☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Hard Talk
Why Is The Law Of Karma Rejected?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Archived_member14" data-source="post: 179261" data-attributes="member: 586"><p>Ambarsaria ji,</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As I said before, it is pointless to try and indentify a particular cause and its corresponding result. Indeed with a little understanding it will be seen that this can’t quite be done. The point is to understand different experiences and come to see how some are of the nature of cause and some resultant. The relationship is therefore “understood”, and this is different from the mind that insists on evidence in order to be convinced. Besides, no amount of evidence can do anything in the way of reducing doubt since only with wisdom can doubt be lessened.</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>Understanding the nature of mental phenomena, particularly the complexity of conditionality, shows how unlikely it is that a deed will produce instantaneous results. Justice perhaps yes, but only from the standpoint of results seen as corresponding to the deed and not from some observers point of view. Otherwise however, the idea of justice and reward is the outcome of a wrong understanding about karma. </p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>But not beyond? Would there not be more number of deeds which will not bear fruit than those which do? So why even believe this “you sow so shall you reap” as a general principle? Why not believe in chaos or blind chance instead?</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>Only in one’s thoughts / imagination. This is the kind of thinking that has led some Buddhists to believe in for example, the idea of collective karma. It is the failure to understand that there is only one moment of consciousness at a time, either a cause or resultant. And that all that is ever involved and affected is within that one instance of experience which rises and falls away in an instant. </p><p></p><p>If I act with kindness towards you, I do it expecting some kind of response. But this is only in thinking and is fine as we live our lives in the conventional world. In reality however, what is experienced by you are momentary experiences such as, seeing and hearing, the rest is what thinking thinks about what is seen and the sounds heard. In other words what happens here involves mental and physical realities each conditioned variously, none of which is within anyone’s control. And no experience lasts long enough to make a connection with anything else outside of that momentary rising and falling away. More importantly, my deed is accumulative within my own moment to moment experience and yours within your own.</p><p></p><p>Interconnectedness is a wrong perception, a metaphysical nonsense held also by the Mahayana Buddhists.</p><p> </p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>You mean it makes no difference to the overall picture if you act with good-will or with ill-will and in both case, is of no more import than say, a leaf falling from a tree?</p><p></p><p>I think even during moments of great inspiration, your own actions follow a path that go against such thinking. When you act with moral restraint or with kindness towards someone, you do it with the knowledge that this is better than acting with hatred. The reference point at such times is not any idea about ‘interconnectedness’ or ‘ripple effect’, but something about the person in front of you. Indeed you’d push away any thoughts about what others might think or what happens later on, preferring instead to put all your heart into that one activity.</p><p></p><p>Also you’d care about a neighbor’s grandchild being sick more than you’d do on hearing about many sun systems collapsing. And why is this, because you know that a living being matters much more than any physical object. The only thing is that for some reason, you find pleasure in entertaining the particular metaphysical belief and will not give it up.</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>How does this influence your decision when confronting say, an old woman tripping and falling in front of you? And how would she react in the days to come, if you chose to ignore her and someone else came to help, or not?</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The stuff of dreams.</p><p>And while entertaining such thoughts, more ignorance, attachment and wrong understanding with regard to what is really going on from moment to moment accumulates. These ideas are just that, with a change of circumstance, other ideas will be entertained, but the realities mentioned are very real and their accumulations don’t just disappear.</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>The fascination and awe is in reality, attachment taking control supported by wrong understanding. Being devoid of a sense of urgency, it takes the attention away from the possibility of understanding this very attachment and wrong understanding as two different kinds of karma. </p><p></p><p>“Consequence of past lives”? No one is asking anyone to think this way with regard to what is “now”. </p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well according to a correct understanding of karma, there is no “self” who comes from a past life into the present one and continues to the next. Only conditions exist and roll on. The reference to a person as having past and future existence is only conventional, one made to distinguish different streams of consciousness / Five Aggregates and points to particular aspects of conditionality.</p><p></p><p>It is funny though, that you should judge karma as encouraging ego. Even when seen through self-view as the Hindus and Jains do, given that the concept points at the fact that human birth is extremely rare as compared to those in lower planes, what is there then to be proud about? </p><p></p><p>On the other hand, God impresses upon me as the ultimate ego. Whether one identifies with, or thinks oneself as only an insignificant part of, both involve comparing and identification which are expressions of conceit, therefore feeding ego. So the more successful one is in merging with, or loosing oneself into God, it is in fact ego that wins.</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>The process of aging begins the very moment one opens one’s eyes to the world, and all experience falls away constantly, why then perceive anything as beautiful? To do so is a perversion of perception and of view. Matter disintegrates is due to the very nature of matter itself and not some overarching controller. Likewise the phenomena of birth, aging and death, these lie in the fact of realities being *conditioned* and not because it was created and then destroyed by some greater power. The idea of a “super controller” is rooted in the individuals own unwillingness to see that there is no “self” who controls anything. </p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>Only the mental reality which thinks can give or not give two hoots about anything, and such thinking is a “conditioned” phenomena. Your creation is just an abstract idea and not a reality, physical or mental. Indeed if you consider it “unconditioned”, then it must follow that it can’t in fact think anything.</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>Of course the body is not you, dead or alive. And it is food for other creatures, both dead and alive.</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>Karma has very specific meanings as I cited before. Why do you have to insist on your own meaning and then try to dismiss it?</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>And your point is? That this is karmic effect and how karma should in fact be understood?</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The other day I went to this website called Reflections on Gurbani and this is what I found:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.gurbani.org/articles/webart40.htm" target="_blank">http://www.gurbani.org/articles/webart40.htm</a></p><p></p><p>One thing the author T. Singh, appears to be suggesting is similar to what I once suggested here to Harry ji (if I remember right). At the time I cited the Buddhist concept of the Five Cosmic Orders of which Karma is one, and suggested that perhaps Hukam can be seen as representing all these orders, if so, it should not be a problem then, to accept Karma as part of this Hukam.</p><p></p><p>What say you about this?</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>There is just the experience and the object of experience through the five senses and the mind to understand, one at a time. In fact, only these can be objects of direct understanding / wisdom. The rest are objects of thought hence completely useless when it comes to knowledge leading to enlightenment.</p><p></p><p>One day someone approached the Buddha with a question to which the Buddha’s responded by picking up some leaves from the ground and asked the man:</p><p></p><p>“Which do you think is more, the amount of leaves in my hand or the leaves in the forest out there?”</p><p></p><p>To this the man answered:</p><p></p><p>“The amount of leaves in your hands is very small. The leaves in the forest is much more.”</p><p></p><p>The Buddha then compared the leaves in his hand to what he taught his disciples and those in the forest to what he actually knew. He then said that what he taught is all that needs to be known in order to be liberated; the rest is not useful in this regard.</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p>You are of the view that different religions teach different aspects of a greater reality?</p><p>Well, this itself is a view and a possible source of inspiration to start a religion.</p><p></p><p>===</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, that is why I pointed this out; I expected you to have noted one aspect of mentality so that you will then begin to consider the possibility of the other as also being true. </p><p></p><p>The first is reference to accumulated tendency and *not* Karma. And you take this fact about accumulated tendency as a case of “sow so shall you reap” and this is nonsense. You are saying to the effect that anger now is cause and more anger later is the fruit. This is *not* the cause and effect which is karma and its result. It is formations and its nature to accumulate, which is one aspect of mentality but not Karma. Karma is intention and its result are particular class of consciousness known as resultants.</p><p></p><p>And as I said, my point was to show you that if you can believe that the one happens, then you should also accept the possibility of the other happening. And I also pointed out that there is difference between mentality and physicality and how unlike the one, the other does not decline but can accumulate without any bounds.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Archived_member14, post: 179261, member: 586"] Ambarsaria ji, As I said before, it is pointless to try and indentify a particular cause and its corresponding result. Indeed with a little understanding it will be seen that this can’t quite be done. The point is to understand different experiences and come to see how some are of the nature of cause and some resultant. The relationship is therefore “understood”, and this is different from the mind that insists on evidence in order to be convinced. Besides, no amount of evidence can do anything in the way of reducing doubt since only with wisdom can doubt be lessened. === Understanding the nature of mental phenomena, particularly the complexity of conditionality, shows how unlikely it is that a deed will produce instantaneous results. Justice perhaps yes, but only from the standpoint of results seen as corresponding to the deed and not from some observers point of view. Otherwise however, the idea of justice and reward is the outcome of a wrong understanding about karma. === But not beyond? Would there not be more number of deeds which will not bear fruit than those which do? So why even believe this “you sow so shall you reap” as a general principle? Why not believe in chaos or blind chance instead? === Only in one’s thoughts / imagination. This is the kind of thinking that has led some Buddhists to believe in for example, the idea of collective karma. It is the failure to understand that there is only one moment of consciousness at a time, either a cause or resultant. And that all that is ever involved and affected is within that one instance of experience which rises and falls away in an instant. If I act with kindness towards you, I do it expecting some kind of response. But this is only in thinking and is fine as we live our lives in the conventional world. In reality however, what is experienced by you are momentary experiences such as, seeing and hearing, the rest is what thinking thinks about what is seen and the sounds heard. In other words what happens here involves mental and physical realities each conditioned variously, none of which is within anyone’s control. And no experience lasts long enough to make a connection with anything else outside of that momentary rising and falling away. More importantly, my deed is accumulative within my own moment to moment experience and yours within your own. Interconnectedness is a wrong perception, a metaphysical nonsense held also by the Mahayana Buddhists. === You mean it makes no difference to the overall picture if you act with good-will or with ill-will and in both case, is of no more import than say, a leaf falling from a tree? I think even during moments of great inspiration, your own actions follow a path that go against such thinking. When you act with moral restraint or with kindness towards someone, you do it with the knowledge that this is better than acting with hatred. The reference point at such times is not any idea about ‘interconnectedness’ or ‘ripple effect’, but something about the person in front of you. Indeed you’d push away any thoughts about what others might think or what happens later on, preferring instead to put all your heart into that one activity. Also you’d care about a neighbor’s grandchild being sick more than you’d do on hearing about many sun systems collapsing. And why is this, because you know that a living being matters much more than any physical object. The only thing is that for some reason, you find pleasure in entertaining the particular metaphysical belief and will not give it up. === How does this influence your decision when confronting say, an old woman tripping and falling in front of you? And how would she react in the days to come, if you chose to ignore her and someone else came to help, or not? === The stuff of dreams. And while entertaining such thoughts, more ignorance, attachment and wrong understanding with regard to what is really going on from moment to moment accumulates. These ideas are just that, with a change of circumstance, other ideas will be entertained, but the realities mentioned are very real and their accumulations don’t just disappear. === The fascination and awe is in reality, attachment taking control supported by wrong understanding. Being devoid of a sense of urgency, it takes the attention away from the possibility of understanding this very attachment and wrong understanding as two different kinds of karma. “Consequence of past lives”? No one is asking anyone to think this way with regard to what is “now”. === Well according to a correct understanding of karma, there is no “self” who comes from a past life into the present one and continues to the next. Only conditions exist and roll on. The reference to a person as having past and future existence is only conventional, one made to distinguish different streams of consciousness / Five Aggregates and points to particular aspects of conditionality. It is funny though, that you should judge karma as encouraging ego. Even when seen through self-view as the Hindus and Jains do, given that the concept points at the fact that human birth is extremely rare as compared to those in lower planes, what is there then to be proud about? On the other hand, God impresses upon me as the ultimate ego. Whether one identifies with, or thinks oneself as only an insignificant part of, both involve comparing and identification which are expressions of conceit, therefore feeding ego. So the more successful one is in merging with, or loosing oneself into God, it is in fact ego that wins. === The process of aging begins the very moment one opens one’s eyes to the world, and all experience falls away constantly, why then perceive anything as beautiful? To do so is a perversion of perception and of view. Matter disintegrates is due to the very nature of matter itself and not some overarching controller. Likewise the phenomena of birth, aging and death, these lie in the fact of realities being *conditioned* and not because it was created and then destroyed by some greater power. The idea of a “super controller” is rooted in the individuals own unwillingness to see that there is no “self” who controls anything. === Only the mental reality which thinks can give or not give two hoots about anything, and such thinking is a “conditioned” phenomena. Your creation is just an abstract idea and not a reality, physical or mental. Indeed if you consider it “unconditioned”, then it must follow that it can’t in fact think anything. === Of course the body is not you, dead or alive. And it is food for other creatures, both dead and alive. === Karma has very specific meanings as I cited before. Why do you have to insist on your own meaning and then try to dismiss it? === And your point is? That this is karmic effect and how karma should in fact be understood? === The other day I went to this website called Reflections on Gurbani and this is what I found: [url]http://www.gurbani.org/articles/webart40.htm[/url] One thing the author T. Singh, appears to be suggesting is similar to what I once suggested here to Harry ji (if I remember right). At the time I cited the Buddhist concept of the Five Cosmic Orders of which Karma is one, and suggested that perhaps Hukam can be seen as representing all these orders, if so, it should not be a problem then, to accept Karma as part of this Hukam. What say you about this? === There is just the experience and the object of experience through the five senses and the mind to understand, one at a time. In fact, only these can be objects of direct understanding / wisdom. The rest are objects of thought hence completely useless when it comes to knowledge leading to enlightenment. One day someone approached the Buddha with a question to which the Buddha’s responded by picking up some leaves from the ground and asked the man: “Which do you think is more, the amount of leaves in my hand or the leaves in the forest out there?” To this the man answered: “The amount of leaves in your hands is very small. The leaves in the forest is much more.” The Buddha then compared the leaves in his hand to what he taught his disciples and those in the forest to what he actually knew. He then said that what he taught is all that needs to be known in order to be liberated; the rest is not useful in this regard. === You are of the view that different religions teach different aspects of a greater reality? Well, this itself is a view and a possible source of inspiration to start a religion. === Well, that is why I pointed this out; I expected you to have noted one aspect of mentality so that you will then begin to consider the possibility of the other as also being true. The first is reference to accumulated tendency and *not* Karma. And you take this fact about accumulated tendency as a case of “sow so shall you reap” and this is nonsense. You are saying to the effect that anger now is cause and more anger later is the fruit. This is *not* the cause and effect which is karma and its result. It is formations and its nature to accumulate, which is one aspect of mentality but not Karma. Karma is intention and its result are particular class of consciousness known as resultants. And as I said, my point was to show you that if you can believe that the one happens, then you should also accept the possibility of the other happening. And I also pointed out that there is difference between mentality and physicality and how unlike the one, the other does not decline but can accumulate without any bounds. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Hard Talk
Why Is The Law Of Karma Rejected?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top