the right thing should always be natural.

The same goes the other way..

When you do something wrong, it's in your karma.

You shall never feel bad about it afterwards.

Old memories only disturb you, when trying to find the path...

Never take the easy way, only the hard path teach us...

[Virin]

The Buddha's Words on Kamma (karma): http://www.buddhistinformation.com/ida_b_w...ds_on_karma.htm

Kamma concerns everyone. We make it, a great deal of it, every day while we are awake.

We decide whether or not to get up -- kamma. (Good kamma if one gets up vigorously, bad kamma if slothfully or grudgingly.)

Let's have a cup of tea, breakfast -- maybe some greed is involved, so bad kamma.

We sympathize with someone's sickness and give help -- good kamma.

We get flustered because the bus is late to take us to work -- bad kamma.

Once we're there perhaps we get impatient with someone, or angry with them, or threaten them -- worse and worse kamma.

But perhaps we are generous and kindly to someone there -- excellent kamma.

Work brings on dull mental states, then we shake ourselves out of that listlessness and resentment (bad kamma) and vigorously try to get back to mindfulness (good kamma).

In the crowded bus returning home someone stamps on one's foot, one curses -- bad kamma -- but after quick reflection one realizes "Ah, no mindfulness" and this is good kamma.

At home at last, one comforts the sick, then plays with the children and tells them some Jataka stories -- all good kamma.

But then, tired and dull, one switches the radio (and/or television) on and, not listening to it, leaves it going as a sound to drown silence, then one eats too much and feels lethargic -- bad kamma.

But perhaps instead one pays respect to the Buddha-image, does some chanting and then meditates -- all kinds of good kamma.

When the body is tired one goes to sleep holding some meditation subject in mind -- good kamma.

All these decisions, choices and desires are kammas made in the mind. More kamma is made when one talks after having decided. Still more kamma is added if after this one acts as well.

[ade100]

What I am more interested in is whether the way we behave in every day situations, at work, with our family and friends (while not killing them) creates karma. I say it does. I think some believe that these are all neutral actions and do not impact our karmic storehouse.

I think that most people are pretty much constantly acting through intention but this doesn't mean that it is impossible to act without intention I guess. I think you are correct that some people are not aware of the intention involved with their actions...I'd say that probably most people are not aware of it most of the time...and often what they see as their intention is really a superficial understanding and does not reflect an understanding of the roots of the intention......"I intend to excell in football"...or is it really "I intend to impress the girls" or is it "I intend to boost my ego by being better than someone else"...or is it "............

Chownah

It’s and interesting point and brings up the whole issue of how Buddhism fits with the concept of the subconscious (I am sure there have been things written on this).

To take a similar example as your footballer, let’s consider a politician. Consciously he entirely believes that he is working for the good of the people and the country. But he is actually being driven by subconscious drives for money, sex and power. Where is his intention? His conscious intention should be creating good karma but his subconscious intention should be creating bad karma.

I need to think more about this…

[chownah]

What I am more interested in is whether the way we behave in every day situations, at work, with our family and friends (while not killing them) creates karma. I say it does. I think some believe that these are all neutral actions and do not impact our karmic storehouse.

I think that most people are pretty much constantly acting through intention but this doesn't mean that it is impossible to act without intention I guess. I think you are correct that some people are not aware of the intention involved with their actions...I'd say that probably most people are not aware of it most of the time...and often what they see as their intention is really a superficial understanding and does not reflect an understanding of the roots of the intention......"I intend to excell in football"...or is it really "I intend to impress the girls" or is it "I intend to boost my ego by being better than someone else"...or is it "............

Chownah

It’s and interesting point and brings up the whole issue of how Buddhism fits with the concept of the subconscious (I am sure there have been things written on this).

To take a similar example as your footballer, let’s consider a politician. Consciously he entirely believes that he is working for the good of the people and the country. But he is actually being driven by subconscious drives for money, sex and power. Where is his intention? His conscious intention should be creating good karma but his subconscious intention should be creating bad karma.

I need to think more about this…

Good example. My view is that ALL of the different levels of intention that we have mentioned in our two examples are still at a rather mundane level. There is a much deeper type of intention which we make having to do with maintaining our existence as an individual self. The Buddha taught that our entire concept of our "self" is a delusion and that our intentions are tied up with creating and maintaining that delusion....at least this is my interpretation of what the Buddha taught.

Chownah

[rockyysdt]

But perhaps we are generous and kindly to someone there -- excellent kamma.

It's good that we debate karma to better understand it and move forward in our lives, but I suspect we can only guess.

Your example "But perhaps we are generous and kindly to someone there -- excellent kamma. " depends on your intention.

If you were generous so others will think you are a good person, then this is not good karma, as it inflates your ego. Your actions should be selfless and not performed for reward.

I read a book called "Thick Face, Black Heart" which detailed literally thousands of good actions and thoughts one should follow to live correctly. So many, that it would be impossible even to know or learn all of them, let alone act on them through mindfulness.

Many of us are also blind to the folly of our actions and can create Karma even if we have good intentions. In Hitlers heart, he truly believed that exterminating Jews was a good thing for humanity and went about it with a clear conscious. Of course we know otherwise.

You can attempt to practice good Karma for many lifetimes (if this is possible) without result.

The answer to living a karmic correct life is through meditation and mindfulness. Over time as you tap into the power within you'll naturally begin to live correctly without intellectual analysis or study.

Having said that, until we do become more enlightened, learning about Karma assists us to avoid the big hitters such as not killing, stealing, and others.

Edited December 30, 2007 by rockyysdt

[chownah]

The Buddha taught that intention to kill always creates kamma with negative fruits....regardless of whether your reasons for doing it is to benefit someone or something.....at least I think so.

Chownah

[jamesc2000]

The Buddha taught that our entire concept of our "self" is a delusion and that our intentions are tied up with creating and maintaining that delusion....at least this is my interpretation of what the Buddha taught.

Chownah

I am not sure too but it sounds correct to me! Can I borrow your point and add a little to it.

If the entire concept of our "self" is a delusion then the thoughts of the deluded self must also be a delusion!

So the thoughts of good or bad karma is also a delusion? Then surely the most important thing is to uncover the delusion and find the truth.

I don't know but if we can uncover the deluded self then maybe the concepts of good and bad karma is also removed?

All this discussion is great! I am learning a lot from all the posts here!

Edited December 30, 2007 by jamesc2000

[chownah]

The Buddha taught that our entire concept of our "self" is a delusion and that our intentions are tied up with creating and maintaining that delusion....at least this is my interpretation of what the Buddha taught.

Chownah

I am not sure too but it sounds correct to me! Can I borrow your point and add a little to it.

If the entire concept of our "self" is a delusion then the thoughts of the deluded self must also be a delusion!

So the thoughts of good or bad karma is also a delusion? Then surely the most important thing is to uncover the delusion and find the truth.

I don't know but if we can uncover the deluded self then maybe the concepts of good and bad karma is also removed?

All this discussion is great! I am learning a lot from all the posts here!

I think that you are on the right track....but I'm not sure what you mean by "uncover the deluded self". I think that the Buddha teaches that we should have no doctrine of self at all and he teaches methods for achieving this. I'm not completely sure but I think that if one can get to the point of actually having no doctrine of self whatever then one will be enlightened. A side note here is that it is a common belief (but a belief that is not held by all) that even believing that you have no self is a doctrine of self and as such will not get you where you want to go. I guess the idea is that to think in terms of "having" or "not having" requires an active doctrine of self so to say "I 'have' no self" is reaffirming that there is an "I" that is doing the "having" and this "I" constitutes a doctrine of self. I guess the idea is to view experience and not have the concept of self enter into it at all.....it is possible to observe what is happening in the fashion of "there is pain" instead of "I hurt"/"I have pain"....or "now there is a feeling of joy" instead of "I feel joy".....but these things need to be at the experiential level and not just a semantic convention. It's not the kind of thing that will help you with your career!!!!!

Chownah

Edited December 30, 2007 by chownah

[jamesc2000]

The Buddha taught that our entire concept of our "self" is a delusion and that our intentions are tied up with creating and maintaining that delusion....at least this is my interpretation of what the Buddha taught.

Chownah

I am not sure too but it sounds correct to me! Can I borrow your point and add a little to it.

If the entire concept of our "self" is a delusion then the thoughts of the deluded self must also be a delusion!

So the thoughts of good or bad karma is also a delusion? Then surely the most important thing is to uncover the delusion and find the truth.

I don't know but if we can uncover the deluded self then maybe the concepts of good and bad karma is also removed?

All this discussion is great! I am learning a lot from all the posts here!

I think that you are on the right track....but I'm not sure what you mean by "uncover the deluded self". I think that the Buddha teaches that we should have no doctrine of self at all and he teaches methods for achieving this. I'm not completely sure but I think that if one can get to the point of actually having no doctrine of self whatever then one will be enlightened. A side note here is that it is a common belief (but a belief that is not held by all) that even believing that you have no self is a doctrine of self and as such will not get you where you want to go. I guess the idea is that to think in terms of "having" or "not having" requires an active doctrine of self so to say "I 'have' no self" is reaffirming that there is an "I" that is doing the "having" and this "I" constitutes a doctrine of self. I guess the idea is to view experience and not have the concept of self enter into it at all.....it is possible to observe what is happening in the fashion of "there is pain" instead of "I hurt"/"I have pain"....or "now there is a feeling of joy" instead of "I feel joy".....but these things need to be at the experiential level and not just a semantic convention. It's not the kind of thing that will help you with your career!!!!!

Chownah

I completely agree with you!

I used the term "uncover the deluded self" because I was trying to be gentle!

The truth that there is no self is really brutal and I thought that maybe it might be better for people to slowly work that one out themselves!

Hehe but I love your direct approach like a hammer to a mirror creating the illusion!

Of course when I say “I love” it really is the illusion that people think is me loves … !

Chownah, may the illusion that is taken as me just say that the illusion that is taken as you has put this in a very nice way!

[camerata]

P.A. Payutto's book, Good, Evil and Beyond - Kamma in the Buddha's Teaching covers the subject in some detail and is available online.

[rockyysdt]

Chownah, may the illusion that is taken as me just say that the illusion that is taken as you has put this in a very nice way!

It can be a little esoteric whilst one is still grounded in the real (illusional) world.

You are all my illusions so I am really posting to myself.

Also at my place of employment, all my colleagues are illusions and have been placed there for my lifes path.

One non adherant colleague tackled me physically and said I shouldn't worry because he was also one of my illusions.

Apparently illusions must appear very real to us, otherwise we would stop playing the game.

I might concentrate on my mindfulness which will be ramped up with some more new years resolutions.

cheers all.

Edited December 31, 2007 by rockyysdt

[jamesc2000]

You are all my illusions so I am really posting to myself.

You are half way there! Chownah and I are illusions but here's the cracker - you really don't exist too!

I know its hard to accept and we do play the game cos it seems so real! Especially when you have to deal with collegues who are less than helpful!

But look on the bright side, it dun matter, nothings does!

[ade100]

Just back from the weekend. Thanks everyone for continuing the lively debate.

I have to say I am very unclear on this idea of no self. In the school of Buddhism that I practice (Nichiren Buddhism) it is not often discussed. I have also just done a bit of reading about it and discovered:

“In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer. When later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is a self or that there is no self is to fall into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice impossible (Samyutta Nikaya XLIV.10)” (http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/noself.html)

It seems like the concept of karma is built upon the concept of self. There has to be someone to make the causes and to receive the effects. Also from a very pragmatic point of view, I can see that improving the way I behave and treat other people can improve my karma and lead to a more fulfilling life with less suffering. I am not sure where adhering to the principle of no self will get me.

Maybe I am missing something…

[jamesc2000]

Just back from the weekend. Thanks everyone for continuing the lively debate.

I have to say I am very unclear on this idea of no self. In the school of Buddhism that I practice (Nichiren Buddhism) it is not often discussed. I have also just done a bit of reading about it and discovered:

"In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer. When later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is a self or that there is no self is to fall into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice impossible (Samyutta Nikaya XLIV.10)" (http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/awakening101/noself.html)

It seems like the concept of karma is built upon the concept of self. There has to be someone to make the causes and to receive the effects. Also from a very pragmatic point of view, I can see that improving the way I behave and treat other people can improve my karma and lead to a more fulfilling life with less suffering. I am not sure where adhering to the principle of no self will get me.

Maybe I am missing something…

If there is no self then it would be impossible to steal from you, insult you, hurt you or even make you suffer!

What kind of world would that be?

Imagine I stole a car that I thought was yours and crashed it and told you about it and you say but I don't own a car?

Imagine if you own nothing and so never have to worry about losing anything or having anything stolen.

Imagine if you have no body and never have to worry if other people think your body is good looking or not.

Imagine if you had no ego and never worry if people insulted you or slighted you.

No one is saying you don't have to behave well or treat people well. If you had no self then would it be easier to behave well and treat people better?

That's why many people do fund raising for charities! They find it easier to get other people to donate to good causes so that they do not have to donate so much of their own money!

Are a lot of problems we have due to the concept of self? My house, my money, my wife, my job etc etc

None of it is really yours really. If my house burned down then I will feel a loss, is that not suffering?

If my wife left me for another man, would I feel a loss, more suffering? I am not married so I cannot answer that one!

If my money got stolen, will I feel not feel cheated and more suffering? I have debts so if someone stole that, that's fine with me!

If people thought I was a bad person or a bad Buddhist, would I not feel bad because of my ego?

If I had no ego, could I suffer or even feel slighted?

No self! What an interesting concept! If the self is not mine and does not exist then good things and bad things are also not mine?

So the good and bad karma is also not mine? Can I just keep some of the good karma?

But if I have no self what good would the good karma be any use to me?

[Brucenkhamen]

It seems like the concept of karma is built upon the concept of self. There has to be someone to make the causes and to receive the effects. Also from a very pragmatic point of view, I can see that improving the way I behave and treat other people can improve my karma and lead to a more fulfilling life with less suffering.

Not at all. If the sun rises tomorrow the trees will grow, there is a cause and an affect there but no self. If the wind blows strong enough some of the trees could be damaged, again there is a cause and an affect there but no self.

The point is that the law of cause and affect we see in nature on a day to day basis is the same law of cause and affect that operates in our lives, it's no different. We label it MY cause and MY affect and try to make it different, somehow special in our minds, this is where the problems arise. Nobody is bothered either way if a tree has a self or not, but we tie ourselves up in knots over maintaining our own self, if we can let that go then I think we'll be much more in tune with nature.

I am not sure where adhering to the principle of no self will get me.

Where has adhering to the principle of self got you so far?

I think it's the adhering that's the problem. Better to see the principal of no self as a question mark, the idea that things are not as they seem but we don't fully understand the reality of it. It's a finger pointing at the moon, it's not the moon itself. It's an idea that you use the examine your reality, not a doctrine to be believed.

[chownah]

It seems like the concept of karma is built upon the concept of self. There has to be someone to make the causes and to receive the effects. Also from a very pragmatic point of view, I can see that improving the way I behave and treat other people can improve my karma and lead to a more fulfilling life with less suffering.

Not at all. If the sun rises tomorrow the trees will grow, there is a cause and an affect there but no self. If the wind blows strong enough some of the trees could be damaged, again there is a cause and an affect there but no self.

The point is that the law of cause and affect we see in nature on a day to day basis is the same law of cause and affect that operates in our lives, it's no different. We label it MY cause and MY affect and try to make it different, somehow special in our minds, this is where the problems arise. Nobody is bothered either way if a tree has a self or not, but we tie ourselves up in knots over maintaining our own self, if we can let that go then I think we'll be much more in tune with nature.

I am not sure where adhering to the principle of no self will get me.

Where has adhering to the principle of self got you so far?

I think it's the adhering that's the problem. Better to see the principal of no self as a question mark, the idea that things are not as they seem but we don't fully understand the reality of it. It's a finger pointing at the moon, it's not the moon itself. It's an idea that you use the examine your reality, not a doctrine to be believed.

I don't think that the sun making trees grow or the wind damaging them has anything to do with kamma. I think that the Buddha taught that intention is kamma and it becomes active through action, word, and thought.

Chownah

[Brucenkhamen]

I don't think that the sun making trees grow or the wind damaging them has anything to do with kamma. I think that the Buddha taught that intention is kamma and it becomes active through action, word, and thought.

Chownah

That's precisely it. When there is a concept of self then kamma accumulates as a result of intentions and actions. Surely freedom from the self concept, ie being enlightened, means freedom from kamma and being at one with the rhythems of nature. Now, cause and effect still happens but perhaps the effect doesn't stick to you in the form we know of as kamma when there is "no you" to stick to.

[rockyysdt]

When there is a concept of self then kamma accumulates as a result of intentions and actions. Surely freedom from the self concept, ie being enlightened, means freedom from kamma and being at one with the rhythems of nature. Now, cause and effect still happens but perhaps the effect doesn't stick to you in the form we know of as kamma when there is "no you" to stick to.

Can you inherit bad kamma your family or others?

You can live an exemplary life but you may suffer as a result of your fathers actions.

Isaiah 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers…

Exodus 34:7 (The Lord visits) …the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

[chownah]

While people sometimes express ideas that kamma can be inherited or even happen because of association with some group, it is usually considered at least in Theravada Buddhism (which uses primarily the Tipitaka as its main scriptural reference) that your kamma is your own and is created by you alone. Intention is kamma and it is made active through action, word, and thought (as I understand the Buddha's teachings)....the intention is your intention and the fruits of this intention are your fruits..as I understand it.

Chownah

[ade100]

It seems like the concept of karma is built upon the concept of self. There has to be someone to make the causes and to receive the effects. Also from a very pragmatic point of view, I can see that improving the way I behave and treat other people can improve my karma and lead to a more fulfilling life with less suffering.

Not at all. If the sun rises tomorrow the trees will grow, there is a cause and an affect there but no self. If the wind blows strong enough some of the trees could be damaged, again there is a cause and an affect there but no self.

The point is that the law of cause and affect we see in nature on a day to day basis is the same law of cause and affect that operates in our lives, it's no different. We label it MY cause and MY affect and try to make it different, somehow special in our minds, this is where the problems arise. Nobody is bothered either way if a tree has a self or not, but we tie ourselves up in knots over maintaining our own self, if we can let that go then I think we'll be much more in tune with nature.

I am not sure where adhering to the principle of no self will get me.

Where has adhering to the principle of self got you so far?

I think it's the adhering that's the problem. Better to see the principal of no self as a question mark, the idea that things are not as they seem but we don't fully understand the reality of it. It's a finger pointing at the moon, it's not the moon itself. It's an idea that you use the examine your reality, not a doctrine to be believed.

I agree with what you say about cause and effect.

Concerning the question:

"Where has adhering to the principle of self got you so far?"

This might have been meant rhetorically but it’s a good question so I’ll answer anyway :-)

My principle of self divides the self up into various layers: Buddhahood (courage, compassion and wisdom), The Ego (home of jealousy, desire for supremacy, fears, anxieties and all that good stuff) and Karma. There are others but these three will do for now.

When I started practicing Buddhism and getting a bit more in touch with my Buddha nature, I began to see certain patterns in my ego. For example I was using arrogance to cover over my fear. If faced with a difficult social situation I would often cover up my inability to deal with it by saying things like “these are people are not cool, why should I bother with them and they have terrible dress sense and look at their haircuts”.

Only through engaging with my greater self (buddhahood) could I see the way my karma had shaped the architecture of my ego. Slowly I was able to change these behavioural patterns.

If I had said that self is illusion, arrogance is illusion and fear is illusion, I would probably still be sneering at people’s haircuts to this day :-)

So yes, a concept of self and Buddhist practice have got me a long way.

[jamesc2000]

Can you inherit bad kamma your family or others?

You can live an exemplary life but you may suffer as a result of your fathers actions.

Isaiah 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers…

Exodus 34:7 (The Lord visits) …the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

"Can you inherit bad kamma your family or others?

You can live an exemplary life but you may suffer as a result of your fathers actions."

Are these Buddhist beliefs or just yours?

So if you had 9 brothers and sisters, does it mean you will only suffer a tenth of the bad karma?

If you had a father and a step father, do you get the bad karma from both or just your natural father?

How about good karma? Will you get good karma from you father and grandfathers too?

You quote the prophet Isaiah and the book of Exodus in a Buddhist forum, they believe in Buddhism too?

[ade100]

When there is a concept of self then kamma accumulates as a result of intentions and actions. Surely freedom from the self concept, ie being enlightened, means freedom from kamma and being at one with the rhythems of nature. Now, cause and effect still happens but perhaps the effect doesn't stick to you in the form we know of as kamma when there is "no you" to stick to.

Can you inherit bad kamma your family or others?

You can live an exemplary life but you may suffer as a result of your fathers actions.

Isaiah 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers…

Exodus 34:7 (The Lord visits) …the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

I don't think we can inherit karma because that would break the law of cause and effect. I have to have made and action to recieve the effect. I can't receieve someone elses effects. However the parents we are born to is a direct result of our karma so we probably have a deep karmic connection with our parents.

[jamesc2000]

So yes, a concept of self and Buddhist practice have got me a long way.

And so if you had to give up the attachment to the concept of self, it would be alright?

[Plus]

While people sometimes express ideas that kamma can be inherited or even happen because of association with some group, it is usually considered at least in Theravada Buddhism (which uses primarily the Tipitaka as its main scriptural reference) that your kamma is your own and is created by you alone.

That's the point I don't really like about Theravada, or, more specifically, the way it is often interpreted.

How can you deny experience of group karma? Man U lost to West Ham, EVERY Man U supporter feels SOMETHING about it. People who are born Thai are subjects to same visa restrictions.

You can talk about each individual role within the group and so some are less affected, or we can talk about individual choice of joining the group, if it exists at all (i.e. being born Thai), but as long as individuals identify themselves as part of a group, they share that group's karma and they create group karma in return.

>>>

About the Sun and the trees - why presume that they are unconscious, "dead" entities?

Edited January 2, 2008 by Plus

[ade100]

So yes, a concept of self and Buddhist practice have got me a long way.

And so if you had to give up the attachment to the concept of self, it would be alright?

I would be happy to be less attached to the ego. But that requires work. I don't think its something you can just do.

Concerning something you said earlier:

"Imagine if you own nothing and so never have to worry about losing anything or having anything stolen."

I am too pragmatic to even understand what that means. I mean walking around Thailand with no shirt on my back, no money, no Visa, no fake designer watch...I just can't really relate to this

"If I had no ego, could I suffer or even feel slighted? "

Now this I can understand. I think so much of our suffering comes from the ego: - all our petty jealousy, anger, fear of rejection, etc. It would certainly be great to be less attached to the ego.

[jamesc2000]

Concerning something you said earlier:

"Imagine if you own nothing and so never have to worry about losing anything or having anything stolen."

I am too pragmatic to even understand what that means. I mean walking around Thailand with no shirt on my back, no money, no Visa, no fake designer watch...I just can't really relate to this

I didn't really mean we should own nothing! Hehe I will be a bit hungry and homeless if that happened!

I meant the attachment to owning the thing! A girl I knew really hated a pair of glasses she had.

She always wish she would loose it or it got broke. But she would always find it again and even when it fell it never broke.

So she never bought another pair as she felt she had a perfectly good pair that worked and why waste money.

But if she should ever lose it, the last thing she would feel is bad about it! In her mind she already does not own it. She has it but she has no attachment to it.

Its not so much loosing or owning anything that can cause suffering, it's our reaction to owning or loosing something that causes the suffering.

I don't know much about Buddhism but I do know a lot of suffering! And its all from personal experience!

And a lot of suffering is just a product of the mind.