I Believe in Karma and its Effects - Poll

[Will]

No, I am not writing a book.

[ronnewmexico]

The question is wrong and cannot be answered.

Foundational philosophies are not necessarily founded upon belief but meditational means which qualify the truth of things not the belief in the truth of things.

So one may question.....for those that believe in things as opposed to actually finding things true, do you believe in karma and its effect.

or.....do you find karma and its effects real or true approximations of things as they are found to be.

The question phrased as it is... is to cause a certain thing to be reinforced and only that thing...belief.
Theism is founded in belief, not all religions nor personal philosophies are founded suchly.
So change your question or withdraw it. I will not participate in questioning which by perameters set lead to only certain conclusion. This perameter being belief.

[Bodhi]

I totally believe it, in all lifetimes :]

[remm]

The question is wrong and cannot be answered.

Foundational philosophies are not necessarily founded upon belief but meditational means which qualify the truth of things not the belief in the truth of things.

So one may question.....for those that believe in things as opposed to actually finding things true, do you believe in karma and its effect.

or.....do you find karma and its effects real or true approximations of things as they are found to be.

The question phrased as it is... is to cause a certain thing to be reinforced and only that thing...belief.
Theism is founded in belief, not all religions nor personal philosophies are founded suchly.
So change your question or withdraw it. I will not participate in questioning which by perameters set lead to only certain conclusion. This perameter being belief.

Why must you overlook things like this? He is simply asking a question and making a poll. If you don't like it, there's no need for you to state such a question is wrong, simply because no question can be wrong. You may think you sound quite intelligent, but one thing you've missed by far is "Right Understanding and Right Mindfulness." I would look into this first before I start to find fault in others. Even if his question is not phrased right, his intention is sincere to see how people view the law of cause and effect. Honestly though, did you even take a moment to think before you replied with such an answer? Did you think of when Will came to read your comment--that he will be offended at the very least? By the way, I'm not replying after this. That is all.

[ronnewmexico]

No mention is made of the individual nor his intention. Mention is made of the thread itself and only that.
Believing infers not fact but belief. I may state a stove when I turn it on will be hot. I don't state I turn on a stove and I believe it will be hot.

A cake in the oven may be taken out and I may correctly state....I believe this cake is done. The term belief indicates affirmation, it is most probably done, but also indicates this may be a bit uncertain. Believing a thing to be so and a thing considered to be so as fact are two differing things.

So thusly the question itself poses uncertainty with the addition of belief. Correctly stated it should read ....do you find karma to be true or how truthful is karma found to be or something of that sort. In actuality there is another thread on this board on karma which is correctly worded.

So your contention my comment is inappropriate is firmly rejected, there is found to be substance to the comment. Your introduction of the personal is also inappropriate and not revelent to the question nor to the poll....so that is likewise firmly rejected.

This stated has no bearing in a individual context but bears stateing in a general context. Just prior to the Iraq war, americans by approximately 75% believed Saddam Husein had something to do with the attack on the world trade center. Approximately 60 plus percent, believed weapons of mass destruction were present there, despite a UN team being present for years finding no such evidence and this team was there just prior to the war.

So ameicans seem to confuse this thing of fact and belief. One cannot believe a thing true, and a fact cannot be only believed as a fact is a fact and not belief.
To allow the post to stand as written infers by its language that karma is a believed thing only, not a factual thing. So it is incorrect...a statement or question framed in a certain way by certain perameters of language establish a perameter of answer which may lead to incorrect conclusion and in legal terms is called...leading, as in leading a witness a certain way to a certain conclusion.

The lead here is to a uncertainity on karma and a relegation of it to belief not factual basis.

As this is a buddhist board and I find this thing absolutely true and factual this karma thing I find it inappropriate to frame a question on karma in such a fashion that assures a belief or uncertainity not a finding of fact.

This is not theism....buddhists invariably base their core foundational principles not on beliefs, as theist do, but on logically determinable facts and observations. Every word the Buddha states is subject to examination to determine if their claim is verifyable by logical and reasonable means as if we were subjecting this as it were.... a piece of gold to find it real or not.

So your claim in entireity is rejected and I find my comment totally appropriate and reasonable.
Your comment is thusly also found inappropriate and unreasonable.

Good day to you sir.

[enjitsu]

There is both personal karma and also group karma. Know that the Law of Causality is utterly fair. It is not biased in any way, and is the ultimate justice. All good you do and all bad you do have coresponding effects. If you experience difficulties it is a Karmic result of your past actions. This is a fundamental belief of Buddhism.

[Will]

Also bringing this poll into sight again.

[Dave The Seeker]

If we don't "believe" in Karma and it's effects, then why bother trying to do good things?

Please excuse the question, but also we "believe" that a person can reach Enlightenment, correct?
Or do we have facts, as in the example of the stove being hot?

If not, then why are we here discussing Buddhism?


Kindest wishes, Dave

[ronnewmexico]

Well this is the problem with the issue of belief of this thing..."If we don't "believe" in Karma and it's effects, then why bother trying to do good things?

The contention of belief disallows the possibility of a known thing of karma. It is fine to allow that if your practice is founded upon belief but the only mention of belief disallows those that find this thing findable and real not hypothetical or possible.
As this is the exploring Buddhism section this thread leaves a impression upon those that are learning of buddhism.
It is again fine to state such a thing and to believe such things but to disallow that one may know this thing is inferred by the wording. So if one answers the poll one may find a negative response....I don't believe in karma, I know it.....a negative being actually a postiive.
So it misleads. Not purposely I intend no slander upon the initial poster, he is a fine fellow and devote buddhist....but it is stated wrongly and will lead to indeterminate result which may lead a person exploring buddhism to a wrong conclusion.

So that said....it is plainly clear and obvious to me that we are a micro display of all larger things. As no singlular identity may be found in any thing, all things being composite what I find in myself is what I may find in perceived other(object or being).
Karma.....is right here and now findable in everything we do say and act. It is quite obviously evident, when one examines oneself.
So it is not belief but fact.

So we should act rightly as if we act wrongly we will have wrong consequence suffered upon us.

As to doing wrong, aside from the obvious implication of karma, we as human derive our happiness only from helping. Displaying compassion. I study myself as I am and find that also. So I can act in no other way. YOu may claim difference as human I suspect you are the same in this, if you study it.

AS to enlightenment....I find enlightenment inescapable. It is only the time that is negotiable in this thing. So that also is a known. Derived that is also from study of how we are as sentient being.

So I'm sorry to offend Will and his friends...but no this remains worded wrong.
I believe in or know karma and its effects is a probable potential correct wording.

I can perhaps elaborate a bit if it is necessary to explain how these things are findable. But just in my laypersons simple language and ways.

Look at the poll...knowing this thing(and I am not alone)...how can I answer it, it is quite quite then confusing and potentially misleading.
I speak not only for myself but for others that know this as well.....you may differ but shouid not discount that we exist. I don't discount that you exist in that way. If this was in a particular school section, I perhaps would not raise objection. But it is in exploring.

As a aside, this may be certainly splitting hairs and I would not offer contention to this thread on this basis but nevertheless this is also true and I am not alone in this as well.....(this is no claim of any spiritual understaning I am a very simple person with no understanding of profound things).....

...this is simply obvious.....as the basis of karmic effect is the aversion and attachment which results when and only in the concurrent presence of a me.....no karmic effect ever can occur. It's whole basis is on that of a false thing....self and other.
So say what you will.....oh I still suffer karmic effect and all the rest pain suffering...I say nonsense....all you see of me is the appearence of such .
things.....nothing here suffers nor is effected in any manner. Say I believe not know that....I say nonsense.....you are no qualifier of that determination....I alone can be....
....so that is splitting hairs but why not split hairs and only express one way of looking at this thing, not all ways as this is exploring buddhism. All potential I would say is best. But that's just me.....the first part I stand by.

[billybudd]

...

“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.” - Albert Einstein

[Dave The Seeker]

Thank you for explaining what you meant.
In my understanding, to believe in something, anything, means it's true and exists.
So I do know Karma is true.

Sorry if I came across wrong. Many times the way I word things isn't really the best, but I'm trying.

Kindest wishes, Dave

[Mr. G]

Well this is the problem with the issue of belief of this thing..."If we don't "believe" in Karma and it's effects, then why bother trying to do good things?

I would amend the statement to say "If we don't believe in Karma or Rebirth, there is no point in practicing Buddhism".

[Fruitzilla]

Well this is the problem with the issue of belief of this thing..."If we don't "believe" in Karma and it's effects, then why bother trying to do good things?

I would amend the statement to say "If we don't believe in Karma or Rebirth, there is no point in practicing Buddhism".

Maybe even: "If I didn't believe in Karma or Rebirth I would see no point in practicing Buddhism" ?

[Mr. G]

Well this is the problem with the issue of belief of this thing..."If we don't "believe" in Karma and it's effects, then why bother trying to do good things?

I would amend the statement to say "If we don't believe in Karma or Rebirth, there is no point in practicing Buddhism".

Maybe even: "If I didn't believe in Karma or Rebirth I would see no point in practicing Buddhism" ?

Perhaps "Buddhist practice is illogical without the literal belief in Karma or Rebirth."

[Fruitzilla]

I would amend the statement to say "If we don't believe in Karma or Rebirth, there is no point in practicing Buddhism".

Maybe even: "If I didn't believe in Karma or Rebirth I would see no point in practicing Buddhism" ?

Perhaps "Buddhist practice is illogical without the literal belief in Karma or Rebirth."

Why do you insist an opinion is an absolute fact? I know people of the opposite opinion, who also present it as an absolute by the way...
Would you lose confidence in your practice if it was (an opinion)?

[Mr. G]

Why do you insist an opinion is an absolute fact?

I haven't done so. I'm indirectly addressing the fact that Shakyamuni Buddha and past masters have clearly stated rebirth and karma are literal.

I know people of the opposite opinion, who also present it as an absolute by the way...

And what is the opposite opinion?

Would you lose confidence in your practice if it was (an opinion)?

Of course not. I'm addressing people who actually would like to sincerely learn Buddhist tenets as clearly stated by the Buddha.

[ronnewmexico]

TS....I often don't word things well so you are not alone in that

..."In my understanding, to believe in something, anything, means it's true and exists....belief implies by definition a contrast to actual proof being present. This is why it applies in a religious context most commonly to theism...those things are not provable, gods things of that sort.
A thing believed to be is not absolutely proven to be but most probably true or existant.

Karma.....absolutely completely proveable to exist. It is a fact and not a very comlex nor disrete one. As fact as anythng in this realm may be fact it is.
For some that is how it is. I can elaborate a bit in my simple way to show how it is able to be proven, but that may be irrelevent to the topic.

So that is what i mean My understanding does not by belief make anything factually true or existant. It cannot do such a thing.
If a thing is true or existant to my understanding it is true or existant by its virtues or characteristics my belief has not really anything to do with it.
I may use belief in the process of hypothesis examination and determination to find a thing true or not. But by itself it is only part of the process of finding truth, not a end in itself. It is the begining of the process of examination, and thusly useful and has purpose but is not sufficient in itself to determine things trueness.

I would like to make this very simple but even einstein could not explain the theory of relativity with but one sentence

[Fruitzilla]

Why do you insist an opinion is an absolute fact?

I haven't done so. I'm indirectly addressing the fact that Shakyamuni Buddha and past masters have clearly stated rebirth and karma are literal.

I know people of the opposite opinion, who also present it as an absolute by the way...

And what is the opposite opinion?

Would you lose confidence in your practice if it was (an opinion)?

Of course not. I'm addressing people who actually would like to sincerely learn Buddhist tenets as clearly stated by the Buddha.

Look, you say practicing Buddhism without the belief karma and rebirth are literal is illogical. Other people say practicing Buddhism without the belief karma and rebirth are literal is perfectly logical.
Both these statements are interpretations, because otherwise both statements would not be possible.
So it follows your statement is an opinion, and therefore it would be only logical to say: "As far as I can see, practicing Buddhism without the belief in karma and rebirth is logical."

[Jikan]

Or: To the best of my understanding, dependent origination and rebirth are integral to Buddhist thought and practice, and consequently, Buddhism just doesn't make sense without them (or isn't Buddhism anymore).

If I understand Fruitzilla right, the objection is not to the position taken but to its expression as an absolute or universal in the absence of a rigorous defense of the same. Or am I misunderstanding?

[Mr. G]

Look, you say practicing Buddhism without the belief karma and rebirth are literal is illogical. Other people say practicing Buddhism without the belief karma and rebirth are literal is perfectly logical.
Both these statements are interpretations, because otherwise both statements would not be possible.
So it follows your statement is an opinion, and therefore it would be only logical to say: "As far as I can see, practicing Buddhism without the belief in karma and rebirth is logical."

Sure. E-prime is a pleasant way to express oneself.

My point is I have no issue with people who haven't directly confirmed literal rebirth. My issue is people who wrongly imply that Shakyamuni Buddha did not teach literal rebirth and outright deny it.