What inherits the Karma if there is Anatta?

[Wizard in the Forest]

I know this has probably been asked a dozen times, but I would like Sutta references where the Buddha clearly answers this question.

But I am aware this is a paradox, and so then who inherits the karma is there is no soul/atta?

[bodom]

I would like Sutta references where the Buddha clearly answers this question.

He doesn't.

One of the first stumbling blocks that Westerners often encounter when they learn about Buddhism is the teaching on anatta, often translated as no-self. This teaching is a stumbling block for two reasons. First, the idea of there being no self doesn't fit well with other Buddhist teachings, such as the doctrine of kamma and rebirth: If there's no self, what experiences the results of kamma and takes rebirth? Second, it doesn't fit well with our own Judeo-Christian background, which assumes the existence of an eternal soul or self as a basic presupposition: If there's no self, what's the purpose of a spiritual life? Many books try to answer these questions, but if you look at the Pali canon — the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings — you won't find them addressed at all.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... self2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Wizard in the Forest]

If that is so, what do you recommend that clears this inconsistency between karma, rebirth, and anatta?

[m0rl0ck]

If that is so, what do you recommend that clears this inconsistency between karma, rebirth, and anatta?

Practice. As in meditation practice.

[Sanghamitta]

The only way in fact. If we could figure this stuff out by logic and deduction we wouldnt need Buddhas. But we cant.

[Wizard in the Forest]

I always thought perhaps conditioned arising explains it, but is Karma a property or effect of conditioned arising rather than actually being a literal result of volitional actions? I mean volitional actions are already affected by conditional arising so that's why it came to me, but I wasn't sure and I wanted to see if anyone else could explain it in a clear way.

[Kenshou]

I've always thought about it like this: The person I will be in a week (using "person" conventionally, keeping in mind anatta and all) is not the same as the person I am now, yet the actions I take now can likely have an impact "me" later. There is no constant essence of "me" either in the present, future, or inbetween, but since those two snapshots in time are results of the same conditioning process, the conditions set in place by an earlier one impact the other. So in short, I'd guess it's the same "process" that inherits kamma, kamma itself being part of the process. Then again I can't find a sutta to confirm this, just what makes sense to me.

[mikenz66]

Hi WITF,

I always thought perhaps conditioned arising explains it, but is Karma a property or effect of conditioned arising rather than actually being a literal result of volitional actions? I mean volitional actions are already affected by conditional arising so that's why it came to me, but I wasn't sure and I wanted to see if anyone else could explain it in a clear way.

As has already been observed, it's going to be hard to get an "easy explanation". However, one of the classic Sutta references is:
Majjhima Nikaya 38
Maha-tanha-asankhaya Sutta
The Major Discourse on the Destruction of Craving
http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/M ... /mn-38.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Then the Blessed One addressed a certain bhikkhu: Come! Bhikkhu, address the bhikkhu Saati in my words, tell that the Teacher wants him That bhikkhu agreed and approached the bhikkhu Saati and said the Blessed One wants you. Bhikkhu Saati said yes friend and approached the Blessed One, worshipped and sat on a side. Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhu Saati: Saati, is it true, that such an evil view has arisen to you. ‘As I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else’.

Yes, venerable sir, as I know the Teaching of the Blessed One, this consciousness transmigrates through existences, not anything else. Saati, how is that consciousness? Venerable sir, this uttering and feeling one, that reaps the results of actions good and evil done here and there. Foolish man, to whom do you know me having preached this Teaching. Haven’t I told, in various ways that consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet, you foolish man, because of your wrong grasp, blame me, destroy yourself, and accumulate much demerit and that will be for your undoing and unpleasantness for a long time.

Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, Bhikkhus, what do you think, shouldn’t this bhikkhu Saati, son of a fisherman be chastised from this dispensation of the Teaching. What is good, venerable sir, why shouldn’t we? When this was said, the bhikkhu Saati became silent, confused, with drooping body and face turned down, sat down unable to reply. Then the Blessed One knowing that bhikkhu Saati son of a fisherman has become silent, confused, was unable to reply. Said thus to him. Foolish man you will be pointed out with your evil view. Now I am going to question the bhikkhus on this. Then the Blessed One, addressed the bhikkhus: Bhikkhus, do you too know this Teaching, wrongly grasped by the bhikkhu Saati the son of a fisherman.

By that he blames me. Destroys himself, and accumulates much unpleasantness. No, venerable sir. In various ways we are told, that consciousness arises dependently. Without a cause there is no arising of consciousness. Bhikkhus, it is good, you know the Teaching preached by me. In various ways I have preached that consciousness arises dependently. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet, this bhikkhu Saati son of a fisherman, grasping this wrong view blames me and destroys himself, and accumulates much demerit. It will be for his undoing and unpleasantness for a long time.

Mike

[cooran]

Hello Wizard,

Worth reading and contemplating:

Anatta (Non-self) by Ajahn Brahmavamso
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... ANATTA.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Anatta (Non-self) and Kamma (Karma): The Best Kept Secret in the Universe Ajahn Jagaro
http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/ebdha260.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No inner core - Anatta Sayadaw U Silananda
http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/ebdha215.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Puggala Nirātman and Dhammā Anatta - A Dynamic Encounter With Life
http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/ebdha326.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Anatta or soul-lessness
http://www.buddhanet.net/nutshell09.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta
Chris

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

The Greater Discourse on the Destruction of Craving is another important source on this topic.

[mikenz66]

Thanks Venerable, that's a much better translation than the one I linked to above...


Mike

[Jason]

I know this has probably been asked a dozen times, but I would like Sutta references where the Buddha clearly answers this question.

But I am aware this is a paradox, and so then who inherits the karma is there is no soul/atta?

This is only a problem if one assumes that anatta = the non-existence of the conventional person.

One moment of consciousness conditions the arising of next, just as one action conditions the quality of feeling a moment of consciousness cognizes; it's simply a continuation of a process — nothing 'remains,' nothing 'transmigrates,' etc. — there are merely phenomena that condition other phenomena in the interdependent process we call life. No one sutta deals with this question, but this idea is found throughout the canon.

[Skaffen]

I know this has probably been asked a dozen times, but I would like Sutta references where the Buddha clearly answers this question.

But I am aware this is a paradox, and so then who inherits the karma is there is no soul/atta?

This is only a problem if one assumes that anatta = the non-existence of the conventional person.

One moment of consciousness conditions the arising of next, just as one action conditions the quality of feeling a moment of consciousness cognizes; it's simply a continuation of a process — nothing 'remains,' nothing 'transmigrates,' etc. — there are merely phenomena that condition other phenomena in the interdependent process we call life. No one sutta deals with this question, but this idea is found throughout the canon.

If we all retain previous life 'memories' - Where are they? I know there are a few fanciful analogies and cultivated previous lives are something a few have experienced (rough percentage that's seen ufo's prob).

It's all about getting rid of your deterministic Ego so why would you want it to be retained?! Consciousness is determined by the vehicle it is in - brand new character everytime.
What kind of mechanism can translate thoughts (wireless I presume) into a body that is often very far away to prevent timing issues on the swap - there is no mention of a Karma regulating mechanism although if someone has such it would be a big surprise. (not casual references and stories told for effect/comfort/education) Unconscious consciousness is no good and it seems to be the only way it works.

[Jason]

I know this has probably been asked a dozen times, but I would like Sutta references where the Buddha clearly answers this question.

But I am aware this is a paradox, and so then who inherits the karma is there is no soul/atta?

This is only a problem if one assumes that anatta = the non-existence of the conventional person.

One moment of consciousness conditions the arising of next, just as one action conditions the quality of feeling a moment of consciousness cognizes; it's simply a continuation of a process — nothing 'remains,' nothing 'transmigrates,' etc. — there are merely phenomena that condition other phenomena in the interdependent process we call life. No one sutta deals with this question, but this idea is found throughout the canon.

If we all retain previous life 'memories' - Where are they? I know there are a few fanciful analogies and cultivated previous lives are something a few have experienced (rough percentage that's seen ufo's prob).

It's all about getting rid of your deterministic Ego so why would you want it to be retained?! Consciousness is determined by the vehicle it is in - brand new character everytime.
What kind of mechanism can translate thoughts (wireless I presume) into a body that is often very far away to prevent timing issues on the swap - there is no mention of a Karma regulating mechanism although if someone has such it would be a big surprise. (not casual references and stories told for effect/comfort/education) Unconscious consciousness is no good and it seems to be the only way it works.

Those are good some questions, and I don't really have any concrete answers to them.

It could be that memories are stored in the brain; and when the body dies, all memories are lost. Or, perhaps our memories are stored/carried on via some difficult to access medium, e.g., genetics, storehouse consciousness a la Yogacara, morphogeneic field, etc.

As for how such a transference of memory is possible (if indeed such a thing even exists), it may take place on the quantum level, kind of like 'spooky action at a distance' where two entangled particles communicate with each other instantaneously, even over great distances. This could also go to explain rebirth — which is viewed as an instantaneous process whereby the last consciousness of a being at the time of death immediately conditions the arising of a new consciousness — occurs.

This is all just speculation on my part, however, so take whatever I say with a grain of salt.

[Individual]

I know this has probably been asked a dozen times, but I would like Sutta references where the Buddha clearly answers this question.

But I am aware this is a paradox, and so then who inherits the karma is there is no soul/atta?

The thought, "What inherits the karma?" is what inherits the karma, because that is all that exists in the present and thus all that may be reborn in the future.