Collective karma

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28558
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Malcolm » Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:22 am

Coëmgenu wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:14 am
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 3:33 pm
Grigoris wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 7:48 am
Doesn't conditioning imply/require ignorance? Conditioned means dependently arisen and dependent arising has ignorance as it's lynch pin.
Simply put, no. Being conditioned is not commensurate with being contaminated. For example, path dharmas are conditioned, but they are pure.

The dependent origination you describe is the dependent origination of bondage. But there is also a dependent origination of freedom. Conditioned by knowledge, merit arises; conditioned by merit, etc.
This looks to slightly resemble the "dependent cessation" of sravakayana.

I don't think it can be the "same thing", because that would imply that bodhisattvas are headed the way of arhats when they realize it, but it is at least vaguely similar, inasmuch as "two modalities", if we can forgive that dreadful tirthika language, are being explored of DO.
There is only one kind of liberation.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 7064
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Collective karma

Post by Astus » Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:07 am

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 3:36 pm
Yes, this is what we mean when we say that one can have a direct perception of another's mind.
In that case, knowing other's mind is not a counter-example to all experiences being within the scope of individual karma.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1745
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Vasana » Mon Apr 23, 2018 9:34 am

Here is a segment from Distinguishing Phenomena from Their Intrinsic Nature: Maitreya's Dharmadharmatavibhanga with Commentaries by Khenpo Shenga and Ju Mipham. To me it seems to reconcile the points made in this thread. Saying that, I don't fully grasp the meaning of sentient beings mutually causing each other as a 'ruling condition' as it seems to state below.
A Summary of Shared and Unshared Abodes

Concerning the first, the treatise states:

  • That which cycles and where the cycling takes place
    Abide throughout as the constituents
    Of sentient beings and their environment.
    The constituents of the environment appear shared
    And are, as such, shared awareness.
    The constituents of sentient beings
    Are shared, but also unshared.

    The phenomena of cyclic existence are that which cycles and where the cycling takes place. These abide pervasively throughout as the constituents of sentient beings and their environment. The constituents of the environment appear as a shared experience and are, as such, the shared appearances of awareness. They are shared awareness because the consciousness associated with such appearances arises within the individual mind streams of all sentient beings. The constituents of sentient beings are shared, but also unshared.


The constituents of sentient beings are that which cycles, while the constituents of the environment are the context within which this continuous cycling takes place in the form of rebirth. The world of sentient beings and the world of the environment are known as the abodes throughout which beings cycle. Aside from these two—the supported constituents of sentient beings and the constituents of the environment that is their support—there is no other abode of cyclic existence whatsoever.
"Of these," one may wonder, 'What is shared and what is not?"

The constituents of the world's environment are referred to as "shared abodes" insofar as they appear collectively to those sentient beings whose active habitual tendencies correspond with one another and who have corresponding perceptions, or consciousnesses. The phenomena that comprise the constituents of sentient beings, however, are both shared and not shared.

The second section contains explanations of (1) shared abodes and (2) those that are not shared.

SHARED ABODES

Concerning the first of these, the treatise states:

  • Furthermore, birth, conventions,
    Support, subjugation, benefit, harm,
    Good qualities, and flaws
    Mutually cause one another by ruling.
    They are, therefore, shared.

    Furthermore, birth, looking and other conventions, the support or subjugation enacted by others, benefiting and harming others, learning and other good qualities, and flaws like desire are present in individual mind streams. These factors mutually cause one another by being the ruling conditions for one another. They are, therefore, classified as constituents of sentient beings that are shared.


The phenomena categorised as the constituents of sentient beings can be classified as follows: (1) womb birth, (2) perceptible physical and verbal conventions, (3) supporting or (4) subjugating another, (5) benefiting, (6) harming, (7) the arising of the positive qualities associated with learning and other such factors that depend upon another and (8) the occurrence of flaws like desire. For a consciousness that manifests in this manner to occur, sentient beings must serve as the ruling conditions for one another and, thereby, mutually cause one another. For this reason they are termed "shared appearances." Birth, for example, occurs as a shared experience insofar as one's karma functions as the cause and the seeds of one's parents as the simultaneous conditions. This shared cause, in turn, results in a body born from the womb coming into existence. Likewise, shared conventions involve observing and communicating with others, as well as other such activities that are instigated by another individual's physical or verbal communication. This is the case when one person cares for another in either a spiritual or material sense; defeats them in an argument, in combat, or otherwise; helps them by protecting them from something they are afraid of or benefiting them in another way; harms them by beating them or through some other form of violence; develops positive qualities through study; or creates faults by teaching negative views, arousing desire, and so on.

Thus, situations where one individual acts as the ruling condition and the phenomena of another person's mind stream function as the primary cause are referred to as "shared" from the perspective of there being a single shared result. Conventionally these results are brought about by a collection of causes and conditions. In actuality, however, using the term "ruling cause" also indicates that there are no collectively experienced external objects. The reason, here, is that there are no external objects to function as observed conditions aside from consciousness, nor are the external environment or other seemingly shared appearances anything more than the objective aspect of the inner consciousness.
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28558
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Malcolm » Mon Apr 23, 2018 12:10 pm

Astus wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:07 am
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 3:36 pm
Yes, this is what we mean when we say that one can have a direct perception of another's mind.
In that case, knowing other's mind is not a counter-example to all experiences being within the scope of individual karma.
Astus, I was not responding to this question.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 7064
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Collective karma

Post by Astus » Mon Apr 23, 2018 12:47 pm

Vasana wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 9:34 am
To me it seems to reconcile the points made in this thread.
A Summary of Shared and Unshared Abodes
there are no external objects to function as observed conditions aside from consciousness, nor are the external environment or other seemingly shared appearances anything more than the objective aspect of the inner consciousness.
Good catch. The difference is that in this topic it is through the way karma is defined that it can be deduced - at least in my interpretation - that experiences are exclusively personal as a consequence of karma being personal.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28558
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Malcolm » Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:19 pm

Vasana wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 9:34 am
Here is a segment from Distinguishing Phenomena from Their Intrinsic Nature: Maitreya's Dharmadharmatavibhanga with Commentaries by Khenpo Shenga and Ju Mipham. To me it seems to reconcile the points made in this thread. Saying that, I don't fully grasp the meaning of sentient beings mutually causing each other as a 'ruling condition' as it seems to state below.
This is the dominant condition (adhipati pratyaya) which is identical to karana hetu, the universal cause -- that is, all phenomenon are the cause of every other phenomena other than itself. Refer to the second chapter of the Kosha.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 18021
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Collective karma

Post by Grigoris » Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:32 pm

Astus wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 12:47 pm
Vasana wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 9:34 am
To me it seems to reconcile the points made in this thread.
A Summary of Shared and Unshared Abodes
there are no external objects to function as observed conditions aside from consciousness, nor are the external environment or other seemingly shared appearances anything more than the objective aspect of the inner consciousness.
Good catch. The difference is that in this topic it is through the way karma is defined that it can be deduced - at least in my interpretation - that experiences are exclusively personal as a consequence of karma being personal.
I think that the major mistake you are making is in reifying the personal/subjective. You seem quite happy to point to the emptiness of everything, except yourself. You grasp at the importance of your subjective experience but do not seem to recognise that ultimately this is empty too.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 7064
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Collective karma

Post by Astus » Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:10 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:32 pm
I think that the major mistake you are making is in reifying the personal/subjective. You seem quite happy to point to the emptiness of everything, except yourself. You grasp at the importance of your subjective experience but do not seem to recognise that ultimately this is empty too.
So far it's been only about the concepts of collective and then shared karma. I might note here that I have not gone into discussing how they are empty, rather how those ideas are contrary to individual karma. As for the nature of individual karma, it is of course fictional.

"There is no doer of a deed
Or one who reaps the deed’s result;
Phenomena alone flow on—
No other view than this is right."

(Visuddhimagga 19.20)
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1745
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Vasana » Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:24 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:19 pm
Vasana wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 9:34 am
Here is a segment from Distinguishing Phenomena from Their Intrinsic Nature: Maitreya's Dharmadharmatavibhanga with Commentaries by Khenpo Shenga and Ju Mipham. To me it seems to reconcile the points made in this thread. Saying that, I don't fully grasp the meaning of sentient beings mutually causing each other as a 'ruling condition' as it seems to state below.
This is the dominant condition (adhipati pratyaya) which is identical to karana hetu, the universal cause -- that is, all phenomenon are the cause of every other phenomena other than itself. Refer to the second chapter of the Kosha.
Thanks. What is the best translation or starting point for the Kosha?
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1745
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Vasana » Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:30 pm

Astus wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:10 pm
As for the nature of individual karma, it is of course fictional.

"There is no doer of a deed
Or one who reaps the deed’s result;
Phenomena alone flow on—
No other view than this is right."

(Visuddhimagga 19.20)
*2-truths alarm bells ring*

Individual karma may ultimately be fictional but it's still conventionally functional as the ongoing flow of the Twelve Nidānas and the serial linking of the aggregates between lives.
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

User avatar
cloudburst
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: Collective karma

Post by cloudburst » Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:52 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 3:36 pm
"The cognition in which there is no conceptual construction is perception."
(Dignaga: Pratyaksapariccheda, in Dignaga on Perception, p 25, tr Hattori)
can you clarify please: what is this "conceptual construction?"
all conceptual, ie non-direct perceptions must have them, is there there a conceptual construction that is not a don spyi?

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28558
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Malcolm » Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:56 pm

cloudburst wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:52 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 3:36 pm
"The cognition in which there is no conceptual construction is perception."
(Dignaga: Pratyaksapariccheda, in Dignaga on Perception, p 25, tr Hattori)
can you clarify please: what is this "conceptual construction?"
all conceptual, ie non-direct perceptions must have them, is there there a conceptual construction that is not a don spyi?
You will have to ask Astus, he cited this passage, not me.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

Norwegian
Posts: 1458
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: Collective karma

Post by Norwegian » Mon Apr 23, 2018 5:35 pm

Vasana wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:24 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:19 pm
Vasana wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 9:34 am
Here is a segment from Distinguishing Phenomena from Their Intrinsic Nature: Maitreya's Dharmadharmatavibhanga with Commentaries by Khenpo Shenga and Ju Mipham. To me it seems to reconcile the points made in this thread. Saying that, I don't fully grasp the meaning of sentient beings mutually causing each other as a 'ruling condition' as it seems to state below.
This is the dominant condition (adhipati pratyaya) which is identical to karana hetu, the universal cause -- that is, all phenomenon are the cause of every other phenomena other than itself. Refer to the second chapter of the Kosha.
Thanks. What is the best translation or starting point for the Kosha?
There are, as far as I know, only two full translations of the Abhidharmakosha (in English).

1. 4 volume set, based on Poussin's French translation, updated/annotated English translation by Gelong Lodrö Sangpo. This is also the latest publication, from 2012: https://www.amazon.com/dp/8120836073/

2. Pruden's English translation from Poussin's original French, published 1990:
- Paperback:
Vol. 1: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0875730078/
Vol. 2: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0875730086/
Vol. 3: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0875730094/
Vol. 4: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0875730108/

- Hardcover:
4 volume set: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0895819139/

User avatar
cloudburst
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: Collective karma

Post by cloudburst » Mon Apr 23, 2018 5:42 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:56 pm
cloudburst wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:52 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 3:36 pm
"The cognition in which there is no conceptual construction is perception."
(Dignaga: Pratyaksapariccheda, in Dignaga on Perception, p 25, tr Hattori)
can you clarify please: what is this "conceptual construction?"
all conceptual, ie non-direct perceptions must have them, is there there a conceptual construction that is not a don spyi?
You will have to ask Astus, he cited this passage, not me.
I see what you are saying.

I am interested in your perspective vis a vis a thread I was just reading regarding dzogchen. Maybe I can take up that thread later, but in brief it seems you accept that everything below path of seeing is conceptual, an inference.

I am wondering if your understanding is that this necessarily means that there is a don spyi or if there is a different type of object of a conceptual mind

thanks

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28558
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Malcolm » Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:08 pm

cloudburst wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 5:42 pm
I am interested in your perspective vis a vis a thread I was just reading regarding dzogchen. Maybe I can take up that thread later, but in brief it seems you accept that everything below path of seeing is conceptual, an inference.
I assume by everything you mean the realization of emptiness. If so, yes, below the path of seeing the ultimate truth of things is an inferential ultimate only. This also applies to Dzogchen and has been discussed by Khenpo Ngachung among others.

I am wondering if your understanding is that this necessarily means that there is a don spyi or if there is a different type of object of a conceptual mind
Can emptiness be a samanyārtha? This is the big argument between Sakya and Gelug. In the former, emptiness below the path of seeing is an inferential exclusion devoid of an object. It seems in Gelug, it takes the form of a universal, and is a conceptual object.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
cloudburst
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: Collective karma

Post by cloudburst » Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:17 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:08 pm
I assume by everything you mean the realization of emptiness.

yes, that was sloppily put.

Can emptiness be a samanyārtha? This is the big argument between Sakya and Gelug. In the former, emptiness below the path of seeing is an inferential exclusion devoid of an object. It seems in Gelug, it takes the form of a universal, and is a conceptual object.
intriguing, thanks.
Any Nyingmas weighing in on this? What about the (non-Sakya) Dzogchen perspective?

User avatar
cloudburst
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: Collective karma

Post by cloudburst » Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:22 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:08 pm
I assume by everything you mean the realization of emptiness. If so, yes, below the path of seeing the ultimate truth of things is an inferential ultimate only. This also applies to Dzogchen and has been discussed by Khenpo Ngachung among others.
yes, that was sloppily put, I am typing in a rush

I am wondering if your understanding is that this necessarily means that there is a don spyi or if there is a different type of object of a conceptual mind
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:08 pm
Can emptiness be a samanyārtha? This is the big argument between Sakya and Gelug. In the former, emptiness below the path of seeing is an inferential exclusion devoid of an object. It seems in Gelug, it takes the form of a universal, and is a conceptual object.
intriguing, thanks.

I'll admit, "an inferential exclusion devoid of an object" does sound a little Hashang-y to my Gelug ear ... Do you know of any Nyingma and/or (non-Sakya) Dzogchen pov's on the matter?

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28558
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Malcolm » Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:27 pm

cloudburst wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:22 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:08 pm
I assume by everything you mean the realization of emptiness. If so, yes, below the path of seeing the ultimate truth of things is an inferential ultimate only. This also applies to Dzogchen and has been discussed by Khenpo Ngachung among others.
yes, that was sloppily put, I am typing in a rush

I am wondering if your understanding is that this necessarily means that there is a don spyi or if there is a different type of object of a conceptual mind
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:08 pm
Can emptiness be a samanyārtha? This is the big argument between Sakya and Gelug. In the former, emptiness below the path of seeing is an inferential exclusion devoid of an object. It seems in Gelug, it takes the form of a universal, and is a conceptual object.
intriguing, thanks.

I'll admit, "an inferential exclusion devoid of an object" does sound a little Hashang-y to my Gelug ear ... Do you know of any Nyingma and/or (non-Sakya) Dzogchen pov's on the matter?
What it means is that "emptiness" below the path of seeing is a result of analysis via the four extremes. Since four extremes are not valid for entities in the relative, there is nothing in the ultimate that exists by way of the four extremes either.

On this point, there is no difference between Sakya and Nyingma.

It is summarized by Śantideva in this way (paraphrase) "when neither an entity nor a nonentity remain before the mind, there being no other alternative, the mind is pacified."

The misrepresented Hashang means trying to have no thoughts.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 7064
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Collective karma

Post by Astus » Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:41 pm

Vasana wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:30 pm
*2-truths alarm bells ring*
Individual karma may ultimately be fictional but it's still conventionally functional as the ongoing flow of the Twelve Nidānas and the serial linking of the aggregates between lives.
Why ring?

"Phenomena alone flow on"
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1745
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Collective karma

Post by Vasana » Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:03 pm

Astus wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:41 pm
Vasana wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 3:30 pm
*2-truths alarm bells ring*
Individual karma may ultimately be fictional but it's still conventionally functional as the ongoing flow of the Twelve Nidānas and the serial linking of the aggregates between lives.
Why ring?

"Phenomena alone flow on"
Mostly out of habit....and fear that unsuspecting eyes can and often do mistake emptiness of self to mean that an experience of 'my' suffering won't be grasped at even if the aggregated basis is inconstant.
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: belindah, javier.espinoza.t, Wayfarer and 35 guests