[Buddha-l] Multi-cause vs single-cause

[Dave Gould]

I am surprised that a Buddhist community would generally reject that
miserliness is a cuase of poverty.  

It is possible to understand why this is so - faith in quotes from suttas
isn't needed.

One quality of Causation is "like produces like".  An action arising from a
particular state of mind will produce an experience of similar kind.  The
root of this experience originates in the mind itself although supportive or
circumstantial causes must all collect together before a particular root
cause experience manifests.   An example of the differecne between root and
circumstantial causes are the causes for an apple tree which are earth,
sunlight, water, air, and apple seed.  Guess which is the root cause?  But
even with the root cause, a seed will not produce an apple tree until all
the circumstantial causes or earth, water, sunlight and air also exit
together; and you will never get an apple tree when all you have is earth,
water, sunlight and air.  The arising of all required circumstantial causes
is what makes karma so unpredictable. 

So miserliness produces poverty - it is inescapable.  How?  

Miserliness is a feeling of scarcity - wealth is a feeling of abundance.
This is how fabulously wealthy people can be misers and poor people can be
generous - it is a state of mind.

An action arising from a state of mind dominated by scarcity will produce an
experinece of scarcity.  Similarly - an action arising from a state of mind
dominated by abundance will produce an experinece of abundance.  

You may have all the circumstantial causes for wealth, but it won't happen
if you haven't acted out of a feeling of abundance in the past.

-Dave Gould

-----Original Message-----
From: buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com
[mailto:buddha-l-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] On Behalf Of Wong Weng Fai
Sent: March 10, 2005 19:50
To: Buddhist discussion forum
Subject: [Buddha-l] Multi-cause vs single-cause


My first posting on this new forum...

A friend of mine brought up the following issue and I would like to get some
expert opinions. It is mentioned in many books (including say
Jayatilleke) that the Buddhist theory of causation is one of multiple
causes, multiple effects. Yet it is hard (impossible?) to find evidence of
this in the Pali or Mahayanist sutras. There it is almost always mentioned
that a single event caused a single consequence.

In fact, there is widely circulated booklet here called the "Cause and Fruit
Sutra" that says stuff like "you are dumb because you insulted the Buddha in
your past life", or "you are poor because you were a miser in your past
life." The Buddhist community here in general has rejected such teachings.
However, we seem to do find such claims in the suttas/sutras.
What is the sutta-basis for the alternative claim of multiple-cause,
multiple-effect?

W.F. Wong


_______________________________________________
buddha-l mailing list
buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l