Dalai lama on loving your enemy, and negative karma.

[delora]

Hi there,

Was wondering what ppl thought of this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXaYp7nwWXM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I was particularly confused what the Dalai Lama meant of "ripening of negative karma" just after 2 mins. Is he interpreting karma as something other than intentional action?

Also - I have my doubts about what he is saying. Whilst I would love to believe him, you only have to look at countries that have been plundered by developed nations, and see the state they're currently in, eg the state of the native americans in america, or most african nations, the chinese after british occupancy etc. I'm left to think that the victims are nearly always worse off than the abuser in the long run. Even though I would love to believe the opposite.

[delora]

also, if the Dalai Lama is correct, in saying that people harm others out of ignorance - can these ppl then truly be considered responsible for their actions?

[Laurens]

Perhaps someone should ask him about the harm that went on in Tibet pre-Chinese invasion. Is the Dalai Lama responsible for this? Seeing as he is supposedly the same God-king reborn over and over, is he responsible for:


People walking around in shackles?


Slave labour?


Amputations?

What bad karma does he get for this?

[Hanzze]

_/\_

[Dan74]

To add to Hanzze's comment above, I think the Dalai Lama was simply encouraging people to cultivate compassion rather than ill-will, which is exactly what the Buddha has taught.

The reason he gave to do with karma is simply that the people committing negative actions will have to reap karmic consequences for their intentions and actions. Again, as far as I can tell, this is completely in line with the Buddha's teaching. "He who lives by the sword, shall die by the sword." Or he who cultivates unwholesome negative mindstates of ill-will and violence, suffers from ill-will and violence. So recognizing the negative consequences the aggressor is going to suffer (and suffers already) we feel compassion for him/her/

As Hanzze said it is in some ways harder on the aggressor who suffers inside, which is the hardest suffering to take.

[cooran]

Hello Delora,

It may be worth your reading:

Kamma and its fruit by Nyanaponika Thera
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... fruit.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good, Evil and Beyond – Kamma in the Buddha’s Teaching ~ Ven. Payutto
http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Misunderstandings of the Law of Kamma
http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma6.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta
Chris

[ground]

I was particularly confused what the Dalai Lama meant of "ripening of negative karma" just after 2 mins. Is he interpreting karma as something other than intentional action?

No. He is interpreting karma to be action. Actually he uses action and karma as synonyms.
You seem to have gotten something wrong.
"ripening of negative karma" is no different from "ripening of negative action"

Kind regards

[Hanzze]

_/\_

[Annapurna]

Hi there,

Was wondering what ppl thought of this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXaYp7nwWXM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I was particularly confused what the Dalai Lama meant of "ripening of negative karma" just after 2 mins. Is he interpreting karma as something other than intentional action?

Also - I have my doubts about what he is saying. Whilst I would love to believe him, you only have to look at countries that have been plundered by developed nations, and see the state they're currently in, eg the state of the native americans in america, or most african nations, the chinese after british occupancy etc. I'm left to think that the victims are nearly always worse off than the abuser in the long run. Even though I would love to believe the opposite.

I'm in agreement with what he says, or better, with what I understood of it.

I have 2 thoughts for you:

Post your question again in our sister forum Dharmawheel, they can give you more qualified answers than Theravadins.

victims are nearly always worse off than the abuser in the long run.

When you say this, you are looking at the present crowd of beings, that have been born into this sad situation due to their kamma. But if they live a virtuous life, after they pass away, things will get a new arrangement...( I pray it doesn't get confused with Hindu thoughts again, so I will support my argument with the shorter exposition of kamma in MN 135, so disagree with the Buddha if you must)

8. "But here some woman or man is not one who harms beings with his hands, or with clods, or with sticks, or with knives. Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a happy destination... If instead he comes to the human state, he is healthy wherever he is reborn. This is the way that leads to health, that is to say, not to be one who harms beings with his hands or with clods or with sticks or with knives.

The whole suttha can be read here:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Sanghamitta]

Hi there,

Was wondering what ppl thought of this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXaYp7nwWXM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I was particularly confused what the Dalai Lama meant of "ripening of negative karma" just after 2 mins. Is he interpreting karma as something other than intentional action?

Also - I have my doubts about what he is saying. Whilst I would love to believe him, you only have to look at countries that have been plundered by developed nations, and see the state they're currently in, eg the state of the native americans in america, or most african nations, the chinese after british occupancy etc. I'm left to think that the victims are nearly always worse off than the abuser in the long run. Even though I would love to believe the opposite.

How long is the long run ? What consitutes " worse off" ?
You seem to be asking Delora about collective kamma. I am unsure whether the concept of collective kamma forms part of the view of the Vajrayana to which the D.L. belongs. Certainly in the Theravada it is not a view that is widely held.
Also at various points The Buddha is very clear that we cant work backwards and deduce that an individual's present situation is due to this or that kamma ripening. he says that these issues are complex to the point of imponderability. All we can do is take what is arising now. And then turn the light of awareness on that.

[Sanghamitta]

Hello Delora,

It may be worth your reading:

Kamma and its fruit by Nyanaponika Thera
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... fruit.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good, Evil and Beyond – Kamma in the Buddha’s Teaching ~ Ven. Payutto
http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Misunderstandings of the Law of Kamma
http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/kamma6.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta
Chris

Thanks for those Chris.
in my view the third excerpt " Misunderstandings Of The Law Of Kamma " is particularly noteworthy

[delora]

Chris - thanks for your reading recommendations.

I got the timing wrong. With regard to negative karma I was talking about his comments at 1:50. "victims side... already ripening negative karma.. or negative action.. previous negative action". He implies to say that those who are experiencing the pain or suffering, are doing so because of previous negative actions or karma. And those that are inflicting it, will experience negative consequences in the future. So in a way, the victims are better off than the persecutors, at least on a relational time scale of suffering.

sanghamitta - i think this might be what you were referring to as "collective karma"? I think it's basically the idea that people experience suffering, because of previous negative actions done by them. And I mean suffering that seems beyond their control. Like natural disasters, birth deformities, persecution etc. It seemed that the Dalai lama was forwarding this view, and I wanted to know if I was correct. I also assume the buddha is solely talking about interpreting the past relating specifically to kamma - and not interpreting the past as historians do. Though i assume he takes the broad view that wholesome actions lead to wholesome outcomes.

Annapurna - thanks for the suggestion. I was unaware of dharmawheel's existence.

any input welcome

[Sanghamitta]

I am not being evasive when i say Delora that I cant comment on the Dalai Lamas view . There may well be aspects of the Vajrayana view which differ from that of the Theravada. I am a student of the latter. The analogy would be a bit like asking a protestant to comment on a view expressed by the Pope...I am not stating that the Vajrayana view differs from the Theravadin view in this regard. i simply do not know.
Certainly in the Pali canon which forms the underpinning basis of Theravadin thought the Buddha cautions in a number of places against ascribing particular conditions to karma vipaka ( the fruits of action ) in any simple one to one way. He also cautions against too much speculation concerning specific causes and effects.



Valerie.