The causal mechanism behind kamma?

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by User13866 »

User13866 wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 11:46 am To facricate something is an action, all fabrication is acted out, all action is intended because intending one acts.
All intending is acted out, to intend is an action, aĺl action is perceived by the one who inacts as it is brought into being through attention...

It's not easy to understand this stuff but it's what the texts explain.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by mikenz66 »

SarathW wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 11:43 am It is not this/ that
It should be this/this
Is this a peculiarity of the Sinhalese dialect of English? Ven Nanananda writes it like that, and it sounds odd in the English dialects I'm familiar with, unless the speaker was speaking while pointing at "this" and "this"... Admittedly, "this" tends to be used for objects that are close and "that" for objects further away, so perhaps that's his reasoning...

:heart:
Mike
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by User13866 »

If people don't like the sutta they can study Nanavira, as many do

I don't want to go too much in depth discussing his confusion but i will a little bit
Are we therefore obliged to understand in-&-out-breaths, thinking-&-pondering, and perception and feeling, respectively, as bodily, verbal, and mental kamma (or cetanā)?
It's what the teacher taught...
Is my present existence the result of my breathing in the preceding existence?
Would be difficult to exist if one wasn't breathing, both formerly & now
Is thinking-&-pondering verbal action?
Yes these are actions, it should be obvious because these can be taken as verbs and therefore actions. Verbal because having made them one breaks into speech.
Must we regard perception and feeling as intention, when the Suttas distinguish between them
Sutta distinguish in delineating a difference but having delineated a difference these are not separated because these things are conjoined.
"Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them."

Mn43
Last edited by User13866 on Mon Feb 13, 2023 2:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Sasha_A
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:35 pm
Contact:

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by Sasha_A »

User13866 wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 12:51 pm If people don't like the sutta they can study Nanavira, as many do
That's an incorrect and misleading statement. He purposely relies solely on the suttas in his writings.
Ven. Nanavira wrote:These books of the Pali Canon correctly represent the Buddha's Teaching, and can be regarded as trustworthy throughout. (Vinayapitaka:) Suttavibhanga, Mahāvagga, Cūlavagga; (Suttapitaka:) Dīghanikāya, Majjhimanikāya, Samyuttanikāya, Anguttaranikāya, Suttanipāta, Dhammapada, Udāna, Itivuttaka, Theratherīgāthā. (The Jātaka verses may be authentic, but they do not come within the scope of these Notes.) No other Pali books whatsoever should be taken as authoritative; and ignorance of them (and particularly of the traditional Commentaries) may be counted a positive advantage, as leaving less to be unlearned.
It is merely dukkha that comes into being, dukkha that stands and disappears,
Nothing apart from dukkha comes into being, nothing other than dukkha ceases.
- SN5.10
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by User13866 »

Sasha_A wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 1:11 pm
User13866 wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 12:51 pm If people don't like the sutta they can study Nanavira, as many do
That's an incorrect and misleading statement. He purposely relies solely on the suttas in his writings.
Ven. Nanavira wrote:These books of the Pali Canon correctly represent the Buddha's Teaching, and can be regarded as trustworthy throughout. (Vinayapitaka:) Suttavibhanga, Mahāvagga, Cūlavagga; (Suttapitaka:) Dīghanikāya, Majjhimanikāya, Samyuttanikāya, Anguttaranikāya, Suttanipāta, Dhammapada, Udāna, Itivuttaka, Theratherīgāthā. (The Jātaka verses may be authentic, but they do not come within the scope of these Notes.) No other Pali books whatsoever should be taken as authoritative; and ignorance of them (and particularly of the traditional Commentaries) may be counted a positive advantage, as leaving less to be unlearned.
Incorrect only if you assume that he understood the texts he was studying. I've no reason to think so. You can study him but his texts aren't authoritative here.

As far as i can tell he was simply a delusional monk.

Nanaviraism is a very small sect within Theravada... The vast majority of people don't approve of his interpretations.

Of course he might not have been wrong about everything but he was wrong about this stuff and therefore also about essentials in general, as i see it of course.
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by auto »

retrofuturist wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 4:20 am (I would actively discourage taking your understanding of kamma from commentarial stories, which present a very puerile take on kamma).
these stories are added by translators. Unless you mean Jataka stories, i don't know about them.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
auto wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 3:06 pm
retrofuturist wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 4:20 am (I would actively discourage taking your understanding of kamma from commentarial stories, which present a very puerile take on kamma).
these stories are added by translators. Unless you mean Jataka stories, i don't know about them.
I'm not sure what stories you're referring to, but I had the Jataka stories and Dhammapada stories in mind.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by User13866 »

As annoying as it is i want to do NV justice and pick this apart more
Sasha_A wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 11:09 am
NV wrote:Now the traditional interpretation says that sankhārā in the paticcasamuppāda context are kamma, being cetanā.
If by traditional he means being inferable from the sutta then yes, it's very traditional.

It is so that sankhara are the 6 classes of cetana and it is true that cetana are kamma. However if Buddha wanted to say that cetana is the requisite condition of vinnana he would do so and it is not due to a lack of words that he says sankharā there.

The right question is then why does he call it sankhara?
Well i assume it is because it fabricates the conditioned therefore it is called sankhara.
“And why, bhikkhus, do you call them fabrications? ‘They fabricate the conditioned,’ bhikkhus, therefore they are called fabrications.

And what is the conditioned that they fabrications?

They fabricate conditioned form as form;
they fabricate conditioned feeling as feeling;
they fabricate conditioned perception as perception;
they fabricate conditioned fabrications as fabrications;
they fabricate conditioned consciousness as consciousness.

‘They fabricate the conditioned,’ bhikkhus, therefore they are called fabrications.

SN 22.79
To fabricate is an act [kamma] and kamma is intention because intending one acts.

Could one say that with ignorance as a requisite condition comes intention and that with intention as a requisite condition comes consciousness?

Yes you can do it like this for example;

There are seven obsessions
The obsession of sensual passion, the obsession of resistance, the obsession of views, the obsession of uncertainty, the obsession of conceit, the obsession of passion for becoming, the obsession of ignorance.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
What one obsesses about that one arranges [plans], what one plans one intends;
What one intends, what one arranges, and what one obsesses about:[1] This is a support for the stationing of consciousness. There being a support, there is a landing [or: an establishing] of consciousness.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Thus because of an obsession of ignorance intention comes into play and with intention as a requisite condition there is an landing[establishment] of vinnana.
Sasha_A wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 11:09 am
NV wrote:Are we therefore obliged to understand in-&-out-breaths, thinking-&-pondering, and perception and feeling, respectively, as bodily, verbal, and mental kamma (or cetanā)?
All of these things are acted out, willed & intended, therefore yes. For example in-&-out-breaths are bodily fabrications, fabrication is kamma [an act], kamma is intention because intending one acts and to intend is also an act.
Sasha_A wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 11:09 am
NV wrote:Is my present existence the result of my breathing in the preceding existence?
To an extent it is in the same way that one's breathing yesterday is a requisite for breathing today. Breathing was a requisite condition for the upholding of life force, it is certainly something that came into play. However is breathing the root cause of all existence? We do not say that.
Sasha_A wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 11:09 am
NV wrote:Must we regard perception and feeling as intention, when the Suttas distinguish between them
Phuttho bhikkhave vedeti, phuttho ceteti, phuttho sañjānāti...
'Contacted, monks, one feels; contacted, one intends; contacted, one perceives;...'
[Salāyatana Samy. ix,10 <S.iv,68>] (SN35.93))?
According to the sutta there is two elements the conditioned and the unconditioned.

Perception, feeling and intention all come under the conditioned.

Should we therefore regard all three merely as sankhata?
Yes we should because they are all sankhata but one still needs to delineate a difference between the various aspect & qualities of the conditioned element to explain it's origination and whatnot.
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by User13866 »

User13866 wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 1:20 pm As far as i can tell he was simply a delusional monk.

Nanaviraism is a very small sect within Theravada... The vast majority of people don't approve of his interpretations.

Of course he might not have been wrong about everything but he was wrong about this stuff and therefore also about essentials in general, as i see it of course.
Anyway i apologize for saying he is delusional. I know many people think he is the best thing since the 1st Council but to me it looks like he didn't understand these things very well.
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by mjaviem »

User13866 wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 10:05 am Kamma and sankhara are the same thing.
...
I understand kamma as "intentional acting" and sankhara as "intentional making" or "intentional making up".

When speaking of kamma there's an agent or actor involved who is intentionally doing . While when speaking of sankhara there's only the intentional doing without involving an agent. So the difference is in whether the person is in the spotlight.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
User avatar
Sasha_A
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:35 pm
Contact:

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by Sasha_A »

User13866 wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 7:26 pm As annoying as it is i want to do NV justice...
But have your read his work?

The quote that I posted here was just to give you a hint on the presence of inconsistency in the approach of equating sankhara to kamma.

Can you give an example of a wholesome and unwholesome action by one's perceptions and feelings, breathig, and by thinking and pondering?
It is merely dukkha that comes into being, dukkha that stands and disappears,
Nothing apart from dukkha comes into being, nothing other than dukkha ceases.
- SN5.10
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22387
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Sasha_A wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 7:11 am
User13866 wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 7:26 pm As annoying as it is i want to do NV justice...
But have your read his work?

The quote that I posted here was just to give you a hint on the presence of inconsistency in the approach of equating sankhara to kamma.

Can you give an example of a wholesome and unwholesome action by one's perceptions and feelings, breathig, and by thinking and pondering?
A reasonable argument can be made that the sankharas of MN44 and that of dependent origination are two different kinds.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
Sasha_A
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:35 pm
Contact:

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by Sasha_A »

Ceisiwr wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 7:23 amA reasonable argument can be made that the sankharas of MN44 and that of dependent origination are two different kinds.
From "A LETTER ON SANKHĀRA" by Sāmanera Bodhesako:
Sāmanera Bodhesako wrote:Note also that you are too restrictive in limiting the M. 44 triad to nirodha-samāpatti[28]. The description is relevant also in particular to 2nd and 4th jhānas, in general to meditation, and sometimes even to non-meditative contexts — e.g. M. 117 (iii,73), and also M. 103 (ii,242), where we find vacī-sankhāra[29], quite evidently meaning vitakkavicārā[30], and where what is sankhata, namely vacī[31], is called a dhamma in opposition to the sankhāra. And in M. 43 (i,296) we find the same 3 sankhāras used in a strictly non-meditative sense (i.e. with regard to a corpse). If they can be used in as general a sense as this then there is no justification for asserting that the 3 paticcasamuppāda sankhārā are “a different set with the same name”. Also note that in M. 43 (āyu-) sankhārā[32] are distinguished from (vedaniyā) dhammā[33], and that the distinction made — specifically with reference to nirodha-samāpatti — supports precisely the view of sankhārā as “conditions”.
It is merely dukkha that comes into being, dukkha that stands and disappears,
Nothing apart from dukkha comes into being, nothing other than dukkha ceases.
- SN5.10
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by User13866 »

Sasha_A wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 7:11 am
User13866 wrote: Mon Feb 13, 2023 7:26 pm As annoying as it is i want to do NV justice...
But have your read his work?

The quote that I posted here was just to give you a hint on the presence of inconsistency in the approach of equating sankhara to kamma.

Can you give an example of a wholesome and unwholesome action by one's perceptions and feelings, breathig, and by thinking and pondering?
I have only read a little.
Can you give an example of a wholesome and unwholesome action by one's perceptions and feelings, breathig, and by thinking and pondering?
It's not a question of whether i can explain it. It's a question of whether i can explain it in a way that you can comprehend. I don't think that i can do so.

Sutta say sankhara are cetana
Sutta say kamma is cetana

If you want to explain this away by creating a new doctrine where sankhara are only sometimes cetana then go ahead.

I don't want to burden myself trying to explain something you are not going to understand.
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: The causal mechanism behind kamma?

Post by User13866 »

Sasha_A wrote: Tue Feb 14, 2023 7:11 am
Can you give an example of a wholesome and unwholesome action by one's perceptions and feelings, breathig, and by thinking and pondering?
Look here
"Monks, I will teach you new & old kamma, the cessation of kamma, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. Listen and pay close attention. I will speak.

"Now what, monks, is old kamma? The eye is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. This is called old kamma.

"And what is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the body, with speech, or with the intellect: This is called new kamma.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Fabricated [sankhatam], willed [cetayitam], felt [vedaniyam]

Why don't you ask Nanavira how is eye wholesome or unwholesome action? Right he dead...
Last edited by User13866 on Tue Feb 14, 2023 8:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply