Karma

[KarmaKat]

Hey everyone!
was just wondering what everyones views on karma were? im doing a project at the moment and would love to hear what people think about karma in gereral, how it effects everyday life...if it effects everyday life for that matter, what exactly it is you believe and so on. Thanks!!!

 

[subculture_of_one]

Hmmm!

Well, I am gonna try and give a technical definition of Karma.

Karma is derived from the Sanskrit verbal root kr (pronounced 'kri'). It is an action noun derivative of the root. You take the root kr and add the suffix -man (which denotes an action noun) and you get Karma! Karma is a napumsakalinga term- it is neuter in gender.

In the Vedic setting, Karma was usually used to refer to ritual action, that is action done for ritual purposes within the confines of a vedic ritual.

With the development of the Upanishads karma came to mean all action.

Though it's almost more representative to say that karma means 'The action, results of the action, and outcomes of those results and actions'!

Again, a little technical but I thought that providing the origins of the word may be helpful.


Sub

 

[Agnideva]

Hi Sub!
Welcome to CR

In the Vedic setting, Karma was usually used to refer to ritual action, that is action done for ritual purposes within the confines of a vedic ritual.

Yes, that’s right. That’s why the former portion of the Vedas (hymn collections and brahmana texts) are known as karma kanda (ritual portion). Karma in this context meant that if the vedic rituals were performed correctly, it would yield specific desired results. This is the focus of the vedic philosophy called Mimamsa written by Sage Jaimini. Jaimini spoke of a force called Apurva, which was responsible for delivering the result of karma.

With the development of the Upanishads karma came to mean all action.
Though it's almost more representative to say that karma means 'The action, results of the action, and outcomes of those results and actions'!

The modern Hindu definition of karma includes every thought, word and action (deed) that one performs, as well as the motivation/intention behind it, and the results thereof. Since we’re being technical, there are different types and catagories of karma:

Sanchita karma – the sum of all one’s karmas in this and previous lives
Prarabda karma – the portion of sanchita karma that one is meant to experience in the present life
Kriyamana karma – the karma one incurs as a result of our thoughts, words, and actions in the present life

Akarma – inaction; failure to perform the proper karma
Vikarma – negative or bad karma
Sukarma – positive or good karma
Sakama karma – karma with selfish motives
Nishkama karma – karma without selfish motives

I’m hoping this will help with Karmakat’s project too

Regards.

 

[subculture_of_one]

Thanks for the welcome AgniDeva

That's some good info, I forgot all about karmic subdivisions! (could you imagine living in one of those kinds of subdivisions?) Heh... Sorry

Here's another idea KarmaKat: Have you heard of the TV show: My name is Earl? The entire premise is a guy who sets out to right some of his wrongs... And it directly deals with the concept (albeit in a rather surface-level manner) of Karma.

Sub

BTW- Agnideva, I've read some of your other posts- quite established with knowledge! Do you study, practice, teach, etc Hinduism? Just curious by what avenue you came to your wisdom.

 

[Agnideva]

Thanks for the welcome AgniDeva
That's some good info, I forgot all about karmic subdivisions! (could you imagine living in one of those kinds of subdivisions?) Heh...

Hello Sub,

I’m sure there are more subdivisions that we don’t even know about. Karma is a very complex subject, and we can write volumes about it and not say everything there is to be said .

BTW- Agnideva, I've read some of your other posts- quite established with knowledge! Do you study, practice, teach, etc Hinduism? Just curious by what avenue you came to your wisdom.

Thanks Sub! Yes, I practice and study Hinduism from a traditional Satguru. But, as you know, one never really finishes studying Sanatana Dharma; there is lifetimes of material to be learned .

Agnideva.

 

[KarmaKat]

Thanks guys, thats really interesting and helpful. so (if you believe in karma) how do you find it effects your everyday life? and do you believe it to be fatalistic and predetermined for you, or can you change your future if you wish to do so?

 

[Agnideva]

Thanks guys, thats really interesting and helpful. so (if you believe in karma) how do you find it effects your everyday life? and do you believe it to be fatalistic and predetermined for you, or can you change your future if you wish to do so?

Hi Karmakat,

Karma affects us every minute of every day, but we can never fully understand the effects our karma. What’s most important, at least in Hinduism, with regards to karma is the intention behind our actions, thoughts and words. Karma is not and cannot be considered fate, fatalism, or predestination. Prarabda karma only defines certain elements of the present life (we can never know which ones) and does not fix our every experience. While karma is often used to define one’s own situation or condition, it is an abuse of karma to use it to justify someone else’s. For example, if I rationalize another person’s present condition (suffering, poverty, etc.) to karma, that is bad karma on my part. And, yes you can definitely change your future, both in this life and ones to come. It’s important to remember that karma exists because free will exists.

 

[KarmaKat]

Thanks Agnideva, that is exactly the kind of information i'm needing. so does everyone agree with Agnideva or do you have different opinions?

 

[Obvious Child]

Hi Karmakat,

Karma affects us every minute of every day, but we can never fully understand the effects our karma. What’s most important, at least in Hinduism, with regards to karma is the intention behind our actions, thoughts and words.

That's important in Buddhism too. In fact, the Buddha may be the first person to clearly make karma a matter of intention or will (cetana), in stark contrast to his contemporaries, the Jains.

Karma is not and cannot be considered fate, fatalism, or predestination.

Surely it is these inasmuch as we cannot escape previous bad karma. However, we can make good karma, which is why I'll end by quoting you:

And, yes you can definitely change your future, both in this life and ones to come. It’s important to remember that karma exists because free will exists.

 

[lucius]

In this connection there's also karma yoga as spoken of by Krishna in the Bhagavd Gita.
The idea is that action or karma cannot be given up, but if we act from the ordinary egoistic level our actions will generate further karmic reactions, which we will then have to suffer or enjoy, and thus we are bound to the wheel of karma - samsara, as Buddhists call it.
It is not possible to give up action, so the solution of karma yoga is to try to act without any craving or desire for the results of action, to act in an un-attached way, giving up the fuits of action to the Divine.
Rather than working for one's own selfish desire, one should try to work for God.
It is further said in the Gita, that the Jiva, the soul or Self within, isn't actually the actor of our deeds - everything is carried out by the modes of prakriti or nature.The Self is seated as an impartial witness. So through action without attachment or desire for the fruit of action one can realize that unmoving consciousness of the Soul. Such action in karma yoga is free from reaction, so one is gradually freed of karma.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste all,

interesting conversation.

Surely it is these inasmuch as we cannot escape previous bad karma.

this, too, is a difference between the Sanatana Dharma and the Buddha Dharma views. within the context of Buddha Dharma one need not, necessarily, reap the full consequences of their karma.

metta,

~v

 

[lucius]

Namaste all,

interesting conversation.




this, too, is a difference between the Sanatana Dharma and the Buddha Dharma views. within the context of Buddha Dharma one need not, necessarily, reap the full consequences of their karma.

metta,

~v

It is the same in Snatana Dharma - the effects of karma can be lessened or destroyed through various means, mainly spiritual realization. And nothing is fixed - karma is not fatalism or predeterminism - it is in our hands to create our own karma.

 

[Obvious Child]

this, too, is a difference between the Sanatana Dharma and the Buddha Dharma views. within the context of Buddha Dharma one need not, necessarily, reap the full consequences of their karma.

This is not my understanding: Mollagona (or Moggalona?) was beaten to deaths by thieves because of previous bad karma despite being an arahat.

My understanding is the physical pleasure and pain (vedana) is an inevitable result of karma but the craving (trsna/tanha), in the forms of aversion and attraction can be cut off. I don't know if physical pain without aversion is 'painful' in the normal sense, as the ego has been dissolved. but at least theoretically it must occur according to dependent origination (Pratitya-samutpada/ paticca samuppada)

 

[Obvious Child]

It is further said in the Gita, that the Jiva, the soul or Self within, isn't actually the actor of our deeds - everything is carried out by the modes of prakriti or nature.The Self is seated as an impartial witness. So through action without attachment or desire for the fruit of action one can realize that unmoving consciousness of the Soul. Such action in karma yoga is free from reaction, so one is gradually freed of karma.

This is, for those interested in the Western Classical tradition, very similar to stoicism.

Just a small point: the Gita uses atman rather than Jiva, which is used elsewhere (particularly in Jainism) for much the same thing.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Obvious Child,

thank you for the post.

This is not my understanding: Mollagona (or Moggalona?) was beaten to deaths by thieves because of previous bad karma despite being an arahat.

this is correct. however, the operative question is "was that the full reaping of the bad karma?" i do not think that we can give a definitive answer on this one way or the other.

within the context of Buddha Dharma, the full workings of karma are said to be unknowable to the unawakened mind.

this link is very good for getting a basic view of Buddhist karma:

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/karma1.htm

here's a snippet which seems relevant:

The effects of karma may be evident either in the short term or in the long term. Traditionally we divide karma into three varieties related to the amount of time that is required for the effects of these actions to manifest themselves. Karma can either manifest its effects in this very life or in the next life or only after several lives. When karma manifests its effects in this life, we can see the fruit of karma within a relatively short length of time. This variety of karma is easily verifiable by any of us. For instance, when someone refuses to study, when someone indulges in harmful distractions like alcohol and drugs, when someone begins to steal to support his harmful habits; the effects will be evident within a short time. They will be evident in loss of livelihood and friendship, health and so forth. We cannot see the long-term effect of karma, but the Buddha and His prominent disciples who have developed their minds are able to perceive directly the long-term effects. For instance, when Maudgalyayana was beaten to death by bandits, the Buddha was able to tell that this event was the effect of something Maudgalyayana had done in a previous life when he had taken his aged parents to the forest and having beaten them to death, had then reported that they had been killed by bandits. The effect of this unwholesome action done many lives before was manifested only in his last life. At death we have to leave everything behind — our property and our loved ones, but our karma will accompany us like a shadow. The Buddha has said that nowhere on earth or in heaven can one escape one’s karma. So when the conditions are correct, dependent upon mind and body, the effects of karma will manifest themselves just as dependent on certain conditions a mango will appear on a mango tree. We can see that even in the world of nature certain effects take longer to appear than others. If for instance, we plant the seed of a papaya, we will obtain the fruit in shorter period than if we plant the seed of a durian. Similarly, the effects of karma manifest either in the short term or in the long term.

metta,

~v

 

[Obvious Child]

Though we can't know how, I'm sure the Buddha said karma was unavoidable.

I'll try to look it up...

 

[lucius]

Just a small point: the Gita uses atman rather than Jiva, which is used elsewhere (particularly in Jainism) for much the same thing.

Another small point is that you're not correct about this - both Atman and Jiva are mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita, and they do not mean the same thing.

EG: Bhagavd Gita Ch7.vs.5:

Sanskrit:

"apareyam itas tv anyam prakritim viddhi me param jiva-bhutam maha-baho yayedam dhratye jagat"

Trans Sri Aurobindo:

"This is the lower. But know my other Nature different from this, O mighty armed, the supreme which becomes the Jiva and by which this world is upheld"

Though we can't know how, I'm sure the Buddha said karma was unavoidable.

BG CH3 "Karma Yoga" Vs 31:

Trans Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada:

"One who executes his duties according to My injunction and who follows this teaching faithfully, without envy, becomes free from the bondage of fruitive actions (karma)."

 

[Obvious Child]

Another small point is that you're not correct about this - both Atman and Jiva are mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita, and they do not mean the same thing.

EG: Bhagavd Gita Ch7.vs.5:

Sanskrit:

"apareyam itas tv anyam prakritim viddhi me param jiva-bhutam maha-baho yayedam dhratye jagat"

Trans Sri Aurobindo:

"This is the lower. But know my other Nature different from this, O mighty armed, the supreme which becomes the Jiva and by which this world is upheld"

OK. My bad. But I thought that jiva was used less technically as 'living being', where atman was the underlying? It's been a while since I read it...

BG CH3 "Karma Yoga" Vs 31:

Trans Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada:

"One who executes his duties according to My injunction and who follows this teaching faithfully, without envy, becomes free from the bondage of fruitive actions (karma)."

Firstly, I was referring to the Buddha, not Krishna. Secondly, I suspect many Buddhists and followers of the Gita would say you were free from the bondage of karma, but not from karma working itself out: the flow of karma remains, but it doesn't reach the vital part of you.

 

[lucius]

OK. My bad. But I thought that jiva was used less technically as 'living being', where atman was the underlying? It's been a while since I read it...

The Atman is seen as the One - it is the same in all, a kind of transpersonal soul if you like. The Jiva is the individual soul - not ego, but a higher level of individuality that underlies it.

 

[Obvious Child]

The Atman is seen as the One - it is the same in all, a kind of transpersonal soul if you like. The Jiva is the individual soul - not ego, but a higher level of individuality that underlies it.

OK. It was the former that I thought was being referred to as the impartial witness of karma. Surely one's individual character is involved in action?