Is there a concept like "karma" in Taoism?

[Yascra]

Hello together,

 

and my apologies if this might be a stupid question, but having a more Christian + Buddhist background I am now wondering how to sort in such a concept like "karma" within the terms I've seen to be used in the context of Taoism.

 

Frequently there seems to be the concept of "staying in the moment" and attaining some state of freedom, if you might express it that way. But, well, what about after you've seen the Tao if action and consequences don't have any meaning at all?

 

You might "be" in one moment however aware you want to; if you do something that involves other beings that might have consequences, for the better or the worse. You can feel to be "in the moment" while giving someone a bit of chocolate; anyway they will like you, which might have consequences concerning their behaviour against you. Your "being aware" does not necessarily influence that course of action.

You might otherwise feel you're staying in the moment and do something that is considered to be negative, like slapping someone into the face, which might have negative consequences lateron.

 

There is a connection in that overall, for if you would not just "feel" to "be completely aware in the present moment", but really be that, this would have consequences on how you would act. The problem about that is that, well, how many people are out there who completely realized the Tao, so you could watch how persons would behave and what kind of decisions they would make when they have the Tao (which should be that state of complete awareness that's never deluded I'd guess)?

 

Some question might be, of course, whether what I describe with that awareness is so important in Taoism at all, or whether that's a very incomplete understanding of mine; and, furthermore, if there is no idea of "karma" in a way that like action and consequences - if there should not be something like that - what concept would a Taoist use to adjust his behaviour in any way?

And, ehm, is that question understandable at all?

 

 

Curious for some potentially new insights and wishing you all the best

 

Yascra

Edited April 5, 2014 by Yascra

[GrandmasterP]

 

That is a big question and there are better qualified posters on here than me to give you in depth answers.

In the meantime here 's a link to a short article with references on Taoist ethics that may give some background to what you are asking.

http://www.taoism.net/articles/mason/ethics.htm

Hope it helps.

Best Regards

GMP.

Edited April 5, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Dr_D]

Hello together,

 

and my apologies if this might be a stupid question, but having a more Christian + Buddhist background I am now wondering how to sort in such a concept like "karma" within the terms I've seen to be used in the context of Taoism.

 

Frequently there seems to be the concept of "staying in the moment" and attaining some state of freedom, if you might express it that way. But, well, what about after you've seen the Tao if action and consequences don't have any meaning at all?

 

You might "be" in one moment however aware you want to; if you do something that involves other beings that might have consequences, for the better or the worse. You can feel to be "in the moment" while giving someone a bit of chocolate; anyway they will like you, which might have consequences concerning their behaviour against you. Your "being aware" does not necessarily influence that course of action.

You might otherwise feel you're staying in the moment and do something that is considered to be negative, like slapping someone into the face, which might have negative consequences lateron.

 

There is a connection in that overall, for if you would not just "feel" to "be completely aware in the present moment", but really be that, this would have consequences on how you would act. The problem about that is that, well, how many people are out there who completely realized the Tao, so you could watch how persons would behave and what kind of decisions they would make when they have the Tao (which should be that state of complete awareness that's never deluded I'd guess)?

 

Some question might be, of course, whether what I describe with that awareness is so important in Taoism at all, or whether that's a very incomplete understanding of mine; and, furthermore, if there is no idea of "karma" in a way that like action and consequences - if there should not be something like that - what concept would a Taoist use to adjust his behaviour in any way?

And, ehm, is that question understandable at all?

 

 

Curious for some potentially new insights and wishing you all the best

 

Yascra

 

Form my teacher: Senior Abbot Jerry Alan Johnson

"The Chinese word “Xing” often refers to specific types of “deeds” or “activities,” while “Gong” refers to one’s “merit.” Both of these terms relate to the term “Karma” (“Yuan”).

All actions are essentially seeds for karmic reaction, and they collect within an individual’s Spirit Body waiting to sprout.

Once these karmic seeds begin to sprout, their energetic course becomes predestined. As these karmic seeds mature, they begin to produce fruit, which filters into the individual’s Energy Body. This karma then induces the individual’s Energy Body to influence his Physical Body, and places him/her in the proper place and time to experience either the pleasant or unpleasant results of his or her past actions.

This is why in ancient China, the merit and virtue of helping just one person obtain immortality was considered incalculable.

The spiritual benefits not only applied to the individual in this lifetime, but it also extended for nine previous generations, and nine generations to come."

Hope this help.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

"That which is done with the Tao will succeed. That which is done without the Tao will fail."

 

This sentiment appears in many many important Taoist texts. I'd say that is essentially the Taoist explanation of Karma/divine justice/Ma'at.

 

What does it mean to act without the Tao? Being overtaken or influenced by strong emotions, such as fear, greed/selfish grasping/egotism, anger, sorrow, despair.

 

Actions that rise out of the Wuji, out of calm openness, they can work with Tao as they can work with people. It's hard enough to work in cooperation with other people when strong emotions get the better of us, let alone to work with the illusive Tao.

 

So if someone acts out of these emotions, their actions will not bear the fruit they hoped for as they will not be working with Tao. It's like drinking water - sure there's lots of water around to drink, but if thirst gets the better of you and you're not conscious of how clean the water is, you'll realize it would have been better to stay calm and ensure the water is clean.

[Yascra]

Thank you so far for your answers.

 

It's getting late over here, I'll think about your points and probably comment on them later

[Marblehead]

Let us remember that taoism comes in three flavors, Alchemic, Religious, and Philosophical.

 

Religious Taoism is most often linked with Buddhism so "karma" would be a part of their belief system.

 

Alchemic Taoism is linked with the more ancient animistic religions prior to Lao Tzu's time so it is very likely, especially since they speak of immortality, that there is a form of "karma" involved.

 

Philosophical Taoism holds to the concept of "cause and effect" and many would suggest (I don't) that this is in fact a form of "karma".

[Bearded Dragon]

Don't you think that the cause and effect is both within yourself though? Every bad action has an effect on yourself deep down. If I punch someone for no reason they will be in pain for maybe a few days, but deep down within myself the effect will be long lasting.

[thelerner]

Don't you think that the cause and effect is both within yourself though? Every bad action has an effect on yourself deep down. If I punch someone for no reason they will be in pain for maybe a few days, but deep down within myself the effect will be long lasting.

Personally I think thats more a function of conscience then cosmic law. If you're a good person, empathy and sympathy effect you on a mental and spiritual level, as you move along an emotional scale towards psychopathic, you may get a free ride from such deep down internal pain. In other words those without a conscience can act like assholes, without the psychosomatic reaction a balanced person would have.

[Marblehead]

Don't you think that the cause and effect is both within yourself though? Every bad action has an effect on yourself deep down. If I punch someone for no reason they will be in pain for maybe a few days, but deep down within myself the effect will be long lasting.

Yes, external and internal. There are many effects we deal with every day, the cause of which we likely have only a few pieces of the puzzle. That is why karma seems to be such a rational concept.

[Bearded Dragon]

Personally I think thats more a function of conscience then cosmic law. If you're a good person, empathy and sympathy effect you on a mental and spiritual level, as you move along an emotional scale towards psychopathic, you may get a free ride from such deep down internal pain. In other words those without a conscience can act like assholes, without the psychosomatic reaction a balanced person would have.

 

Yeah I don't believe in a "cosmic law". It doesn't make sense. There is only ever a difference of potential and the effect it results in.

[thelerner]

To me the big question is how deep does karma go? You can't argue w/ cause and effect, but with a wider view, things don't fall straightly, or according to our view- moral, personal and objective.

 

I guess that is the question behind all religion and mysticism. Is there a mechanism keeping score and what are its rules?

[SonOfTheGods]

"ThaiShang Tractate of Actions and Their Retributions"-

"There are no special doors for calamity and happiness - they come as men themselves call them. Their recompenses follow good and evil as the shadow follows the substance"

[Yascra]

Oki,

 

I'd say from the formerly written posts I'd conclude that maybe "karma" is not present in Taoism so far as a direct term, but that what is meant by it is largely also addressed, at least in what Marblehead pointed out to be Religous and Alchemic Taoism, right?

 

By the way, what is Philosophical Taoism all about? If "Philosophical" should mean something like "theoretical" I'd hardly be interested in too much of it, I'm more the person who likes things one can practice.

But I think that's just a side-topic in here...

 

 

"That which is done with the Tao will succeed. That which is done without the Tao will fail."

 

This sentiment appears in many many important Taoist texts. I'd say that is essentially the Taoist explanation of Karma/divine justice/Ma'at.

 

What does it mean to act without the Tao? Being overtaken or influenced by strong emotions, such as fear, greed/selfish grasping/egotism, anger, sorrow, despair.

 

For sure, it's not so much about terminology for me, I'm interested in the main idea of "if not for cause and effect, what would be the point of being virtuous?"

 

I'm afraid I don't like that reference to "failure". What does "failure" mean? Emotions can be quite successful in some ways, that's why evolution led to their creation. Being catched by a lion because you were not afraid enough and didn't run fast enough would not be the successful kind of outcome of that situation, at least not for you.

I think that it's not that simple, and maybe acting with the Tao might have meant that the lion would never have tried to hunt you and feed on you, but if THAT is the case, then obviously not giving in to (wild) emotions can't be the whole story.

 

 

Yeah I don't believe in a "cosmic law". It doesn't make sense. There is only ever a difference of potential and the effect it results in.

 

Well, if that "law" would more be like one of the "laws of physics" that's not necessarily contradictory, I assume. So maybe not necessarily some "watching" instance or protocol.

 

But, eehm, what would you think where such a difference of potential would come from?

 

 

I guess that is the question behind all religion and mysticism. Is there a mechanism keeping score and what are its rules?

 

Yeah, I think that, or the perceived lack of that question, is exactly what confuses me about what I understood from Taoism so far

I mean, you can talk a lot about energetic development etc, but finally that's all talking about very "worldly" issues, though maybe the laws are more complicated than what modern physics found out yet.

What about a kind of basic mechanism, which will go further than that, and an interest to find out how this mechanism works, or, so to speak, how the world as a whole works? Is that an essential part of Taoism? Is it the "high level" on which you ask such things, or is it the low level, and is a high level more like this Wu Wei-thing? Maybe should have a deeper look at Taoist religion?

My problem with religion is that religion tends to just STATE how things are and want you to believe; at least that's what I know from the religious part of Buddhism, and of course for Christianity that's not different.

 

You'll hardly ever find out how the world really works as long as you rely on what others tell you without checking it.

What would you guys say how a Taoist way of finding out such things would look like?

 

All the best to you

 

Yascra

[soaring crane]

What would you guys say how a Taoist way of finding out such things would look like

 

Well, 'finding out' is exactly what Daoist methods are about, in my experience and understanding. There's more research and experimentation, it's more evidence-based and less philosophical than (western) Buddhist practices. There's a basic, physical, model of the the creation process, not all that dissimilar to western physics, and an attempt to understand our place in that model.

 

The body plays a crucial role in the process and I think this is the major point of separation of the two paths. You won't find a Daoist who doesn't practice some form of physical expression of that model. This goes back to the deepest roots of the belief system, back to the pre-historic shamanic age. The practices were geared toward physical immortality; there was no sense of spiritual immortality. The reality proved otherwise of course, and, over time, and with the influence of the Buddhists who eventually brought their spirituality to China, the spiritual practices (nirwana, karma, reincarnation et al) began to take hold.

 

But the early methods of cultivation continued, and proved incredibly effective in extending the physical life, and with it the experience and appreciation of physical life, to a maximum.

 

What I see happening with the Buddhist approach is a lot of discussion and debate, a lot of thinking, a lot of brain-work. And this, in the Daoist approach, is harmful. It leaves you top-heavy. We're supposed to reflect the natural world, where the heavy is at the bottom, but so much thinking leaves us light at the bottom an bloated on top. And then we run into difficulties. This is the basic problem with western-societies in general.

 

Hence, the fully-realized man starves the head

and feeds the belly

 

:-)

[Marblehead]

I'd say from the formerly written posts I'd conclude that maybe "karma" is not present in Taoism so far as a direct term, but that what is meant by it is largely also addressed, at least in what Marblehead pointed out to be Religous and Alchemic Taoism, right?

 

By the way, what is Philosophical Taoism all about? If "Philosophical" should mean something like "theoretical" I'd hardly be interested in too much of it, I'm more the person who likes things one can practice.

But I think that's just a side-topic in here...

Yes, my responding to this here would take this thread too far off topic and I don't want to do that.

 

But I would gladly speak with you concerning what I bolded above if you want to start a thread on it.

[Rara]

Yes, my responding to this here would take this thread too far off topic and I don't want to do that.

 

But I would gladly speak with you concerning what I bolded above if you want to start a thread on it.

Gets my vote! Edited April 7, 2014 by Rara

[Yascra]

Yes, my responding to this here would take this thread too far off topic and I don't want to do that.

 

But I would gladly speak with you concerning what I bolded above if you want to start a thread on it.

Ayyi, me want to, look here

[Yascra]

 

Well, 'finding out' is exactly what Daoist methods are about, in my experience and understanding. There's more research and experimentation, it's more evidence-based and less philosophical than (western) Buddhist practices. There's a basic, physical, model of the the creation process, not all that dissimilar to western physics, and an attempt to understand our place in that model.

That might sound strange, but that's actually what I feel it to be, and my reason to be interested in it at all

I don't see that big a controversy between different systems - I'm just interested to learn from different perspectives etc, and use what I get in the one to put in what I feel to be missing in the other. If you just do buddhist practice, you might very well feel kind of energetic flows etc. .. but my experience is that if you try to bring that up with other Buddhists, you'll end up in meaningless debate with people fighting for their pride, and will hardly get to the point of talking about "hard evidence". It's not that this topic is really missing in Buddhist practice, if you do the practice, but I feel a lack of communication about some parts of it.

 

And thanks for that explanation about the roots and development

What I see happening with the Buddhist approach is a lot of discussion and debate, a lot of thinking, a lot of brain-work. And this, in the Daoist approach, is harmful. It leaves you top-heavy. We're supposed to reflect the natural world, where the heavy is at the bottom, but so much thinking leaves us light at the bottom an bloated on top. And then we run into difficulties. This is the basic problem with western-societies in general.

That, I feel, is so very true :/

 

Feel no need to feed my belly anyway. I tend to feed my energy system wherever it lacks something, as good as I can at least

 

I'll think a little about it, thank you

[Harmonious Emptiness]

[...]

 

 

For sure, it's not so much about terminology for me, I'm interested in the main idea of "if not for cause and effect, what would be the point of being virtuous?"

 

I'm afraid I don't like that reference to "failure". What does "failure" mean? Emotions can be quite successful in some ways, that's why evolution led to their creation. Being catched by a lion because you were not afraid enough and didn't run fast enough would not be the successful kind of outcome of that situation, at least not for you.

I think that it's not that simple, and maybe acting with the Tao might have meant that the lion would never have tried to hunt you and feed on you, but if THAT is the case, then obviously not giving in to (wild) emotions can't be the whole story.

 

[...]

 

It's not quite so cut and dry as that.

 

The way I see it/understand it has a lot to do with timing, and doing the right things at the right time. If your motives are wrong, you will be out of step with the greater mechanism that is turning and determines the outcome, like a musician that stops listening to the band because he wants to show off and play an awesome lick that comes out sounding terrible in the grand scheme of things.

 

Of course there is more to it than just managing your emotions and desires, but that is sort of the main mechanism that catches and reverses a great deal of it, sort of like a safety mechanism on the grand order of things. Not a guarantee, but something that is in place to catch things before they mess everything up too much.

 

Notice that bad things can turn out to be good in their timing with other things too.

 

When it's time to use your adrenaline, then use it, but you will also use it more wisely if you practice this Dao of self-awareness in other situations.

[Captain Mar-Vell]

...

If there is indeed no Kamma in Daoism, then it is the poorer for it.

 

I tell thee true.

...

[soaring crane]

...

If there is indeed no Kamma in Daoism, then it is the poorer for it.

...

 

swencan?

[Marblehead]

...

If there is indeed no Kamma in Daoism, then it is the poorer for it.

 

I tell thee true.

...

But Captain, Tao is all encompassing. You know that.

 

And I don't know what Kamma is but I'm sure it's going to taste good.

[Yascra]

Maybe Theravadan Buddhist. They also tend to say "dhamma". Seem to lack an "r"

[TaoMaster]

if

 

that which is (done+) with the Tao will ( succeed +,)

 

then by the law of duality

 

that which is ( not done-) with the Tao ( will fail -.)

"That which is done with the Tao will succeed. That which is done without the Tao will fail."

[Daeluin]

When 1 becomes, it can only be 1 (+) because of everything not 1 (-), and two are distinguished in our law of duality.

After that, anything 1 does expends 1 into 2 (-), or invites 2 (+) into 1 (-).

When 1 feeds 2, more 1's and 2's are created in what is external to 1.

When 2 feeds 1, more 1's and 2's are created in what is internal to 1.

 

By "doing", 10,000 things are created, endlessly living and dying.

 

Tao exists before duality, before Yang and Yin.

When 1 nurtures the inner dualities, refining them until 1 is pure yang again,

Then 1 embraces the receptivity of 2 via "non-doing", and yang-yin return to Tao.

 

By "non-doing", yin and yang merge, death and life are left behind, and one reunites with the ancestral.

 

That which is done with Tao lives close to the center, that which is done without Tao is leaving the center.

That which returns to Tao offers its center to the greater center.