[Buddha-l] RE: Article of possible interest--correction

[curt]

Erik Hoogcarspel wrote:

> We have obviously a person here who has learned to read and to listen, 
> but never learned to think and has a very peculiar view of the world. 
> I wonder if Rche would be able to pass a highschoolexam. Still he 
> imposes his quotes of wholy book on the mass of believers. Reminds me 
> of some politicians and of course the Pope.
>
>
It could also be that Rinpoche is dumming things down and presenting 
only a very very very rough "first order approximation" of karma. While 
this might not be the case with this particular Rinpoche - I think it is 
often true that Buddhist teachers assume that until a person understands 
"the basics" - that if you do bad stuff you will create suffering for 
yourself and others - then there is no point in moving on to the 
subtleties. And I think there's a lot of truth to that.

The basic idea that how we choose to act matters, and that we should be 
guided by whatever limited understanding we have about the results of 
our actions, is painfully obvious but far from trivial. Ideas about "how 
karma works" are clumsy but necessary attempts to apply this very 
general principle to the messy business of actually living our lives. 
That doesn't excuse some of the preposterous (not to mention morally 
bankrupt) crap that passes for "theories about karma" - but it is 
important to remember that there is something more to it than what 
appears on the surface.

Here is something that T.H. Huxley had to say on the matter:

"We live in a world which is full of misery and ignorance, and the plain 
duty of each and all of us is to by to make the little corner he can 
influence somewhat less miserable and somewhat less ignorant than it was 
before he entered it. To do this effectually it is necessary to be fully 
possessed of only two beliefs: the first, that the order of Nature is 
ascertainable by our faculties to an extent which is practically 
unlimited; the second, that our volition counts for something as a 
condition of the course of events."
 From "On the physical basis of life" ( 
http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE1/PhysB.html )

In the above quote Huxley makes the same mistake that all of the fools 
quoted by Victoria (and the others who have been quoted in this thread) 
make: they are far too optimistic about the extent to which "the order 
of Nature is ascertainable to our faculties." But surely this is better 
than that one word philosophy: "whatever".

Of course all of this begs the real question: why are poor people poor, 
enslaved people enslaved, etc? Those who wish to pooh-pooh the "they 
deserve it because of bad karma from past lives" theory should be ready 
to provide some explanation of their own, or else it is merely an 
exercise in darkness cursing.

Lastly - teachers often make rather outlandish exaggerations when they 
are trying to make a point (on the assumption that those who already 
possess a more subtle understanding will not be confused). I attended a 
retreat last weekend led by a teacher who insisted that you can "burn up 
all of your karma" by just chanting "om" one time. However, she also 
strongly encouraged all of her students to meditate for 2 hours every 
day, one hour of which should ideally be between 3:30 and 4:30 am 
("brahmi muhurta") - but by all means prior to 6 am! She further said 
that you need to bathe prior to meditating and that if you get up at 
3:15 am, bathe and then meditate for an hour during brahmi muhurta - you 
cannot then go back to bed!

- Curt