A Fundamental Buddhist Concept

[Long Yun]

Hi everyone,

 

I was watching a film about the Tibetan Book of the Dead when a concept of Buddhism which I had previously thought I understood became very confusing for me. I'm hoping someone here can help me understand.

 

Buddhists reject the Hindu theory of the Atman, which means "self" or "soul" or "ego."

Buddhists embrace the theory of Karma, which means literally "action."

When we are unhappy, it is the result of negative Karma either from this life or from a past life.

 

My question is, if there is no Atman for the Karma to follow, how is Karma carried over from past lives?

 

I hope someone can help me understand this concept. Thanks.

[Machin Shin]

Hi everyone,

 

I was watching a film about the Tibetan Book of the Dead when a concept of Buddhism which I had previously thought I understood became very confusing for me. I'm hoping someone here can help me understand.

 

My question is, if there is no Atman for the Karma to follow, how is Karma carried over from past lives?

 

The best thing to do is get a version of the sadhana and use it for a couple of years.

 

Your own experience will answer your question.

 

Also Chakrasamvara is the teaching on cyclic existence. The Old Mahasiddhi's understood the afflictions of cyclic existence, but it was Sakyamuni Buddha that created this teaching to bring about and end to samsara.

[Gerard]

Anicca (impermanence) teaches us that all phenomena are subjected to change. Karma is balancing force of the Universe, when you alter the balance (action, speech or thought) you'll be "asked" to return it to how it was. It can happen in this life (desirable), the next one or several after (both being undesirable).

 

You are unhappy because you are clinging to phenomena using either of the 5 aggregates: Rupa (form), vedana (feeling), sanja (perception), sankhara (mental formation) and vinjana (consciousness).

 

Karma is carried over to the next life because you left behind an unresolved issue (good you go up the spiritual evolution ladder or bad you go down the spiritual evolution ladder).

 

Karma is carried over future lives the same way you bury a seed in the ground and over time it will grow as a tree which will eventually give you a fruit, i.e. banana. In other cases karma operates like this: you didn't sleep well last night (cause) and as a result you'll be tired the day after (effect).

Edited February 4, 2009 by durkhrod chogori

[mouse]

Hi everyone,

 

I was watching a film about the Tibetan Book of the Dead when a concept of Buddhism which I had previously thought I understood became very confusing for me. I'm hoping someone here can help me understand.

 

Buddhists reject the Hindu theory of the Atman, which means "self" or "soul" or "ego."

Buddhists embrace the theory of Karma, which means literally "action."

When we are unhappy, it is the result of negative Karma either from this life or from a past life.

 

My question is, if there is no Atman for the Karma to follow, how is Karma carried over from past lives?

 

I hope someone can help me understand this concept. Thanks.

 

Wu-Lin,

 

From my understanding Buddhists do not reject theory of the ego but rather acknowledges that ignorance forms the ego.

 

If there is no ego, there is no more rebirth. The karma left continues to act on the body aggregates but do not touch the mind.

 

There are lots of stories of arahants who continue to have bad things happen to them after attaining. Angulimala comes to mind.

 

So the statement you posed, "if there is no Atman for the Karma to follow, how is Karma carried over from past lives?" that in itself is flawed in that if there is the dissolution of ego then there is no rebirth. So no rebirth, no more karma to be acted on either the mind nor the body.

 

mouse

[mat black]

Wu-Lin,

 

From my understanding Buddhists do not reject theory of the ego but rather acknowledges that ignorance forms the ego.

 

If there is no ego, there is no more rebirth. The karma left continues to act on the body aggregates but do not touch the mind.

 

There are lots of stories of arahants who continue to have bad things happen to them after attaining. Angulimala comes to mind.

 

So the statement you posed, "if there is no Atman for the Karma to follow, how is Karma carried over from past lives?" that in itself is flawed in that if there is the dissolution of ego then there is no rebirth. So no rebirth, no more karma to be acted on either the mind nor the body.

 

mouse

 

>>nods<< Nice Mouse. Thanks

Edited February 4, 2009 by mat black

[Gerard]

From my understanding Buddhists do not reject theory of the ego but rather acknowledges that ignorance forms the ego.

 

 

What Buddhism rejects is the notion of an immutable ego that remains as such in each and every lifetime.

 

 

If there is no ego, there is no more rebirth. The karma left continues to act on the body aggregates but do not touch the mind.

 

The mind and matter are the process resulting from the interaction of the five aggregates. Karma will determine your next life, as pure and simple as that.

 

 

So the statement you posed, "if there is no Atman for the Karma to follow, how is Karma carried over from past lives?" that in itself is flawed in that if there is the dissolution of ego then there is no rebirth. So no rebirth, no more karma to be acted on either the mind nor the body.

 

Let me clarify your answer:

 

if there is the dissolution of ego then there is no rebirth

 

The ego is dissolved after death because it is one of the five aggregates.

 

The state of "no rebirth" is only attained by someone who is fully enlightened (Arahant/Buddha). The rest of the beings will be reborn in an specific realm according to their karma. There are five levels:

 

1. Puthujjana or Ordinary people: trapped in the endless changes of Saṃsara. Most of humanity.

2. Sotappana or Stream-enterer: The stream-enterer is also said to have "opened the eye of the Dharma". A stream-enterer is guaranteed enlightenment after no more than seven successive rebirths, and possibly in fewer. The stream-enterer can also be sure that he will not be reborn in any of the unhappy states or rebirths (animal, preta, hell). He can only be reborn as a human being, or in a heaven.

3. Sakadagami or Once-returner: Will return to the human world only one more time, and will attain Nirvana in that life.

4. Anagami or Non-returner: Does not come back into human existence, or any lower world, after death. Instead, they are reborn in one of the worlds of the Rupadhatu called the Suddhavasa worlds, or "Pure Abodes", where he will attain Nirvaṇa. However, some of them are reborn a second time in a higher world of the Pure Abodes, but in no case are born into a lower state.

5. Arahant: a fully enlightened human being who has abandoned all fetters, and who upon decease (Parinirvana) will not be reborn in any world, having fully abandoned Samsara.

 

The fetters are the following:

 

1. Belief in an individual self (Sakkaya-diṭṭhi)

2. Doubt or uncertainty, especially about the teachings (Vicikiccha)

3. Attachment to rites and rituals (Silabbata-paramaso)

4. Sensual desire (Kamacchando)

5. Ill will (Vyapado)

6. Lust for material existence, lust for material rebirth (Ruparago)

7. Lust for immaterial existence (Aruparago)

8. Pride in self, conceit, arrogance (Mano)

9. Restlessness, distraction (Uddhaccan)

10. Ignorance (Avijja)

Edited February 4, 2009 by durkhrod chogori

[adam mizner]

mouse is correct

 

metta

adam

 

What Buddhism rejects is the notion of an immutable ego that remains as such in each and every lifetime.

The mind (sankhara) is another of the five aggregates (khandhas). Karma will determine your next life, as pure and simple as that.

Let me clarify your answer:

The ego is dissolved after death because it is one of the five aggregates.

 

The state of "no rebirth" is only attained by someone who is fully enlightened (Arahant/Buddha). The rest of the beings will be reborn in an specific realm according to their karma. There are five levels:

 

1. Puthujjana or Ordinary people: trapped in the endless changes of Saṃsara. Most of humanity.

2. Sotappana or Stream-enterer: The stream-enterer is also said to have "opened the eye of the Dharma". A stream-enterer is guaranteed enlightenment after no more than seven successive rebirths, and possibly in fewer. The stream-enterer can also be sure that he will not be reborn in any of the unhappy states or rebirths (animal, preta, hell). He can only be reborn as a human being, or in a heaven.

3. Sakadagami or Once-returner: Will return to the human world only one more time, and will attain Nirvana in that life.

4. Anagami or Non-returner: Does not come back into human existence, or any lower world, after death. Instead, they are reborn in one of the worlds of the Rupadhatu called the Suddhavasa worlds, or "Pure Abodes", where he will attain Nirvaṇa. However, some of them are reborn a second time in a higher world of the Pure Abodes, but in no case are born into a lower state.

5. Arahant: a fully enlightened human being who has abandoned all fetters, and who upon decease (Parinirvana) will not be reborn in any world, having fully abandoned Samsara.

 

The fetters are the following:

 

1. Belief in an individual self (Sakkaya-diṭṭhi)

2. Doubt or uncertainty, especially about the teachings (Vicikiccha)

3. Attachment to rites and rituals (Silabbata-paramaso)

4. Sensual desire (Kamacchando)

5. Ill will (Vyapado)

6. Lust for material existence, lust for material rebirth (Ruparago)

7. Lust for immaterial existence (Aruparago)

8. Pride in self, conceit, arrogance (Mano)

9. Restlessness, distraction (Uddhaccan)

10. Ignorance (Avijja)

 

 

sankara is not mind.

mind is not a kandha, thats the point.

 

sankara is the quality of mental proliferation.

 

metta

adam

 

What Buddhism rejects is the notion of an immutable ego that remains as such in each and every lifetime.

The mind (sankhara) is another of the five aggregates (khandhas). Karma will determine your next life, as pure and simple as that.

Let me clarify your answer:

The ego is dissolved after death because it is one of the five aggregates.

 

The state of "no rebirth" is only attained by someone who is fully enlightened (Arahant/Buddha). The rest of the beings will be reborn in an specific realm according to their karma. There are five levels:

 

1. Puthujjana or Ordinary people: trapped in the endless changes of Saṃsara. Most of humanity.

2. Sotappana or Stream-enterer: The stream-enterer is also said to have "opened the eye of the Dharma". A stream-enterer is guaranteed enlightenment after no more than seven successive rebirths, and possibly in fewer. The stream-enterer can also be sure that he will not be reborn in any of the unhappy states or rebirths (animal, preta, hell). He can only be reborn as a human being, or in a heaven.

3. Sakadagami or Once-returner: Will return to the human world only one more time, and will attain Nirvana in that life.

4. Anagami or Non-returner: Does not come back into human existence, or any lower world, after death. Instead, they are reborn in one of the worlds of the Rupadhatu called the Suddhavasa worlds, or "Pure Abodes", where he will attain Nirvaṇa. However, some of them are reborn a second time in a higher world of the Pure Abodes, but in no case are born into a lower state.

5. Arahant: a fully enlightened human being who has abandoned all fetters, and who upon decease (Parinirvana) will not be reborn in any world, having fully abandoned Samsara.

 

The fetters are the following:

 

1. Belief in an individual self (Sakkaya-diṭṭhi)

2. Doubt or uncertainty, especially about the teachings (Vicikiccha)

3. Attachment to rites and rituals (Silabbata-paramaso)

4. Sensual desire (Kamacchando)

5. Ill will (Vyapado)

6. Lust for material existence, lust for material rebirth (Ruparago)

7. Lust for immaterial existence (Aruparago)

8. Pride in self, conceit, arrogance (Mano)

9. Restlessness, distraction (Uddhaccan)

10. Ignorance (Avijja)

[limitless sky]

very good observation wu liu, there is atman, the soul body is carried by the vehicle karana sarira

[Gerard]

I have edited my post.

 

mouse is correct

 

About what?

[rex]

Even though the ego and associated mind states dissolve at death there is still a very subtle form of ignorance known as co-emergent ignorance. Co-emergent ignorance is "the simultaneous arising of cognition and a failure to recognize its actual nature" *1 which gives rise to conceptualisation which in turn kicks off the process of the Twelve Links of Dependent Arising.

 

*1 Quote taken from this teaching by Kalu Rinpoche : http://www.iol.ie/~taeger/mahamud/mahamud.html

 

edited for the usual typos

Edited February 4, 2009 by rex

[gendao]

Karma is carried over to the next life because you left behind an unresolved issue (good you go up the spiritual evolution ladder or bad you go down the spiritual evolution ladder).

Could you give a concrete example of this?

 

I know one form of past-life baggage is say, a fear of water now due to having drowned in a past life. Is this a form of "karma?"

 

If not, then what would be a real-life example?

[Machin Shin]

 

If not, then what would be a real-life example?

 

Fighting the Deamons.

Yaksha is a fast deamon. But what is a fast Deamon? A person on a quick path that becomes enlightened to the uses of the darker side of things.

 

Example: A soldier that gets to meet a king. The soldier doesn't agree with what the king has ordered his sovereign nation to do, and protests to the king in front of an assembly. The soldier is then forcable removed from the assembly, and turns to substances, lying, stealing, killing, and rape for a quick answer. This yaksha eventually has followers and attainments.

 

There are many levels of this parable.

Edited February 4, 2009 by Machin Shin

[Lightbringer]

The Buddhist idea of no ego is not so much that it does not exist, but rather that it doesn't have to exist. You must choose to have an ego. Something that you can just will out of existence is only existent in a broader sense of the word.

 

However, Buddhists leave me irritated more often than not because these things are not explained very well. For example, you start with thinking "Why do we have an ego?" and every traditional Buddhist answer leaves you going "But why?" until finally you get "The ego does not exist". Suddenly you are stonewalled with generalization. It's a bit of a cop out, and I feel this has less to do with the way of the Buddha and more to do with the structure of the "ism". Keep trucking away and you'll end up with a much clearer version of things that are part Hindu, part Buddhist, part everything but also different from what is often taught in all those traditions.

[Gerard]

However, Buddhists leave me irritated more often than not because these things are not explained very well. For example, you start with thinking "Why do we have an ego?" and every traditional Buddhist answer leaves you going "But why?" until finally you get "The ego does not exist". Suddenly you are stonewalled with generalization. It's a bit of a cop out, and I feel this has less to do with the way of the Buddha and more to do with the structure of the "ism". Keep trucking away and you'll end up with a much clearer version of things that are part Hindu, part Buddhist, part everything but also different from what is often taught in all those traditions.

 

This happens because you are solely relying in what you hear/read.

 

Have you ever practiced Buddhist meditation in a proper setting and following a technique, i.e. 2 month retreat following the Vipassana method?

 

When you finish come back here and let us know what you think about this issue.

 

 

Edited: Forgot to include the word "read."

Edited February 4, 2009 by durkhrod chogori

[林愛偉]

Hi everyone,

 

I was watching a film about the Tibetan Book of the Dead when a concept of Buddhism which I had previously thought I understood became very confusing for me. I'm hoping someone here can help me understand.

 

Buddhists reject the Hindu theory of the Atman, which means "self" or "soul" or "ego."

Buddhists embrace the theory of Karma, which means literally "action."

When we are unhappy, it is the result of negative Karma either from this life or from a past life.

 

My question is, if there is no Atman for the Karma to follow, how is Karma carried over from past lives?

 

I hope someone can help me understand this concept. Thanks.

 

 

Karma doesn't follow the "soul, self, ego". It is because of the views one holds to.

The one holding is a view itself, and there being one holding is also a view. People

tend to believe there is a "self" and thus they create that reality of illusion, thus

the relative manifestation of karma.

 

Peace,

Lin

[forestofsouls]

Why do we need to have things mentally sorted out before we go down the path? What is being looked for and offered here are answers: a pert, mental summation that allows one to set aside the issue with no more thought. Some one once wrote that all you get then are "dead answers" instead of "living questions."

 

Ajahn Brahm has said that if you want to know the truth about past lives, you must first become good at meditation. Then you can gain experiential knowledge for yourself.

[adam mizner]

haha mentioning Buddhism and the vipassana "method" in the same sentence. it seems you may be confused. the meditation that the buddha taught was jhana. never in the canon does the buddha say go practice vipassana but always go practice jhana. vipassana is a result not a method. well not within dhamma anyway.

 

metta

adam

 

This happens because you are solely relying in what you hear/read.

 

Have you ever practiced Buddhist meditation in a proper setting and following a technique, i.e. 2 month retreat following the Vipassana method?

 

When you finish come back here and let us know what you think about this issue.

Edited: Forgot to include the word "read."

 

 

yes ajahn Brahm. a master of the jhanas and a non returner for sure. i think his words count.

 

metta

adam

 

Why do we need to have things mentally sorted out before we go down the path? What is being looked for and offered here are answers: a pert, mental summation that allows one to set aside the issue with no more thought. Some one once wrote that all you get then are "dead answers" instead of "living questions."

 

Ajahn Brahm has said that if you want to know the truth about past lives, you must first become good at meditation. Then you can gain experiential knowledge for yourself.

[forestofsouls]

See Sattipathana Sutta..

[Ian]

Hi everyone,

 

I was watching a film about the Tibetan Book of the Dead when a concept of Buddhism which I had previously thought I understood became very confusing for me. I'm hoping someone here can help me understand.

 

Buddhists reject the Hindu theory of the Atman, which means "self" or "soul" or "ego."

Buddhists embrace the theory of Karma, which means literally "action."

When we are unhappy, it is the result of negative Karma either from this life or from a past life.

 

My question is, if there is no Atman for the Karma to follow, how is Karma carried over from past lives?

 

I hope someone can help me understand this concept. Thanks.

 

As I understand it, the karma doesn't need anything to follow, as it's all tangled together. So it starts again, not in any sense as "the same person" but with the same tendencies and encumbrances.

[Long Yun]

Wu-Lin,

 

From my understanding Buddhists do not reject theory of the ego but rather acknowledges that ignorance forms the ego.

 

If there is no ego, there is no more rebirth. The karma left continues to act on the body aggregates but do not touch the mind.

 

There are lots of stories of arahants who continue to have bad things happen to them after attaining. Angulimala comes to mind.

 

So the statement you posed, "if there is no Atman for the Karma to follow, how is Karma carried over from past lives?" that in itself is flawed in that if there is the dissolution of ego then there is no rebirth. So no rebirth, no more karma to be acted on either the mind nor the body.

 

mouse

This makes sense I was overthinking it a bit, or maybe underthinking. Haha. Thank you Mouse.

[Lightbringer]

This happens because you are solely relying in what you hear/read.

 

Have you ever practiced Buddhist meditation in a proper setting and following a technique, i.e. 2 month retreat following the Vipassana method?

 

When you finish come back here and let us know what you think about this issue.

Edited: Forgot to include the word "read."

 

I'd like to know how you've decided that I'm relying on what I hear or read rather than experience. It seems like you've jumped the gun a bit. To be honest, your tone comes off as quite condescending, like you're lecturing a child. This isn't compassion, it's an ego game to feel holier than thou.

 

And I don't do my Vipassana during a little 2 month vacation. I observe myself constantly in the real world. Personally, I think this ascetic mindset that the only place for "real" growth is in some cave or in the mountains is a load of crap. Running from the real world is a result of discomfort with it. A calm mind with no one to challenge you, expose your weaknesses or make you really think isn't a calm mind at all. Higher states can be reached than that. Try to extend what you have learned about yourself in quietude to the bustling, noisy world and then let ME know what you think about this.

[adam mizner]

why are we reading this sutta translation?

 

metta

adam

 

See Sattipathana Sutta..

[WhiteTiger]

Karma doesn't follow the "soul, self, ego". It is because of the views one holds to.

The one holding is a view itself, and there being one holding is also a view. People

tend to believe there is a "self" and thus they create that reality of illusion, thus

the relative manifestation of karma.

 

Peace,

Lin

 

Great words... Thank you for them Lin.

[thelerner]

I've been working on the Buddhist concept of noself, ie I do not exist. I think I'm ( ) getting closer to it. It certainly makes me feel squeamish, like looking into a mirror and finding out you're invisible.

 

What I'm getting is, in Buddhism I am awareness. I have no soul. I am say 36 bits of awareness. Right now, me is split between looking at a screen and having my fingers type. That is truly what 'I' am. My bit stream can look at imperfect memories of my past or fantasize about the future. But its a limited range. The world is real, but I am not. I'm a focus, a single sentence being written and disappearing.

 

Ego is an illusion. The bits trying to say they are something more, something important, something permanent, but its a trick. The drive for mindfulness isn't to become mindful, its about the acknowledgement that mindfulness right now is all we are (or ever will be?).

 

It may not be orthodox but I side with the view expressed in 'The Gods Drink Whiskey' that the concepts of reincarnation and karma can be tossed out of Buddhism . They do it more harm then good!! They're older concepts that side track the real issue of life and how to live it.

 

 

So, take that and put it where you want

 

Michael

 

 

let me keep going since I'm on a roll.

 

My senses are real. But they acknowledge the world through the bits, squeezed through the single sentence. Thoughts are not the filter, they're the trap...a distorted lens..

[.k.]

I've been working on the Buddhist concept of noself, ie I do not exist. I think I'm ( ) getting closer to it. It certainly makes me feel squeamish, like looking into a mirror and finding out you're invisible.

 

What I'm getting is, in Buddhism I am awareness. I have no soul. I am say 36 bits of awareness. Right now, me is split between looking at a screen and having my fingers type. That is truly what 'I' am. My bit stream can look at imperfect memories of my past or fantasize about the future. But its a limited range. The world is real, but I am not. I'm a focus, a single sentence being written and disappearing.

 

Ego is an illusion. The bits trying to say they are something more, something important, something permanent, but its a trick. The drive for mindfulness isn't to become mindful, its about the acknowledgement that mindfulness right now is all we are (or ever will be?).

 

It may not be orthodox but I side with the view expressed in 'The Gods Drink Whiskey' that the concepts of reincarnation and karma can be tossed out of Buddhism . They do it more harm then good!! They're older concepts that side track the real issue of life and how to live it.

So, take that and put it where you want

 

Michael

let me keep going since I'm on a roll.

 

My senses are real. But they acknowledge the world through the bits, squeezed through the single sentence. Thoughts are not the filter, they're the trap...a distorted lens..

 

 

 

only someone that doesnt understand Dhamma at all would say such a thing.

Karma is fundamental in Dhamma practise. Everything is subject to cause and effect.

and reincarnation is a hindu concept, if you mean rebirth (totally diffferent) then this is also fundamental in dhamma teachings. So much so that the enrire goal of Buddhism is that deathless is the end of it (rebirth). Some people dumb down the Dhamma thinking that practsing ordinary mindfulness for ordinary happiness in ordinary life is the goal. Although you can probably sell this in a self help book, it is not what the Buddha taught.

 

.k.