Beliefs and Intent

[JustARandomPanda]

I've been wading my way through the Kunlun poll thread and as long threads tend to do it seems to have wandered away (at least at the point I'm at) from it's original post.

 

However, the spin-off discussion got me curious. What is the difference between belief and intent? I read one poster saying intent precedes beliefs. That all we experience (does he mean 'how we see or interpret things') ends up as a result of one's intent (is this the same thing as the Buddhist classification of Intent aka Volition Form?).

 

Of course it then got further into a discussion of whether there's such a thing as a reality 'out there' v. one in here. I myself am quite confused on the matter. I'm on my first baby steps to trying to attain higher or deeper awareness. So of course to me there still seems to be a very blatantly obvious 'out there' we all share. Otherwise why can't I just materialize a million dollars into my bank account via intent and have it show up the next day for real? Did my own intent make that drunk driver hit me and mess up my back and neck?

 

Other examples:

 

Did that little 6 year old girl in Florida (who was the inspiration for a federal law) who was abducted one night from her bedroom, brutally raped then buried alive somehow unconsciously made this happen to herself via her own karmic baggage or intent?

 

Do the Dalits of India deserve their crap status and crap treatment because it's just past bad karma coming back to haunt them?

 

I confess this is one of the biggest reasons I intensely dislike the doctrine of Karma. It seems waaaay too easy for people to justify or explain away super-bad, truly evil shit happening to either themselves or others as 'well it's your own karma coming right back on you'.

 

But to get back to that discussion

 

 

I do remember the thing about inner intent shaping 'out there' reality as being similar to a page by a guy from South America on his investigations into whether there is anything that survives or manifests beyond the material realm.

 

Oddly enough...he said there were only 2 philosophies he's ever been able to follow through to their logical ends that were consistent with the possibility of an afterlife of some sort. Solipcism or Panpsychist Brahmanism (wtf is that?! ). Current day Materialism - which is the alter men like James Randi and Richard Dawkins worship at - falls into the black hole of being unable to explain Consciousness - it's the White Elephant in their theories they can't explain and so consistently run from. The other is the belief in an Essence that is not identical to the Body - which leads to Dualism. It too runs into major problems. The only philosophies which did not run into problems were as he said Solipcism and Panpsychist Brahmanism.

 

I'm confused.

[Sunya]

just because someone 'deserved it' because of karma does not mean one shouldn't have compassion. I think you should be more compassionate to these people because its their own doing, suffering is because of their own actions, and not just because of a random occurrence.

 

the belief in karma allows people to get over tragic events much easier than believing in random chaos and spontaneity. take a woman who was raped, if she believes in chaos than she will never feel close to a man again, and always live in fear. but if that woman truly believed in karma than of course she would be traumatized for a while, but she would know that this was bound to happen because of her past actions and there was nothing she could've done. furthermore it is sort of a relief when bad things happen because you just knocked off some bad karma. this allows one to move on from a traumatic event or bad situation or circumstance and not get into a negative state. to get into a negative state of fear and anger only creates more bad karma because of the negative imprints in the mindstream.

 

I know that its hard to believe, and I'm not a 100% believer. but i'm open minded. and I think its important to be open minded, because it makes more sense than materialistic chaos. but even if you believe in karma, you won't really know until you have true insight into karma, and that comes with meditation. so you won't really fully know karma until you have that insight.

Edited July 26, 2009 by mikaelz

[JustARandomPanda]

just because someone 'deserved it' because of karma does not mean one shouldn't have compassion. I think you should be more compassionate to these people because its their own doing, suffering is because of their own actions, and not just because of a random occurrence.

 

the belief in karma allows people to get over tragic events much easier than believing in random chaos and spontaneity. take a woman who was raped, if she believes in chaos than she will never feel close to a man again, and always live in fear. but if that woman truly believed in karma than of course she would be traumatized for a while, but she would know that this was bound to happen because of her past actions and there was nothing she could've done.

 

Hmm...

 

Believing one is responsible is separate from whether one actually is.

 

I'm asking about what actually is...

 

Example:

 

Did that little 6 year old girl (for whom the federal law was passed) who was abducted from her bed at night, beaten, raped and buried alive (she was found in the makeshift grave still clutching her little blue stuffed animal)...did she also cause that crime to occur? I consider 'deserved' a separate issue. I'm not asking whether someone deserved it, just whether they caused it? If I understand the doctrine right - because of Karma - she did. Thus there is no such thing as a true victim. The "victim" is also the ultimate cause every time. That rapist who murdered her was the instrument of karma.

 

p.s. can anyone tell me what the heck is Panpsychist Brahmanism?

Edited July 26, 2009 by SereneBlue

[Aetherous]

did she also cause that crime to occur?

 

No, she absolutely didn't in any way.

[innerspace_cadet]

The doctrines of karma and rebirth are bullshit, because they assume that the universe has a moral dimension to it, and it doesn't. I used to work at a special education school, and I saw students who were still crapping in their diapers...at the age of 14. I thought to myself, what could a person possibly do that was so evil to deserve being born mentally retarded and consigned to an entire lifetime of mental feebleness, to an entire lifeteime of misery? And the thinking part of me replied that these people did NOTHING to deserve such a fate, no one does. The universe cares nothing for our actions. In my opinion, the only moral imperative is to live in harmony with the universe, in this life. Virtue is its own reward.

 

It baffles me, all of these Westerners who believe in reincarnation without thinking of the implications of such a belief. The ancient Indians looked upon reincarnation with horror, and they did everything in their power to transcend, to escape the cycle, because reincarnation isn't fun. I personally don't want to be reincarnated after I die, because one life is difficult enough, and why would I want to relive the same old miseries again?

 

Do I know what will happen to "me" after I physically die? Of course not. But as one philosopher said, I don't worry about what happened before I was born, so why would I worry about life after death? The afterlife is a distraction from this life, just as much as tomorrow is a distraction from today.

Edited July 26, 2009 by innerspace_cadet

[Pietro]

Let me add one ingredient, to make the whole discussion a bit more spicy:

 

The problem with the statement: " there is no such thing as an external reality, is not if it is true but if it can be true."

 

I cite it by memory. I might check it out later, and edit back.

Don't discount this very deep statement from a modern philosopher.

[Sunya]

No, she absolutely didn't in any way.

 

so it happened by chance then?

 

The doctrines of karma and rebirth are bullshit, because they assume that the universe has a moral dimension to it, and it doesn't.

 

 

karma and rebirth have nothing to do with morality. its causality and interconnectedness.

 

 

I used to work at a special education school, and I saw students who were still crapping in their diapers...at the age of 14. I thought to myself, what could a person possibly do that was so evil to deserve being born mentally retarded and consigned to an entire lifetime of mental feebleness, to an entire lifeteime of misery? And the thinking part of me replied that these people did NOTHING to deserve such a fate, no one does. The universe cares nothing for our actions. In my opinion, the only moral imperative is to live in harmony with the universe, in this life. Virtue is its own reward.

 

the universe is not sentient, theres no God that decides who suffers and who doesn't. and you don't have the omniscience to see these childrens' past lives to understand their causality... I understand that its a terrible situation, and being compassionate is wonderful. but people do a lot of evils, you cannot ignore that. there have been many murderers, rapists, and people who just did a lot of wrong. look at all the wars that have occured just in our recorded history. and this is just one planet! just because the effects are truly terrible does not mean that the causes cannot exist, simply because of the extreme nature of the effect.

 

It baffles me, all of these Westerners who believe in reincarnation without thinking of the implications of such a belief. The ancient Indians looked upon reincarnation with horror, and they did everything in their power to transcend, to escape the cycle, because reincarnation isn't fun. I personally don't want to be reincarnated after I die, because one life is difficult enough, and why would I want to relive the same old miseries again?

 

yes.. and not believing in reincarnation somehow liberates you?

 

Do I know what will happen to "me" after I physically die? Of course not. But as one philosopher said, I don't worry about what happened before I was born, so why would I worry about life after death? The afterlife is a distraction from this life, just as much as tomorrow is a distraction from today.

 

let's see if you feel the same on your deathbed.

[seadog]

Nature,immune as to a sacrifice of straw dogs,

Faces the decay of its fruits.

A sound person,immune as to a sacrifice of straw dogs,

Faces the passing of human generations.

The universe,like a bellows,

is always emptying,always full;

The more it yields,the more it holds.

Men come to their wits end arguing about it

And had better meet it at the marrow.

Dao De Jing 5

 

Perhaps this is the hardest for us as humans to do, to look at life with its with all it unreasonableness,its suffering and injustice.To look right at it and remain immune as the Sage sugests. Facing the decay of its fruit,meeting it at the marrow.

[Aetherous]

so it happened by chance then?

 

Yes, of course.

[innerspace_cadet]

so it happened by chance then?

karma and rebirth have nothing to do with morality. its causality and interconnectedness.

the universe is not sentient, theres no God that decides who suffers and who doesn't. and you don't have the omniscience to see these childrens' past lives to understand their causality... I understand that its a terrible situation, and being compassionate is wonderful. but people do a lot of evils, you cannot ignore that. there have been many murderers, rapists, and people who just did a lot of wrong. look at all the wars that have occured just in our recorded history. and this is just one planet! just because the effects are truly terrible does not mean that the causes cannot exist, simply because of the extreme nature of the effect.

yes.. and not believing in reincarnation somehow liberates you?

let's see if you feel the same on your deathbed.

 

The word karma means "deed" and obviously it does have something to do with right and wrong. Of course I don't know, but there is a strong possibility that death is the end of all experience. I have to keep that possibility in the back of my mind, and live my life accordingly--to the fullest. If I am wrong, and there is an afterlife, then at least having lived a virtuous life, I won't have much to worry about.

 

Dharmic religions that teach reincarnation/rebirth are positing a problem that may not exist, and they present themselves as the solution to that problem. That's the problem with religion in general; they sell you a bunch of goods to solve a problem that may not even be there. It's like those "male enhancement" infomercials that sell you pills to make your dick bigger, when all along all you really needed to do was make your insecurities smaller.

 

On my deathbed, I will probably feel the same way--completely agnostic.

[-O-]

..

Edited August 25, 2009 by -O-

[Sunya]

Karma does mean action and it refers to the law of causality. theres no such thing as 'right or wrong' really. its more about, the intent behind the action and whether or not the intent was that of dualistic (selfish) or nondualistic (compassionate). having a dualistic intent creates an effect that leads to a dualistic cause.

Edited July 26, 2009 by mikaelz

[Sunya]

Dharmic religions that teach reincarnation/rebirth are positing a problem that may not exist, and they present themselves as the solution to that problem. That's the problem with religion in general; they sell you a bunch of goods to solve a problem that may not even be there. It's like those "male enhancement" infomercials that sell you pills to make your dick bigger, when all along all you really needed to do was make your insecurities smaller.

 

religions are all based on the experiences and insights of mystics and yogis.. some had deeper experiences than others... there is evidence of transmigration being taught in early christianity and by the essenes (i think), also its mentioned in Kabbalah, ancient Jewish mysticism. mostly every religion has some form of rebirth, though this doesn't mean that it's 'right'. karma is different in Buddhism than in Hinduism because Hinduism still posits a God and karma is just a facet of that God, while in Buddhism karma is just the way things are, a natural law like gravity. there are infinite amount of mind streams and these mind streams have infinite power but due to their ignorance they take the energy experienced through the 5 senses as separate from themselves, and acting in a dualistic manner is the cause of their suffering.

 

On my deathbed, I will probably feel the same way--completely agnostic.

 

I highly doubt that. it is very easy to ignore death while sitting safely in your home, being completely healthy and sipping on a cold beer. it is a completely different matter to be confronted with death head on. evenwith your relatives around you, they cannot help you. you are alone, and the body is about to stop functioning. you will experience real fear right then. and simply being 'open minded' will not lead you to experience a favorable rebirth, or to achieve liberation. like it isn't possible to achieve lucid dreaming simply by wishing it to happen once with no practice. right now this is your conscious mind talking, this completely shuts off upon death. and the deeper unconscious aspects of psyche are illuminated, since you haven't practice you have no control. So karma, which are just imprints on your mindstream, will carry you away like a gust of strong wind.

 

you're on a forum of mysticism and you're still agnostic? don't you meditate?

Edited July 26, 2009 by mikaelz

[xabir2005]

Edited July 26, 2009 by xabir2005

[xabir2005]

Edited July 26, 2009 by xabir2005

[xabir2005]

Karma does mean action and it refers to the law of causality. theres no such thing as 'right or wrong' really. its more about, the intent behind the action and whether or not the intent was that of dualistic (selfish) or nondualistic (compassionate). having a dualistic intent creates an effect that leads to a dualistic cause.

The Buddha did not say 'good' and 'bad' but he taught that there are actions that are 'wholesome', 'skillful', leading to happiness, and there are actions that are 'unwholesome', 'unskillful', leading to harm and suffering.

[innerspace_cadet]

you're on a forum of mysticism and you're still agnostic? don't you meditate?

 

I do meditate, but not often or deeply enough to have realizations about karma or past lives.

[Sloppy Zhang]

Perhaps this is the hardest for us as humans to do, to look at life with its with all it unreasonableness,its suffering and injustice.To look right at it and remain immune as the Sage sugests. Facing the decay of its fruit,meeting it at the marrow.

 

This I think is the best way to go.

 

I've read a lot about a lot of philosophies, I've had a lot of philosophies in my life, and may have a lot more to go.

 

You think about karma, and whether you do things that are good and bad, and if you will be punished for them. You think about kids that are victims of violent crimes, people who live with debilitating conditions for their entire lives. Did they do something in a past life? Or are we just using that as an excuse so we don't have to feel bad, or so we don't have to face the reality of the world? Is it all just random chance? Is there no God that cares, no universal judgment. Should we all just do what we want because there are no consequences? When we die do we just cease to exist? Do we ever have to face judgment for what we've done? When I'm on my death bed will I look back on my life and be fine? Will I be afraid of judgment? Be afraid of the abyss?

 

So many opposing views, contradictions. Believe one thing and it seems to exclude the others.

 

For me, personally, I look at all of them and see that they all have merit. So, maybe they're all true. Maybe the real truth is some complex compilation of them. Maybe the real truth is more simple than that. Maybe I'll never know, maybe the real truth is staring in my face. So I think all fo that at once, then I move on and keep living.

Edited July 26, 2009 by Sloppy Zhang

[JustARandomPanda]

 

Now, though we can say that the girl being raped has partly to do with her karma, that doesn't mean the person who raped her is thus free of the moral and karmic responsibilities for raping her. Karmic cause cannot ripen until there is conditions for that karmic cause to ripen. However the cause and the conditions are two different things, and when they meet, a result happens. But the cause (e.g. girl's karmic cause) does not cause the conditions (e.g. the man to become evil). It is not that the girl's karma made the man evil and rape her -- it is entirely the man's fault for having evil intentions, and that person then became a condition for the girl's karma to ripen. However if the girl had no such karma in the first place, I believe she would not have landed in such a situation.

 

This argument looks suspiciously like something I learned early on to call by another name - Fate.

 

So it was the girls fate to be raped and murdered - it just so happened to be by that one guy but if not by him it would've been the same result by anyone else who 'ignited' her latent fate.

 

 

[Pietro]

There is no truly existing external reality, nor is there a truly existing internal reality. ...

 

Hello Xabir.

 

You just made a claim:

"There is no truly existing external reality, nor is there a truly existing internal reality"

 

How can you claim that claim to be true if there is no external reality?

 

Anticipated thanks for the explenation.

 

In no bullshit, yours

Pietro

[Sunya]

This argument looks suspiciously like something I learned early on to call by another name - Fate.

 

So it was the girls fate to be raped and murdered - it just so happened to be by that one guy but if not by him it would've been the same result by anyone else who 'ignited' her latent fate.

 

 

Karma is not fate. fate is that everything is determined already by a supreme being, and there is no free will, there is no choice. in Buddhism there is no supreme being writing your fate. you are the supreme being, well not the supreme being, but you do have the power to create your circumstances and your situation.. more or less. not in an individual egoic self, and this is the catch really since good 'karma' really is just acting in an unselfish non-dualistic manner. It's not that you do good acts and good things happen to you.. it's more like doing good acts with the intent that you are no more important than others leading to the insight that there is no 'you' separate from 'others', you and others are interdependent. so acting good towards others, not with the intent to 'gain' anything really, karma isn't something physical to be gained like money, but rather acting unselfishly for the sake of others sends out a wave of compassion and this wave comes back. why? because it interdependence.

 

fate is one extreme, and unconditioned free will is the other extreme. karma lies in the middle.

[JustARandomPanda]

Karma is not fate. fate is that everything is determined already by a supreme being, and there is no free will, there is no choice. in Buddhism there is no supreme being writing your fate. you are the supreme being, well not the supreme being, but you do have the power to create your circumstances and your situation.. more or less. not in an individual egoic self, and this is the catch really since good 'karma' really is just acting in an unselfish non-dualistic manner. It's not that you do good acts and good things happen to you.. it's more like doing good acts with the intent that you are no more important than others leading to the insight that there is no 'you' separate from 'others', you and others are interdependent. so acting good towards others, not with the intent to 'gain' anything really, karma isn't something physical to be gained like money, but rather acting unselfishly for the sake of others sends out a wave of compassion and this wave comes back. why? because it interdependence.

 

fate is one extreme, and unconditioned free will is the other extreme. karma lies in the middle.

 

 

Your conception of Fate is different from mine for I never saw Fate as being bestowed by a deity, Supreme Being, Ultimate Origin or what have you. People can believe in Fate (or Karma) without needing any regress back to a ultimate origination whatsoever. The more you explain karma the more to me it sounds like how I was taught to think of fate. Or maybe call it destiny if you will. Or Wyrd. Whatever.

 

As it stands - to me at least - karma sounds as irrational as believing only in chaos. A truly random result looks no different than a karmic one. How then is anyone - enlightened or not - able to tell which one it was? oh right - belief in everything being Dependently Originated with no Self-Substance by definition rules out the possibility of true randomness (i.e. un-dependent originated events, etc).

 

Thanks for giving me more things to ponder (and I don't mean that sarcastically).

 

In any case that's just a small part of what I was wondering. I'm still wondering about what that guy in the other thread meant when he said intent precedes belief.

 

And wikipedia has no entry for panpsychist brahmanism. Anyone here know wth that is?

[Sunya]

fate has no opportunity for the individual to change the future because everything is already determined. there is no free will. karma, the future is entirely up to you, in your hands alone.

[JustARandomPanda]

Edited July 27, 2009 by SereneBlue

[Sloppy Zhang]

Edited July 27, 2009 by Sloppy Zhang