karma and original sin

[Marblehead]

Hi Tian,

 

I accept that you believe everything you just said. I don't hold to those concepts in my understanding of Taoism.

 

The only writings I use in my understanding of Taoism are the Tao Te Ching and the Chuang Tzu and both of these were written before Taoism bacame a formal religion so there is no religious teachings in what I hold as my guide in life.

 

There is no problem for me between Science and Philosophical Taoism. They are very compatible.

 

Yes. Changes are made one step at a time. But, if you need go nowhere (you are at peace with yourself) there is not reason to make any unnatural changes.

 

You know what? The simpler we allow life to be the easier it is to find peace and contentment. The more complicated we make it the harder it is to find any rest in our life.

 

Peace & Love!

[dwai]

Reading up at buddhanet, I came across this. Will someone please elaborate on how this is different from the doctrine of original sin because it sure as hell seems like it is approaching it very closely.

 

All this is karma:

What is the cause of the inequality that exists among mankind?

Why should one person be brought up in the lap of luxury, endowed with fine mental, moral and physical qualities, and another in absolute poverty, steeped in misery?

Why should one person be a mental prodigy, and another an idiot?

Why should one person be born with saintly characteristics and another with criminal tendencies?

Why should some be linguistic, artistic, mathematically inclined, or musical from the very cradle?

Why should others be congenitally blind, deaf, or deformed?|

Why should some be blessed, and others cursed from their births?

 

Sounds like punishment/sin to me. And the only way buddhists can be saved is by taking salvation in buddha and his teachings alone.

 

See where I'm going with this?

 

It is incorrect to assume that Original Sin and Karma are the same thing. Here's why:

 

Per Original Sin theory, man is born tainted and therefore must redeem himself by accepting the teaching of Jesus Christ (in other words, accept Jesus as the saviour or be damned).

 

Karma theory is very different. There is no specific qualification of whether karma is good or bad...it simply is Karma (or action). When one does action using one's free will, he/she will have performed karma/kriya and therefore will have to face the consequences of this action.

 

The theory of Karma exists because there is no concept of "original sin" in the Eastern traditions. No one is born a "sinner" and no one can "save" anyone else. It is the individual's responsibility to watch out for one's own salvation or moksha (that being breaking the cycle of re-incarnation).

 

I find the concept that "Buddhists will find salvation in Buddha" simply a transference of sorts, by those from a judeo-christian background. It is usually the case with converts...they try and overcompensate for their "noobie-ness" with zeal.

 

I would venture to say that Karma theory frees the individual from the clutches of Churches and Sons of God(s) and puts him/her in-charge of his/her destiny. Karma isn't something that can only be talked about but not proven. It is a natural law (as opposed to a "God-given" one). It is simply the law of cause and effect.

[Vajrahridaya]

Karma as it is used today sounds like the New Age ism of "you create your own reality"

ralis

 

Ralis,

 

How do things happen? Why are you born in the body that you are born in? Why do you undergo the circumstances that happen to you in your early childhood that you have no choice in considering or changing at the time?

 

Of course if you don't believe in past lives, or have no past life experience. If your memory only starts with this life, then you might find it hard to see the Buddhas model of karma. That through your past life actions, this life has come into play as an effect of those causes might seem like pushing logic.

 

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche has said that you have come into contact with him due to past karmas. Your own teacher is a believer in karma.

 

How do you explain this?

[ralis]

It is incorrect to assume that Original Sin and Karma are the same thing. Here's why:

 

Per Original Sin theory, man is born tainted and therefore must redeem himself by accepting the teaching of Jesus Christ (in other words, accept Jesus as the saviour or be damned).

 

Karma theory is very different. There is no specific qualification of whether karma is good or bad...it simply is Karma (or action). When one does action using one's free will, he/she will have performed karma/kriya and therefore will have to face the consequences of this action.

 

The theory of Karma exists because there is no concept of "original sin" in the Eastern traditions. No one is born a "sinner" and no one can "save" anyone else. It is the individual's responsibility to watch out for one's own salvation or moksha (that being breaking the cycle of re-incarnation).

 

I find the concept that "Buddhists will find salvation in Buddha" simply a transference of sorts, by those from a judeo-christian background. It is usually the case with converts...they try and overcompensate for their "noobie-ness" with zeal.

 

I would venture to say that Karma theory frees the individual from the clutches of Churches and Sons of God(s) and puts him/her in-charge of his/her destiny. Karma isn't something that can only be talked about but not proven. It is a natural law (as opposed to a "God-given" one). It is simply the law of cause and effect.

 

The proponents of karma argue the point of being born with karma and somehow karma needs to be purified so that one can escape the karmic wheel. Is not this an indictment that humans are all impure and are born into a tainted existence?

 

 

 

ralis

[Vajrahridaya]

 

 

I find the concept that "Buddhists will find salvation in Buddha" simply a transference of sorts, by those from a judeo-christian background. It is usually the case with converts...they try and overcompensate for their "noobie-ness" with zeal.

 

 

Actually this is something that every Buddhist does, is take refuge in the Buddha/Dharma/Sangha, or the triple jewel. It is considered the life line for Buddhists. But, that doesn't mean that all other beings are damned. Everyone will reap the fruits of their efforts. Even someone who takes refuge, but does not follow the dharma and only pays lip service will only reap the fruits of their efforts.

 

When we Buddhists take refuge in the Buddha, we are basically taking refuge in the faith that we can become just like the Buddha, so it's not that he saves us in the magical sense that Christianity poses that Christ is the son of God and that we are to worship him but we will never be like him.

 

We understand that when we focus on the Buddha and all his virtues that our mind becomes like that of the Buddha, like that which we focus upon. Of course this happens for real Christians as well, as many of the autobiographies of the saints talk about if you read them they talk about becoming one with Christ.

 

Anyway, we more like realize that same potential within ourselves and actualize it by keeping the company of those that are like minded and follow the same path to the same goal as us, so this is inspiring and keeps our mind focused in the right direction. We also read the teachings of the Buddha which is a whole assortment of methodology for how to become a Buddha ourselves. It's not a doctrine of blind faith, or metaphors, like the NT which is very, very short compared to the teachings of the Buddha.

 

We realize that we are not punished in any way, but we just reap the fruits of our actions, which is interesting because Jesus say's this in the Bible, that we reap what we sow. We just don't blame anybody, not even God for our existence. We see that we are reaping the fruit of our own past lives in this life, not as punishment, as karma is not good or bad as Dwai say's, but is merely action and reaction, cause and effect.

 

For instance, it could be good for someone to go to jail after committing a crime, because if not, that person might continue to commit the crime, making more bad karma and that person might not be given a chance to think about the consequences of their actions. So, it's all perspective, as it doesn't have to be seen as punishment, but rather a time to contemplate and re-direct ones mind and focus in life, then when they get out of jail, they have an entirely different state of mind and their life takes on a new direction.

 

It's really perspective and understanding really. Nothing is as it seems and what things seem to be is generally how we are making them seem through our own conception.

 

The proponents of karma argue the point of being born with karma and somehow karma needs to be purified so that one can escape the karmic wheel. Is not this an indictment that humans are all impure and are born into a tainted existence?

ralis

 

Depends on your perspective. I was born with the karma of having a yogically inclined mother, so this was a great help for me in my life. At the same time I grew up quite poor so I didn't have many of the monetary advantages. So, both are due to the response of past lives. Your view only works if one were to think one was just born. I know that I was born many, many times in different circumstances. I was never really born per say, I just go through different manifestations of the cause and effect chain.

 

To me, it seems that you have decided to look at it in this way, so you experience the information in that way. But, I don't see it like this at all. I don't find this perspective very helpful.

 

It doesn't answer why bad things happen to good people and why good people sometimes do bad things. Why good things happen to bad people, and why people are born in the situations they are born into. If you want to accept chaotic nihilism, that's your choice. I don't find this helpful at all. Nor do I find this the truth through both introspection and consideration of life as a whole, I see that everyone reaps what they sow in a complicated manor. Rinpoche talks about this, how a circumstance can leave seeds of primary conditions that don't come to fruition until the appropriate secondary conditions are ripe for the primary condition to manifest it's fruit.

 

Tainted existence is merely a perspective. Yes, there are positive and negative polarities, there is night and day, yes our body can get hurt or feel pleasure, it's a paradox. We are born into this world due to causes and conditions. If you see things as inherently liberated, that's on a deeper dimension of vision through Rigpa. But, this is merely the non-dual vision, that does not take away the facts of duality.

 

From a certain perspective Ralis... if your body is so pure, why does it get hurt? There are realms that you can take birth in where your body cannot get hurt, where you can manifest your thoughts desire instantaneously without having to put forth the work and effort that you have to in this realm. If you have no taints in your body or mind karma, why are you born in this realm? Why do you suffer?

 

Your teacher believes in karma and see's that yes, for the most part, we are born with dualistic vision, because we are reaping the fruits of past lives. How do you see this teaching?

 

It seems to me that you are interpreting things in very simplistic black and white ways. Your not seeing the grey.

Edited October 23, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[dwai]

The proponents of karma argue the point of being born with karma and somehow karma needs to be purified so that one can escape the karmic wheel. Is not this an indictment that humans are all impure and are born into a tainted existence?

ralis

 

It is not a matter of purification. It is a matter of attachment and severing of those attachments...it is at the crux of it an energetic thing. As you do actions with your volition, you are investing energy into these actions and there is always an effect of such energetic investment. By neutralizing Karmic traces, one is simply release bound energy and then using it to reach "escape velocity".

[voidisyinyang]

Looks like the old Karma ran over my Dogma joke has taken on a new meaning:

 

The California-based Fisker Automotive's Karma uses Q-DRIVE plug-in hybrid technology, developed exclusively for Fisker Automotive by Quantum Technologies. A fully-charged Karma burns no fuel for the first 50 miles. After venture further, the gasoline engine turns a generator to charge the lithium ion battery. Once the 50-mile electric range has been exceeded, the car operates as a normal hybrid vehicle. This balance of electric and gas range makes it entirely possible that Karma drivers who charge their car overnight and commute less than 50 miles a day will achieve an average fuel economy of 100 mpg (2.4L/100km) per year.

 

It is not a matter of purification. It is a matter of attachment and severing of those attachments...it is at the crux of it an energetic thing. As you do actions with your volition, you are investing energy into these actions and there is always an effect of such energetic investment. By neutralizing Karmic traces, one is simply release bound energy and then using it to reach "escape velocity".

[Vajrahridaya]

By neutralizing Karmic traces, one is simply release bound energy and then using it to reach "escape velocity".

 

That's pretty good, I like that!

[ralis]

 

It seems to me that you are interpreting things in very simplistic black and white ways. Your not seeing the grey.

 

I make a statement and I receive a lecture on the Buddhist ideology of karma as a universal absolute. My views are not simplistic. Will you ever stop framing condescending statements?

 

 

ralis

[rebelrebel]

Well an important question still stands. Hell and heaven in buddhism are the results of particular actions done in life. That is undoubtedly an absolutist/black and white sense of morality. This is absolutely good and will lead to heaven/a better rebirth and that is absolutely bad and will lead to hell. This requires somebody to set in stone what is good and bad, absolutely right and wrong. And life is just not reducible to black and white like that. "Morality" is always relative and completely arbitrary. Like somebody else said, this is a child's sense of morality.

 

In terms of afterlife beliefs, I lean toward rebirth to be honest. But I have a very very hard time accepting karma as it is supposed to relate to rebirth. If rebirth is true, I tend to think it would just be random.

Edited October 24, 2009 by rebelrebel

[ralis]

Well an important question still stands. Hell and heaven in buddhism are the results of particular actions done in life. That is undoubtedly an absolutist/black and white sense of morality. This is absolutely good and will lead to heaven/a better rebirth and that is absolutely bad and will lead to hell. This requires somebody to set in stone what is good and bad, absolutely right and wrong. And life is just not reducible to black and white like that. "Morality" is always relative and completely arbitrary.

 

Excellent point! I was just accused of seeing the universe in black and white! All I did was make an observation of Buddhist dogma. The whole Buddhist karmic debate reduces to "I create and control my own reality."

 

ralis

[TianhuaQigong]

Hi Tian,

 

I accept that you believe everything you just said. I don't hold to those concepts in my understanding of Taoism.

 

The only writings I use in my understanding of Taoism are the Tao Te Ching and the Chuang Tzu and both of these were written before Taoism bacame a formal religion so there is no religious teachings in what I hold as my guide in life.

 

There is no problem for me between Science and Philosophical Taoism. They are very compatible.

 

Yes. Changes are made one step at a time. But, if you need go nowhere (you are at peace with yourself) there is not reason to make any unnatural changes.

 

You know what? The simpler we allow life to be the easier it is to find peace and contentment. The more complicated we make it the harder it is to find any rest in our life.

 

Peace & Love!

 

Wish Peace & Love be with you and hold like that for ever. all the best!!

 

The proponents of karma argue the point of being born with karma and somehow karma needs to be purified so that one can escape the karmic wheel. Is not this an indictment that humans are all impure and are born into a tainted existence?

ralis

 

there are good karma too. such as Bill Gates , some people fight hard and smart, but not as easy as Bill to be rich, Bill return all his money back to make the world better, he make a big good karma again.

Edited October 24, 2009 by TianhuaQigong

[ralis]

There are sweeping generalizations being made here in that all beings are subject to karma. So if I am not aware that karma is playing an absolute role in my life, then what? Should not all beings be warned ahead of time as to the dangers inherent in existence? After all some claim karma offers choices. How does one know what the proper choices are? Good and evil are relative concepts depending on what culture one finds oneself.

 

 

ralis

[rebelrebel]

Also I don't think any human, no matter how they have lived their life and how bad they have been, deserves to suffer and endure sick, disgusting, unspeakably horrible acts conjured from the human imagination in a "hell realm" for any period of time. The human imagination can be a truly scary thing.

Edited October 24, 2009 by rebelrebel

[ralis]

Wish Peace & Love be with you and hold like that for ever. all the best!!

there are good karma too. such as Bill Gates , some people fight hard and smart, but not as easy as Bill to be rich, Bill return all his money back to make the world better, he make a big good karma again.

 

This argument is bogus! Gates has ripped off billions from his crappy software. Anti-trust violations? Yes, the Europeans courts have found MS guilty. Therefor if he gives away lots of money, then is karmic burden is reduced? It is a well known fact that he stole the source code from Apple Computer. Also, just because he gives money away through his charitable foundation, that is good karma? What if he needs the tax breaks and that is a way to benefit? Is that not a selfish endeavor?

 

This deference to the aristocrats that somehow they have better karma than the rest of us is an untenable argument.

 

 

ralis

[TianhuaQigong]

Well an important question still stands. Hell and heaven in buddhism are the results of particular actions done in life. That is undoubtedly an absolutist/black and white sense of morality. This is absolutely good and will lead to heaven/a better rebirth and that is absolutely bad and will lead to hell. This requires somebody to set in stone what is good and bad, absolutely right and wrong. And life is just not reducible to black and white like that. "Morality" is always relative and completely arbitrary. Like somebody else said, this is a child's sense of morality.

 

In terms of afterlife beliefs, I lean toward rebirth to be honest. But I have a very very hard time accepting karma as it is supposed to relate to rebirth. If rebirth is true, I tend to think it would just be random.

 

it is not black/white, if you have seen Taiji sign, you can see that Yin in the yang, yang in the Yin, and Yin and yang are not separate, there is a cure make the connection, so if you are in the go to heaven side, sure there are still a small part of hell side problem, so our real life is complicate enough, good people , bad people , good thing, bad thing. ...

 

there are nothing random at rebirth, base on the karma all has been arranged , this is even hard to accept, all life has been decide too. every group soul has a master, he find a best way for you and let you choose "some of you" . the master will choose the best for you , and arrange suffering for everyone , by all mean, in all kind of way, and what you do in this life and some other life will decide your next life karma, unless you become Buddha or Xian . reached Void

[voidisyinyang]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/myriam-miedz...e_b_298483.html

 

This argument is bogus! Gates has ripped off billions from his crappy software. Anti-trust violations? Yes, the Europeans courts have found MS guilty. Therefor if he gives away lots of money, then is karmic burden is reduced? It is a well known fact that he stole the source code from Apple Computer. Also, just because he gives money away through his charitable foundation, that is good karma? What if he needs the tax breaks and that is a way to benefit? Is that not a selfish endeavor?

 

This deference to the aristocrats that somehow they have better karma than the rest of us is an untenable argument.

ralis

[ralis]

it is not black/white, if you have seen Taiji sign, you can see that Yin in the yang, yang in the Yin, and Yin and yang are not separate, there is a cure make the connection, so if you are in the go to heaven side, sure there are still a small part of hell side problem, so our real life is complicate enough, good people , bad people , good thing, bad thing. ...

 

there are nothing random at rebirth, base on the karma all has been arranged , this is even hard to accept, all life has been decide too. every group soul has a master, he find a best way for you and let you choose "some of you" . the master will choose the best for you , and arrange suffering for everyone , by all mean, in all kind of way, and what you do in this life and some other life will decide your next life karma, unless you become Buddha or Xian . reached Void

 

Arranged by who? These arguments with so many opinions, prove there are no absolute answers.

 

ralis

[voidisyinyang]

[ralis]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/myriam-miedz...e_b_298483.html

 

Thanks for that link. Just to imagine that my fate is in the hands of someone who has more money than god, is not reassuring!

 

 

ralis

[dwai]

Also I don't think any human, no matter how they have lived their life and how bad they have been, deserves to suffer and endure sick, disgusting, unspeakably horrible acts conjured from the human imagination in a "hell realm" for any period of time.

 

Why do you presuppose that sickness or disease or anything "negative" is "negative" and that in an ideal world only "positives" should exist?

 

There can be something positive that comes out of someone's illness. It is obvious that everyone has to go (whether you choose to believe in reincarnation or not). So then, why should it be, that departure be painless?

 

Think about the cumulative "disease" humans have spread on Nature. Starting with trying to subjugate the rest of the world, to devouring every natural resource on earth with gluttonous appetite...

 

Maybe disease is a way of balancing...I'm suffering from the Flu. Perhaps it is time for the viruses and bacteria to thrive and finish their cycle at my expense.

 

What you sow, so you shall reap. At the end of the day, do you claim that you are not party to the actions of those around you? Whether we actively or passively "indulge", we share the Karma.

 

The notion of "Heaven" and "Hell" is also misleading. If you try to approach Eastern traditions from a Western vantage point, all you will get is interpretations from a Western Vantage point. I understand that language and syntax are problematic...as is the indoctrination in a "way of thinking".

 

Heaven and Hell are what you make of them here. They are simply symbolic/allegorical. Depending on your state of mind, isn't your being in "Heaven" or "Hell", subjectively?

[TianhuaQigong]

This argument is bogus! Gates has ripped off billions from his crappy software. Anti-trust violations? Yes, the Europeans courts have found MS guilty. Therefor if he gives away lots of money, then is karmic burden is reduced? It is a well known fact that he stole the source code from Apple Computer. Also, just because he gives money away through his charitable foundation, that is good karma? What if he needs the tax breaks and that is a way to benefit? Is that not a selfish endeavor?

 

This deference to the aristocrats that somehow they have better karma than the rest of us is an untenable argument.

ralis

 

this proved my point, Gates can get money in a very easy way, why Apple lost that share, Apple has the copy right of Windows. IBM has first OS DOS at pc, and PC was designed by IBM. why Gates make OS money on PC. by all mean, the money will go to his GATE. he has the good Karma , the money are his. Gates do bad thing in this life, he will have bad karma too. but I am sure , he will rich again in next life. born with money. for sure, he will has so hard time, since he use his money give others hard time too.

 

btw, Apple sell Windows copy right to Gates, first MS windows was writed by MS basic. IBM give Gates the right to sell OS on PC. at that time, MS-DOS are almost copied from IBM-DOS. but he has the right to do so.

Edited October 24, 2009 by TianhuaQigong

[voidisyinyang]

Well at least IBM enabled the holocaust (does that compete with Gates?) --

 

http://news.cnet.com/Selling-technology-to...1_3-876539.html

 

this proved my point, Gates can get money in a very easy way, why Apple lost that share, Apple has the copy right of Windows. IBM has first OS DOS at pc, and PC was designed by IBM. why Gates make OS money on PC. by all mean, the money will go to his GATE. he has the good Karma , the money are his. Gates do bad thing in this life, he will have bad karma too. but I am sure , he will rich again in next life. born with money. for sure, he will has so hard time, since he use his money give others hard time too.

 

btw, Apple sell Windows copy right to Gates, IBM give Gates the right to sell OS on PC. at that time, MS-DOS are almost copied from IBM-DOS. but he has the right to do so.

[TianhuaQigong]

Arranged by who? These arguments with so many opinions, prove there are no absolute answers.

 

ralis

 

arranged by master base on the law and rule of God, such as Yinyang, 5 elements, Karma, etc. this master are a high level soul in the group. I can not prove , but we can watch it by our eye.

 

in fact, a few hundreds years ago, there is a book written by a Sweden talk about the his journey in heaven, almost all in his book are true.

there are three book written by western doctor, <Journey of soul> . almost all in his book are true.

 

in fact, in my view, I put all those book together , all the religions, the jorney of soul , come back from death etc, I think all of them are same, and I am trying to find the similirty , most of others are try to find out what others read are different with yours.

 

 

the problem for most of others are , "I am right, all others are wrong, and Ii will kill you if you aginist me for my god"

Edited October 24, 2009 by TianhuaQigong

[voidisyinyang]

Right -- Swedenborg -- that's a fascinating book. Kant was convinced by Swedenborg.

 

This "Journey of Souls" has 289 Amazon reviews -- 25 case studies....

 

http://www.amazon.com/Journey-Souls-Studie...nDateDescending

 

Thanks for the recommendation.

 

arranged by master base on the law and rule of God, such as Yinyang, 5 elements, Karma, etc. this master are a high level soul in the group. I can not prove , but we can watch it by our eye.

 

in fact, a few hundreds years ago, there is a book written by a Sweden talk about the his journey in heaven, almost all in his book are true.

there are three book written by western doctor, <Journey of soul> . almost all in his book are true.