[Buddha-l] Re: Buddhist pacifism

[Tom Troughton]

On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 19:30:50 -0600, Richard P. Hayes wrote:

>> Thirdly, a lot of writers on Buddhism (and Hinduism) seem to use "karma" as
>> the term for the result of action.  I've been taught that karma was
>> "action".  It is the term for the act, the doing, and not the term for the
>> result of the action.  The result is "karma vipaka", the fruits of karma.
>
>Yes, that is correct. 

I think there is a distinction between the karma, which is accumulated
through action, and the ripening of karma, which occurs later when that
'seed' encounters the proper conditions to 'ripen'. Thus karma is not
simply intention, nor simply act, but a link in an ongoing chain of
causal consequences that necessarly includes intention, grasping,
name-and-form, etc. Check for the 12 Dependently Related Links. Some [?
later ?] thinkers also interpret this chain in other ways than a
strictly causal explanation of the arising of various experiences -
interdependence and so forth.

The ripening of karma consists of the end of a particular causal chain,
and thus it is an opportunity for liberation. However karma does not
simply mean 'action'. Rather it seems to be the particular power of an
intentional action to generate 'experience'. Generally speaking, this
experience always has a component of suffering associated with it, so
karma is always associated with suffering. 'Good' karma produces only a
temporary state of affairs, and generally 'temporary' is synonymous
(sp?) with 'suffering'.

Best wishes,

Tom