Is There A Rational Basis To The Idea Of Karma?

[Several]

Just from a math perspective it seems that more humans are alive today than have ever lived throughout history. I'm not sure if there are correspondingly less animals to account for this. Buddha did speak about previous lives so I'm sure Kamma applies to both moment to moment and life to life rebirth. So how is this working? Without a 'soul' or individual is it possible that Kammic effect splits into more than one rebirth? When in different moods I can behave like completely different people. As stated before we are not the same as we were 20 years before, sometimes 20 seconds before. So does an 'unresolveable' kammic equation break down into multiple 'resolveable' equations upon rebirth?

[rockyysdt]

"some say that once you do something which is bad, it will always return, either in this life or a later one".

Whether it be conditioned or otherwise, all action (karma) comes from mind.

Without poise, balance, and equanimity (goal of meditation) one cannot observe ones mind (intention of action).

By cleaning up ones intentions, ones actions (kharma) will alter vipaka (consequence).

If you consider "doing something bad" is a reflection of how one habitually thinks, you will always experience it returning (consequence) .

If you continue to think in a certain way due to your conditioning, you will most likely continue to "do something bad" in the future.

"Karma/doing something bad" = "relection of the conditioned (habitual) mind" = "vipaka/consequence or fruits of action"

Edited August 6, 2012 by rockyysdt

[fabianfred]

Just from a math perspective it seems that more humans are alive today than have ever lived throughout history. I'm not sure if there are correspondingly less animals to account for this. Buddha did speak about previous lives so I'm sure Kamma applies to both moment to moment and life to life rebirth. So how is this working? Without a 'soul' or individual is it possible that Kammic effect splits into more than one rebirth? When in different moods I can behave like completely different people. As stated before we are not the same as we were 20 years before, sometimes 20 seconds before. So does an 'unresolveable' kammic equation break down into multiple 'resolveable' equations upon rebirth?

The Buddha bent down a picked up some dirt on his thumbnail asking his companions how did this small amount of dirt compare to the whole Earth.... They of course replied that it was an infinitesmally small part. He then said that in a similar way the dirt compares to the number of beings born in the human realm whereas the whole Earth compared to the number of beings in the four lower realms (hells, hungry ghosts, animals and asuras.)

Edited August 6, 2012 by fabianfred

[Several]

Well. There you go then. Thats one hell of a waiting list.

[leolibby]

The Buddha bent down a picked up some dirt on his thumbnail asking his companions how did this small amount of dirt compare to the whole Earth.... They of course replied that it was an infinitesmally small part. He then said that in a similar way the dirt compares to the number of beings born in the human realm whereas the whole Earth compared to the number of beings in the four lower realms (hells, hungry ghosts, animals and asuras.)

When did humans transcend above being animals? At the time of Homo erectus? Australopithicus africanus? Were Neandrathals in one of the four lower realms? when did we get our privaledged status?

[fabianfred]

The Buddha bent down a picked up some dirt on his thumbnail asking his companions how did this small amount of dirt compare to the whole Earth.... They of course replied that it was an infinitesmally small part. He then said that in a similar way the dirt compares to the number of beings born in the human realm whereas the whole Earth compared to the number of beings in the four lower realms (hells, hungry ghosts, animals and asuras.)

When did humans transcend above being animals? At the time of Homo erectus? Australopithicus africanus? Were Neandrathals in one of the four lower realms? when did we get our privaledged status?

Beings taking rebirth in the human realm seem scientifically to be a part of the animal kingdom, but are in the best form to make spiritual progress. Our intelligence and ability to change our environment give us the most opportunities to understand and practice a moral life. We have more chances to create good karma whereas animals have only the chance to expend and create bad karma.

Do not assume the scientific community are correct about mankind's past...

[leolibby]

We have more chances to create good karma whereas animals have only the chance to expend and create bad karma.

Animals show compassion...

http://news.softpedi...ath-32660.shtml

how does low intelligence have anything to do with compassion, selflessness, etc. Of course, I understand most people hold a human-centered view of the wold... and rightly so. I admit, humans are the pinnacle of existence... probably the only reason anything is here anyway. I just don't understand where the division between humans and animals is.. is it if your IQ is above 90? do people who have an IQ of 180 live a more moral and spititual life than peoople with downs syndrome?

why is life inherantly immoral... ?

Edited August 8, 2012 by camerata
Remark pulling in another religon deleted

[rockyysdt]

We have more chances to create good karma whereas animals have only the chance to expend and create bad karma.

Animals show compassion...

http://news.softpedi...ath-32660.shtml

how does low intelligence have anything to do with compassion, selflessness, etc. Of course, I understand most people hold a human-centered view of the wold... and rightly so. I admit, humans are the pinnacle of existence... probably the only reason anything is here anyway. I just don't understand where the division between humans and animals is.. is it if your IQ is above 90? do people who have an IQ of 180 live a more moral and spititual life than peoople with downs syndrome?

why is life inherantly immoral... ?

Hi L.

Asking these questions may lead to a number of answers, but you'll find them to be either conditioned responses or beliefs.

No one really knows the answers to something that may not even be.

I believe the Buddha himself said not to look for the answers in the metaphysical.

That which is of the real world is impermanent, suffers dukkha, and has non self (nothing fixed).

Without body there is no mind.

Beyond that you could suggest just about anything and it could be possible.

Edited August 8, 2012 by rockyysdt

[leolibby]

Beyond that you could suggest just about anything and it could be possible.

I tried to make that my point, but you're so much more articulate

[fabianfred]

Because (some) humans have higher intelligence than animals means that they held more responsible for their actions.

I do not say that animals are immoral, but they do not understand, so when they kill for food it earns them less karma than a human doing the same thing. We have more choices, but often act worse than the animals by killing and inflicting suffering just for the fun of it or because of our own egos and beliefs that we are right and the others are wrong.

Animals do create negative karma for themselves when they cause other beings to suffer, but have little opportunity to create good karma. They mostly act out of instinct and do things without intending to cause harm so the karma they accrue is less than a similar act for us.

Intelligence does not mean the same thing as wisdom....many people have studied to get University degrees but have less wisdom than illiterate farmers.

[huli]

If I may, I would like to try to tie together the current threads on karma and meditation.

Almost 100 posts have contributed to the topic “Is there a Rational Basis to the Idea of Karma?” .

Why should there be karma? Why wouldn’t each new person just be born afresh from a new combination of aggregates?

We know that the human mind has a conscious part and an unconscious part. Consciousness is the part of the human mind that arises in the presence of a body that functions normally. When the body dies, it is gone. I believe this is what Buddha taught, and it is understandable.

Our unconscious mind is that part of our mind hidden from our direct observation. It is huge, and affects us in our perceptions, our attitudes and behavior etc. nearly all the time. Many desires, aversions, and delusions are hidden there. I wonder if this unconscious content doesn’t disappear at death like regular fleeting consciousness, but becomes the content of karma?

This is logical when you consider that Vipassana meditation, is primarily a method for revealing and then dissipating the content of our unconscious. If successful, the unconscious is progressively emptied, and it is reasonable to define a person who emptied it all as a Buddha, with then nothing left to reincarnate. Voila !

It can be observed that our regular consciousness has a constantly changing quality to it. Our unconscious content is considerably more persistent and substantial. Maybe, at death, it has to go somewhere, and this would be a rational basis for karma.

This is just an idea I had, for better or for worse.

[rockyysdt]

If I may, I would like to try to tie together the current threads on karma and meditation.

Almost 100 posts have contributed to the topic “Is there a Rational Basis to the Idea of Karma?” .

Why should there be karma? Why wouldn’t each new person just be born afresh from a new combination of aggregates?

We know that the human mind has a conscious part and an unconscious part. Consciousness is the part of the human mind that arises in the presence of a body that functions normally. When the body dies, it is gone. I believe this is what Buddha taught, and it is understandable.

Our unconscious mind is that part of our mind hidden from our direct observation. It is huge, and affects us in our perceptions, our attitudes and behavior etc. nearly all the time. Many desires, aversions, and delusions are hidden there. I wonder if this unconscious content doesn’t disappear at death like regular fleeting consciousness, but becomes the content of karma?

This is logical when you consider that Vipassana meditation, is primarily a method for revealing and then dissipating the content of our unconscious. If successful, the unconscious is progressively emptied, and it is reasonable to define a person who emptied it all as a Buddha, with then nothing left to reincarnate. Voila !

It can be observed that our regular consciousness has a constantly changing quality to it. Our unconscious content is considerably more persistent and substantial. Maybe, at death, it has to go somewhere, and this would be a rational basis for karma.

This is just an idea I had, for better or for worse.

I suspect not Huli.

The subconscious mind is the part we may not be aware of in our day to day thoughts.

The subconscious mind is our memory and this houses our "beliefs", "conditioning" and experiences.

Think of the subconscious as a data base of memory.

We don't necessarily remember all that has happened in our lives all at once but tend to dwell in given styles of thinking and on subjects our mind latches onto.

Some of our memories were created many years ago and reside in our memory banks.

Probably due to evolution, the way humans think is as follows.

When we encountrer something new, we must anaylise, decide and act.

Once we've learned a given analysis/decision, when we encounter new events, similar or otherwise, we go back to the memory bank in which our response is stored and automatically act on it.

This maybe a response to a threat or situation, or a fixed belief we already have.

When interacting with others or encountering new thoughts, rather than assessing them, we often compare them to our conditioned beliefs and then accept or reject them.

We don't think, we automatically respond whether the new event is appropriate to the stored response or not.

We have often driven a car but can't remember aspects of it because our thoughts have been elsewhere whilst driving on auto pilot.

Because we are not aware of our subconscious this doesn't mean that there is a hidden being or presence.

It's merely a memory data bank which we aren't always conscious of.

As our memories are stored in our brain, when our body dies and deteriorates, the memories stored in the brain will no longer be.

Body and mind are inseparable.

The Buddha referred to our conscious as a series of processes and that there is nothing solid or permanent inside like a soul or spirit (non self).

Meditation (awareness) of the mind allows us to become aware of our thoughts, our beliefs, our memories and our conditioning.

It allows us to become aware of how we think, and analyse our intentions.

It allows us to become aware of the association of thoughts with corresponding feelings and actions/reactions.

I wouldn't say meditation dissipates our memories, but allows us to be mindful of them and act outside of them.

When we analyse thought we discover that it is of random nature and we are captive by it.

Poise, calm, and equanimity allows us to view all contact, thought, feeling, but not react to it.

We become free of our conditioning and beliefs.

Edited August 8, 2012 by rockyysdt

[BuckarooBanzai]

Although I admit to being peeved at the OP's response to my first post, which was dismissive at best, insulting in reality, I have this for you to think about. Self aggrandizement is not a trait of Buddhism. Learning is.

"Maybe the constant infighting between different religions, faiths, and sects would finally come to an end if we only recognize that all religious beliefs are the physical interpretations of mortals. It's now absolutely clear that God does not care about our personal theology. Our physical beliefs are all rooted in temporary forms and substance; they are all but a passing moment in time. What really matters is experience, spiritual experience. It appears that the purpose of the entire universe is experience---firsthand, gut-wrenching, personal experience. Nothing can replace it. It's now clear that personal experience is the road to wisdom that we all share."

This was much more meaningful to me than the Op's response to my response. This quote comes from a book I am currently reading. Very enlightening stuff.

[rockyysdt]

What really matters is experience, spiritual experience. It appears that the purpose of the entire universe is experience. Nothing can replace it. It's now clear that personal experience is the road to wisdom that we all share."

Yes, and we can take this further by saying it is all about "awareness", free from attachment to greed, delusion and aversion.

We often experience body and feelings as a reaction to thought due to our attachments.

My manager set me a task with a deadline.

Whilst performing my duties I could clearly see that the deadline would be missed.

I began to observe shortness of breath, tightening of the chest, reddening of the face and a heightened heart rate.

I felt accutely stressed and began to go about my work in a dangerous manner with many thoughts of what would happen due to my failure.

Later I found I had recorded the wrong time and ended up experiencing much pain unnecessarily.

I would have been far better off experiencing my day, as the crisp fresh air entered my lungs filling me with life and energy, the gentle sun bathing my cheeks, as I walked through the field surrounded by the scent of fresh flora, and the magical sound of the birds in the trees. As I walked I would have been aware of a slight stoop forward and I would have straightened up to allow for life giving air to enter. I would have taken the time to see the children happily playing in the distance. I would have been aware of many things.

I would have got back on time regardless, but instead I chose to be attached to my mental formations which resulted in an appreciable part of my day, living in hell of my own creation.

Edited August 9, 2012 by rockyysdt

[huli]

If I may, I would like to try to tie together the current threads on karma and meditation.

Almost 100 posts have contributed to the topic “Is there a Rational Basis to the Idea of Karma?” .

Why should there be karma? Why wouldn’t each new person just be born afresh from a new combination of aggregates?

We know that the human mind has a conscious part and an unconscious part. Consciousness is the part of the human mind that arises in the presence of a body that functions normally. When the body dies, it is gone. I believe this is what Buddha taught, and it is understandable.

Our unconscious mind is that part of our mind hidden from our direct observation. It is huge, and affects us in our perceptions, our attitudes and behavior etc. nearly all the time. Many desires, aversions, and delusions are hidden there. I wonder if this unconscious content doesn’t disappear at death like regular fleeting consciousness, but becomes the content of karma?

This is logical when you consider that Vipassana meditation, is primarily a method for revealing and then dissipating the content of our unconscious. If successful, the unconscious is progressively emptied, and it is reasonable to define a person who emptied it all as a Buddha, with then nothing left to reincarnate. Voila !

It can be observed that our regular consciousness has a constantly changing quality to it. Our unconscious content is considerably more persistent and substantial. Maybe, at death, it has to go somewhere, and this would be a rational basis for karma.

This is just an idea I had, for better or for worse.

I suspect not Huli.

The subconscious mind is the part we may not be aware of in our day to day thoughts.

The subconscious mind is our memory and this houses our "beliefs", "conditioning" and experiences.

Think of the subconscious as a data base of memory.

We don't necessarily remember all that has happened in our lives all at once but tend to dwell in given styles of thinking and on subjects our mind latches onto.

Some of our memories were created many years ago and reside in our memory banks.

Probably due to evolution, the way humans think is as follows.

When we encountrer something new, we must anaylise, decide and act.

Once we've learned a given analysis/decision, when we encounter new events, similar or otherwise, we go back to the memory bank in which our response is stored and automatically act on it.

This maybe a response to a threat or situation, or a fixed belief we already have.

When interacting with others or encountering new thoughts, rather than assessing them, we often compare them to our conditioned beliefs and then accept or reject them.

We don't think, we automatically respond whether the new event is appropriate to the stored response or not.

We have often driven a car but can't remember aspects of it because our thoughts have been elsewhere whilst driving on auto pilot.

Because we are not aware of our subconscious this doesn't mean that there is a hidden being or presence.

It's merely a memory data bank which we aren't always conscious of.

As our memories are stored in our brain, when our body dies and deteriorates, the memories stored in the brain will no longer be.

Body and mind are inseparable.

The Buddha referred to our conscious as a series of processes and that there is nothing solid or permanent inside like a soul or spirit (non self).

Meditation (awareness) of the mind allows us to become aware of our thoughts, our beliefs, our memories and our conditioning.

It allows us to become aware of how we think, and analyse our intentions.

It allows us to become aware of the association of thoughts with corresponding feelings and actions/reactions.

I wouldn't say meditation dissipates our memories, but allows us to be mindful of them and act outside of them.

When we analyse thought we discover that it is of random nature and we are captive by it.

Poise, calm, and equanimity allows us to view all contact, thought, feeling, but not react to it.

We become free of our conditioning and beliefs.

Rocky,

Thank you an interesting response to my post.

I was thinking that the unconscious mind had meaningful content that came from somewhere, perhaps from a karmic influence. I now believe that it is probably more from this life’s experiences.

I note that you agree with me as far as meditation being a method for revealing the content of our unconscious mind. That is, how it allows us to be aware of those usually unconscious thoughts, beliefs, conditioning and memories.

Thanks to your feedback, I now see that I was mistaken to suggest that unconscious content and mechanisms are a rational explanation for karma.

Karma is rather bigger than that.

[Several]

There is more to the subconscious. It does act as an incredible memory bank storing everything we perceive from the moment our senses become active. It can also perform mathematical computations almost instantly as demonstrated by some individuals. Others play songs they have heard once or improvise new music with no technical training whatsoever (I knew a guy who could do this). Many people can 'order' themselves to wake up at a certain time, and do (I learned that trick from my mum) without the aid of a clock. I'm not denying what Rocky says, but I do feel there's more to the subconscious than we know, and the math and improv are not memory functions. If Kamma is stored then why not there? It is unbiased, it affects our behaviour. If through rigorous meditation we loosen the grip of the memory of past actions, our emotional investment in them fades, they cease to have power over us in our equanimity.

[MrRealDeal]

People can rationalise anything ....... but the reality is that good things happen to bad people and bad things happen to good people , any corolation with Karma payback is merly a coincedence or the fact that people who surround themselves with bad actions can expect bad things to happen and people who surround themselves with good things can expect the same not because of Karma but because of what they chose to be around.

The Karma explanation is simply an un needed explanation for something that needs no explanation. Sometimes you stub your toe because the walkway is eneven not because of some equally minor thing you did prior to that.

If I am in the Rainforest I will get wet , if I am in the Desert I will get dry , the reason is as simple as because what I am surrounding myself with is either wet or dry anything beyond that is bloviating nonsense.

It's not Karma it's simply that if your mind is about doing good you notice it and if your mind is about harming others you notice that more often , it's not that bad doesn't happen to the good it's just they notice it less and concentrate on it less and the opposite with people who wallow in harmfull behaviors and activities.

[leolibby]

The Karma explanation is simply an un needed explanation for something that needs no explanation. Sometimes you stub your toe because the walkway is eneven not because of some equally minor thing you did prior to that.

Totally agree. Let's face it... the idea of karma was origionally invented to keep people in line and society together...common people... people who were illiterate and needed something simple and not too hard to think about. And based on the posts here, I think you can follow Buddhism just fine without it.

[Several]

Yep. You can. And if you reach enlightenment Kamma is no longer a problem. But it is not so simple as keeping the great unwashed in line. You can die of dehydration in a rainforest, become soaked with sweat in a desert.

Theres a Tibetan story about an old man whose horse runs away. People said 'bad karma' but he said 'we shall see.'

Some time later his stallion returns with two mares.

His son falls and brakes his leg training the mares.

'bad karma.'

'we shall see.'

Tibetan army arrives to recruit more soldiers, but leave his son because he is infirm.

It is easy to say that everything is random and I cannot claim to know the truth of it. I do know that two and a half millenia ago a very wise man said that there was a thing called Kamma and to explore the possibility for myself. To my knowledge no scientist ever gained enlightenment and escaped suffering. Intelligence may tell you a thing cannot be, wisdom will explore the possibility.

[leolibby]

Does a belief in karma help anyone to become enlightened?

[BuddhistVirus]

Does a belief in karma help anyone to become enlightened?

Do you think a belief in karma will help anyone to enlightenment?

[Several]

Only in as far as you consider your actions. Right thought, speech, action etc. I do think it should only be considered in relation to ones own situation. I met one monk who would tell people their afflictions were due to bad Kamma which generally caused them to become enraged and abusive. Surprise surprise. Not everything that happens is due to Kamma, but as Buddhists we believe it explains a lot. Even if it proves to be a fallacy at very least it caused some to consider their actions and be nice to their mum. Which is good.

[Several]

Oh, and good Kamma can get you born into a situation where you are exposed to the teachings that will get you to Nibbana.

[leolibby]

Oh, and good Kamma can get you born into a situation where you are exposed to the teachings that will get you to Nibbana.

Hi Several

Well, let's assume that's correct. You don't need to believe in some obscure cosmic rule (karma) to be a good person. It wont hurt to believe it, but i don't see a 100% coorelation between believing and being. Animals don't believe in karma, and yet manage to be reborn as humans. I realize your statement isn't an abosolute.. i think. Why did Buddha just happen to be a Hindu in all or most of his previous human lives.?. why was he never a Native American? Would a native American never be reborn into a buddhist culture? does karma only apply to people following a hindu or Buddhist path?

The thing with beliefs is that they are biochemical patterns in the brain.. they can change.. and when you die, they are gone.

So why rely on beliefs at all? I used to be religious. I think it was this realization that beliefs are temoporary, mundane chemical patways in the brain. So belief is not a ticket to anywhere.

[Several]

Oh, and good Kamma can get you born into a situation where you are exposed to the teachings that will get you to Nibbana.

Hi Several

Well, let's assume that's correct. You don't need to believe in some obscure cosmic rule (karma) to be a good person. It wont hurt to believe it, but i don't see a 100% coorelation between believing and being. Animals don't believe in karma, and yet manage to be reborn as humans. I realize your statement isn't an abosolute.. i think. Why did Buddha just happen to be a Hindu in all or most of his previous human lives.?. why was he never a Native American? Would a native American never be reborn into a buddhist culture? does karma only apply to people following a hindu or Buddhist path?

The thing with beliefs is that they are biochemical patterns in the brain.. they can change.. and when you die, they are gone.

So why rely on beliefs at all? I used to be religious. I think it was this realization that beliefs are temoporary, mundane chemical patways in the brain. So belief is not a ticket to anywhere.

Yo Leo. Yeah, I try not to sound absolute and as a monk I'm required to believe in Kamma. Or at least verify it for myself. For the animals its more a case of exhausting the Kamma they have rather than aquiring good Kamma. I don't think a tiger gets bad Kamma from killing as that is its design function, so to speak. The tiger must also have some kind of belief that there is prey it can stalk even though the impetus to do so is at a genetic level, its mother taught it how to go about it.

There is no reason why Gotama could not have been an American Indian at some point. The description goes something like we have all been each others mothers, brothers, fathers, lovers and enemies at some point in the round of rebirths. Pretty unlikely that all occured in India. There are stories of non-Buddhist arahants and Pacceka Buddhas (who did not hear the teachings of the Buddha) so I'd be pretty surprised if the American Indians did not produce a few of those.

True enough that belief itself achieves nothing. The tiger salivating over the possibilty of deer won't fill his guts without going forth. Following the logic that all mentation is biochemical it still results in suffering. I lived my life how I pleased and obtained unpleasant results. I heard of the four noble truths and found two to be true, that there is suffering and a cause of it (mostly my own actions). I believe that the other two must be true; that there is a path to and an end of suffering (also to be found within myself). I follow this way to verify this and make it a reality. So belief engenders effort until I can abandon it for knowing.

[Xangsamhua]

The thing with beliefs is that they are biochemical patterns in the brain.. they can change.. and when you die, they are gone.

So why rely on beliefs at all? I used to be religious. I think it was this realization that beliefs are temoporary, mundane chemical patways in the brain. So belief is not a ticket to anywhere.

It's a Buddhist teaching (belief?) that one should not rely on beliefs. One hears of the "tyranny of beliefs", but I think what is being referred to is attachment to beliefs. But what is a belief unless it's something you believe to be not only true, but justifiable, or justifiable and hopefully true. And how confident can you be that your belief is justified, unless it's in relation to something tautological ("a bachelor is an unmarried man) or trivial (my name is .....)?

So all significant beliefs are tentative and arguable, but should we then give up having beliefs - in anything? That would be very difficult. One who appears to have no beliefs about anything other than tautologies or trivia would not be fully human. I don't know if animals have "beliefs" or simply conditioned responses and some memory-based inferential capacity, but the latter sounds like a belief to me.

It is reasonable, indeed virtuous, to try and arrive at tentative beliefs in things of importance based on experience and reason, but it would be un-Buddhist to become fixed in a set of beliefs, to reject the possibility that one may be wrong or to expect those beliefs to be permanent, even though they may be lifelong.

But is faith the same as belief? To say one has faith in the Buddha's teaching is not an act of reason, though there may well be good reasons behind it. It is neither reasonable nor unreasonable, as Wittgenstein said in his lectures on religious belief. Faith is a disposition, a turning of the mind and body towards a way of living based on a set of beliefs. As St John of the Cross said: "We live in what we love". This is faith (shraddha/sattha), "what we deem worth having, doing, attaining, being." So faith is more than just belief, but it rests on a platform of belief/s. Like our thinking and our beliefs, our faith evolves. We do not believe all the things we used to, and the things we still believe we believe differently.

One can believe in the doctrine of karma, but only tentatively it seems. The Buddha did not insist that we believe in this doctrine, though he obviously believed it himself. But for us to believe in it simply means that we believe it is worth believing in, either because it seems logical or because it forms a component of our encompassing faith in the Buddha. William James also used to justify beliefs in terms of their cash value, an unfortunate but striking phrase that means we value beliefs in terms of what we get from them. To me, belief in karma fills no emotional or intellectual need, but I can see the point in it and can rationalize this belief in terms of a metaphysical interpretation of the cosmos. Having seen the point, though, belief in Karma has no motive power for me in deciding how I will act, hence I don't think much about it. It has no "cash value" for me; hence I don't work it up to the level of a personal belief. It's just there.

Edited August 11, 2012 by Xangsamhua

[leolibby]

Hi Several...

I hope we can post videos here. In this video, a leopard kills a monkey (baboon I think), but discoveres there was a baby baboon with it. The Leopard spends hours looking after the baby, protecting it from hyenas.. The Leopard apparently did not eat the mother Baboon it killed... protecting baby was more important to her. This is an example of qualities we usually don't expect to find in animals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy7DXSbiWbE

Edited August 11, 2012 by leolibby

[Several]

Thanks for the video Leo, but I'll have to take your word for it. The connection here sucks and I have trouble sending emails sometimes. Must be Kamma.

[rockyysdt]

Does a belief in karma help anyone to become enlightened?

I've been ill lately and haven't been able to contribute.

As mentioned before, I suggested that what the Buddha was saying was that "there is Consequence to our Actions".

Karma is action (verb) and Consequence is Vipaka (fruits of Karma or consequence).

If you habitually do bad or negative things, then statistically there will be consequence.

If you look at actions of humans you will find that they are largely habitual.

Belief in Karma (Consequence to our Actions),will not lead to awakening (enlightenment is an 18th century word and never taught by the Buddha).

Awakening occurs through the practice of concentration, awareness and wisdom (eightfold path).

Edited August 12, 2012 by rockyysdt

[poanoi]

Yes, there is a rational basis, same as christianity & others,

namely to create some values & ethics, or humanity really.

Moses said: If thee rip the balls off another man thee shalt suffer hell !

Buddha said: Karma goes downhill and you'll be reborn without balls if you rip the balls

off another man