[Buddha-l] H.H. The Dalai Lama on Stone and Karma

[Jim Peavler]

Thanks, Doc, for the short and clear differentiation and isolation of  
the pop version of karma. I was in the middle of struggling with my  
periodic rant: karma is impossible to predict or evaluate and is  
useless as a guide to life or a guide to judging others [which you  
shouldn't be doing anyway] because every effect has over a pentillion  
distinct causes and every cause [such as an act or a failure to act  
has at least a million tera-pentillion effects, most of them bad.

You managed to clear the whole thing up by simply pointing out that  
the view of karma in question is actually bullshit (which I believe  
the buddha pointed out some years ago,

Isn't some of this popular view of karma an imbedded fossil of Hinduism?


On Jun 14, 2008, at 10:34 AM, Richard Hayes wrote:
>
>> For example, physical beauty/non-beauty in this life, as a result of
>> "good" or "bad" karma in a previous life.
>
> That is pure bullshit. This is a feature of a vulgar understanding of
> karma entertained by ignorant people seeking legitimacy for their
> benighted Schadenfreude.
>
>> So, is there a "traditional/orthodox" view of causation/karma and  
>> then
>> a "popular" one? If so, what are their origins?
>
> Yes, exactly. The abhidharmic view has its origins in wisdom and  
> careful
> reflection, and the popular view has its roots in greed, hatred and
> delusion. In the popular view, karmic ripening is often seen as
> retribution, as getting "paid back" for something displeasing one has
> done. (Sharon Stone's comments, which are by now far better known than
> anything Bhuddhaghosa or Vasubandhu ever said on the subject, stem  
> from
> an angry feeling about the way the Chinese have dealt with Tibetans  
> and
> from a perhaps unacknowledged desire for revenge. Anger and desire for
> revenge are pretty unenlightened, I think you'll agree.)
>
> -- 
> Richard Hayes
> Department of Philosophy
> University of New Mexico