karma and its fruit or fruits

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Malcolm »

Aemilius wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 9:51 am The old question about merit is: Does it matter if the recipient of one's generosity does not actually get one's gift? Due to some circumstance that is, or seems to be, beyond one's control. Like for example a sudden earthquake or a traffic accident, that destroys the actual gift or its giving. I.e. is the intention really enough to create the positive karmic consequence or not ?

Etienne Lamotte has in his History of Indian Buddhism answered this question: According to tradition the merit of a gift is twofold, 1. there is the actual intention, the disposition it creates in one's mental continuum, and its future karmic reward. And 2. there is the aspect of the enjoyment of the gift by its recipient. This event creates happiness also in the giver. If the gift is not received nor enjoyed this happines is not created. Thus it does matter whether the gift is received or not.
He is mistaken. The intention alone is sufficient, as pointed out by Shantideva.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Malcolm wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 2:17 pm
Aemilius wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 9:51 am The old question about merit is: Does it matter if the recipient of one's generosity does not actually get one's gift? Due to some circumstance that is, or seems to be, beyond one's control. Like for example a sudden earthquake or a traffic accident, that destroys the actual gift or its giving. I.e. is the intention really enough to create the positive karmic consequence or not ?

Etienne Lamotte has in his History of Indian Buddhism answered this question: According to tradition the merit of a gift is twofold, 1. there is the actual intention, the disposition it creates in one's mental continuum, and its future karmic reward. And 2. there is the aspect of the enjoyment of the gift by its recipient. This event creates happiness also in the giver. If the gift is not received nor enjoyed this happines is not created. Thus it does matter whether the gift is received or not.
He is mistaken. The intention alone is sufficient, as pointed out by Shantideva.
Yeah, otherwise, the merit accrued by the giver would depend on the mindset of the receiver. But that mindset is totally separate and may arbitrarily depend on the recipient’s mood that day.

But consider this example: suppose a loving grandmother knits a sweater and gives it to her young grandson. But the grandson is a spoiled brat and doesn’t want the sweater because it’s not stylish or whatever. This doesn’t affect the merit accrued by the grandmother resulting from her intentions and subsequent actions (knitting the sweater, giving it, etc).

However, suppose the grandmother feels hurt or angry as a result of her grandson’s rejection of her gift. This is a pretty typical response. But the reason why it is typical is because self-grasping (ego clinging) is typical behavior. In other words, the sweater wasn’t given 100% freely. It had strings attached (or yarn, maybe). The grandmother expected gratitude and thanks. Again, this is typical because of culture, manners, politeness, and so on.
But Buddhism takes a slightly different position on this: if you give something away, let go of it. Give the kid the sweater and if he likes it he likes it and if he doesn’t, he doesn’t. But don’t give with expectations, because doing that will only bind you to samsara.

Similarly, when giving to the poor, like when organizations drop off a boxes of food and toys to peoples houses at christmas, it’s better to just drop things off to them and leave, just like a delivery driver. Don’t wait around for a “thank you”. I have a friend who is an artist and she never gives her art as a gift, because doing so obligates the receiver to hang it somewhere. A gift shouldn’t place an obligation on someone.

As a side note: Interestingly, in the west, when we give someone a wrapped gift, we expect them to open it in front of us and to be all excited and grateful. In Chinese culture, you don’t open the gift in front of the giver. You wait until later. And then, you may thank them or reciprocate appropriately.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Aemilius »

On the contrary, it seems evident that Shantideva has got it wrong. Think for yourself! Is there equal merit if one doctor intends to heal your sickness, and another doctor actually heals it? Is there equal merit if someone intends to give you food to eat, and another one actually gives you food and satisfies your hunger?

"3. The faith and morality demanded of the lay person are eclipsed by
the third virtue, which is in some way his justification : generosity
(tyaga) : "It is good continually to distribute rice-gruel for whomever
desires joy, whether he aspires for heavenly joys or sighs after human
happiness".

The texts have compiled a list of meritorious material deeds (punya-
kriyavastu) which are recommended to the laity. They are seven in
number : 1. giving land to the congregation, 2. building a monastery on
it, 3. furnishing it, 4. allocating revenue to it, 5. assisting strangers and
travellers, 6. tending the sick, 7. in cold weather or at times of famine,
giving the congregation food and sweetmeat.

Rising above purely self-interested preoccupations, the Buddhists
congratulate sovereigns who carry out great works of public utility :
providing water suppliesin the desert, planting trees to provide fruit and
coolness, providing bridges and ferries, giving alms. Through such pious
works, merit increases day and night and one is certain to be reborn
always among gods and mankind.

Theoreticians have elaborated a whole ethics of giving. Its value varies
depending on the importance of the thing given, the donor's intention,
the circumstances of the gesture, but also and in particular the moral
quality of the beneficiary. "

E. Lamotte p.79
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14456
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Queequeg »

You may want to review how the mind works

Conditioning merit of dana on its effect in the recipient would necessitate some ledger keeping track of the merit and it's impact. That makes no sense.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Aemilius »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 12:57 pm
Aemilius wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 8:23 am But I do say that what is given to a virtuous person is of great fruit, and not so much what is given to an unvirtuous person."


How do you know if a person is virtuous or not? What if the beggar is the god Indra or bodhisattva Lokeshvara in disguise ?
Sorry, I don’t understand the point of the question.

(I italicized the sutra quote simply to distinguish it from the question)
It is in reference to what you have said earlier:

"There’s certainly merit in giving to one needy person. But it is quickly exhausted because the residual effect or ripple effect is minimal."

You don't know if a person is a deva, stream-entrant (or higher) or not. You can't judge a person by appearance.
Stream-entrants etc.. will also get hungry tomorrow. There is no difference.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Malcolm »

Aemilius wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 3:20 pm On the contrary, it seems evident that Shantideva has got it wrong.
No, since Śantideva is an awakened person and Lamotte is not even a Buddhist.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Aemilius wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 3:31 pm
It is in reference to what you have said earlier:

"There’s certainly merit in giving to one needy person. But it is quickly exhausted because the residual effect or ripple effect is minimal."

You don't know if a person is a deva, stream-entrant (or higher) or not. You can't judge a person by appearance.
Stream-entrants etc.. will also get hungry tomorrow. There is no difference.
Yes, that’s true.
But I don’t understand the point you are making.

Are you saying that it’s better to give money to a stranger on the street than it is to a dharma center or charity that you know is helping people, because of the possibility that the stranger on the street might really be some emanation of a celestial Bodhisattva, or a monk in disguise or something like that?

In any case, it’s one’s motivation in giving that determines merit. If I give a dollar with either positive or negative attachment to the stranger on the street (who is really Padmasambhava), but give 10¢ to the Dharma center without thinking twice about it, the giving to the dharma center will accrue more merit.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14456
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Queequeg »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 6:21 pm the giving to the dharma center will accrue more merit.
This is because of the intention - its alms to the Three Jewels. The giving is accompanied by mindfulness of the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. Which is why if donations are given with pure intentions, even to a fake monk, the merit is untainted by the fraud.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 4844
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 3:47 am
Location: Uni-verse

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Virgo »

Queequeg wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 6:47 pm
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 6:21 pm the giving to the dharma center will accrue more merit.
This is because of the intention - its alms to the Three Jewels. The giving is accompanied by mindfulness of the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. Which is why if donations are given with pure intentions, even to a fake monk, the merit is untainted by the fraud.
Yes, and giving the Dharma is the best gift. :)

Virgo
master of puppets
Posts: 1647
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2020 9:52 pm

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by master of puppets »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 6:21 pm ...but give 10¢ to the Dharma center without thinking twice about it, the giving to the dharma center will accrue more merit.
everyone here has two cents so you have ten..
😃
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Aemilius »

Malcolm wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 4:36 pm
Aemilius wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 3:20 pm On the contrary, it seems evident that Shantideva has got it wrong.
No, since Śantideva is an awakened person and Lamotte is not even a Buddhist.
Consider the matter and not the person. Remember the Four Great Reliances.
Last edited by Aemilius on Fri May 06, 2022 8:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Aemilius »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 6:21 pm
Aemilius wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 3:31 pm
It is in reference to what you have said earlier:

"There’s certainly merit in giving to one needy person. But it is quickly exhausted because the residual effect or ripple effect is minimal."

You don't know if a person is a deva, stream-entrant (or higher) or not. You can't judge a person by appearance.
Stream-entrants etc.. will also get hungry tomorrow. There is no difference.
Yes, that’s true.
But I don’t understand the point you are making.

Are you saying that it’s better to give money to a stranger on the street than it is to a dharma center or charity that you know is helping people, because of the possibility that the stranger on the street might really be some emanation of a celestial Bodhisattva, or a monk in disguise or something like that?

In any case, it’s one’s motivation in giving that determines merit. If I give a dollar with either positive or negative attachment to the stranger on the street (who is really Padmasambhava), but give 10¢ to the Dharma center without thinking twice about it, the giving to the dharma center will accrue more merit.
It is not really so, in many places in the sutras, for example the Sutra in 42 Sections, different fields of merit (punya-kshetra) are described. This means that the person or being to whom you give, really does affect your merit. The same teaching, that is in the 42 Sections sutra, is found in Sarvastivada and Theravada traditions, although with significant differences. Vasubandhu also discusses this teaching in AKB.
There are Jatakas and Avadanas where Indra appears in the guise of a beggar, asking fo alms.

"Section 11, The Increase in Merit Gained by Bestowing Food

"The Buddha said, "Giving food to a hundred bad people is not as good as giving food to a single good person. Giving food to a thousand good people is not as good as giving food to one person who holds the Five Precepts. Giving food to ten thousand people who hold the Five Precepts is not as good as giving food to a single Srotaapanna. Giving food to a million Srotaapannas is not as good as giving food to a single Sakridagamin. Giving food to ten million Sakridagamins is not as good as giving food to a single Anagamin. Giving food to a hundred million Anagamins is not as good as giving food to a single Arhat. Giving food to one billion Arhats is not as good as giving food to a single Pratyekabuddha. Giving food to ten billion Pratyekabuddhas is not as good as giving food to a Buddha of the three periods of time. Giving food to a hundred billion Buddhas of the three periods of time is not as good as giving food to a single person who is without thoughts, without dwelling, without cultivation, and without accomplishment."

from Sutra in Forty-Two Sections
Translated by the Buddhist Text Translation Society
http://www.cttbusa.org/42s/42sections.asp.html
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14456
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Queequeg »

Aemilius wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 8:50 am
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 6:21 pm
Aemilius wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 3:31 pm
It is in reference to what you have said earlier:

"There’s certainly merit in giving to one needy person. But it is quickly exhausted because the residual effect or ripple effect is minimal."

You don't know if a person is a deva, stream-entrant (or higher) or not. You can't judge a person by appearance.
Stream-entrants etc.. will also get hungry tomorrow. There is no difference.
Yes, that’s true.
But I don’t understand the point you are making.

Are you saying that it’s better to give money to a stranger on the street than it is to a dharma center or charity that you know is helping people, because of the possibility that the stranger on the street might really be some emanation of a celestial Bodhisattva, or a monk in disguise or something like that?

In any case, it’s one’s motivation in giving that determines merit. If I give a dollar with either positive or negative attachment to the stranger on the street (who is really Padmasambhava), but give 10¢ to the Dharma center without thinking twice about it, the giving to the dharma center will accrue more merit.
It is not really so, in many places in the sutras, for example the Sutra in 42 Sections, different fields of merit (punya-kshetra) are described. This means that the person or being to whom you give, really does affect your merit. The same teaching, that is in the 42 Sections sutra, is found in Sarvastivada and Theravada traditions, although with significant differences. Vasubandhu also discusses this teaching in AKB.
There are Jatakas and Avadanas where Indra appears in the guise of a beggar, asking fo alms.

"Section 11, The Increase in Merit Gained by Bestowing Food

"The Buddha said, "Giving food to a hundred bad people is not as good as giving food to a single good person. Giving food to a thousand good people is not as good as giving food to one person who holds the Five Precepts. Giving food to ten thousand people who hold the Five Precepts is not as good as giving food to a single Srotaapanna. Giving food to a million Srotaapannas is not as good as giving food to a single Sakridagamin. Giving food to ten million Sakridagamins is not as good as giving food to a single Anagamin. Giving food to a hundred million Anagamins is not as good as giving food to a single Arhat. Giving food to one billion Arhats is not as good as giving food to a single Pratyekabuddha. Giving food to ten billion Pratyekabuddhas is not as good as giving food to a Buddha of the three periods of time. Giving food to a hundred billion Buddhas of the three periods of time is not as good as giving food to a single person who is without thoughts, without dwelling, without cultivation, and without accomplishment."

from Sutra in Forty-Two Sections
Translated by the Buddhist Text Translation Society
http://www.cttbusa.org/42s/42sections.asp.html
This still does not have to do with the receiver, at least not in a way that you seem to be insisting. For merit to depend on the receiver, there would need to be some metaphysical substrate where good and evil deeds are recorded, where the repercussions for the receiver somehow reflect back to the giver. There is no basis for this in Buddhist teachings. What we do have is the mind streams of beings which at once expresses as thoughts, words and actions and which is in turn conditioned by those thoughts, words and deeds.

In the section immediately before that:

"The Buddha said, when you see someone who is practicing giving, aid him joyfully, and you will obtain vast and great blessings. "

A Shramana asked, is there an end to those blessings? "

The Buddha said, consider the flame of a single torch. Though hundreds and thousands of people come to light their own torches from it so that they can cook their food and ward off darkness, the first torch remains the same. Blessings, too, are like this. "

The point here is the mind of joy.

When we give to an arhat as opposed to an ordinary beggar, we not only practicing non-attachment, but we are mindful of the status of that person as accomplished in the Dharma; we are conditioning our mind to be positively disposed toward Dharma. Moreover, we are drawing near that person with a seeking mind and we are open to their influence, we are receptive to the impression of their thoughts, words and deeds which condition our mindstream in a beneficial way.

Respectfully, thinking about this process of giving with some notion of a metaphysical substrate is a detrimental concept that is adharmic and the not meritorious toward liberation, even if it is well intentioned. As Malcolm pointed out, such thoughts are not right view of the path. They might lead to higher births within samsara but they do not lead to liberation.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Aemilius wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 8:50 am in many places in the sutras, for example the Sutra in 42 Sections, different fields of merit (punya-kshetra) are described. This means that the person or being to whom you give, really does affect your merit. The same teaching, that is in the 42 Sections sutra, is found in Sarvastivada and Theravada traditions, although with significant differences. Vasubandhu also discusses this teaching in AKB.
There are Jatakas and Avadanas where Indra appears in the guise of a beggar, asking fo alms.

"Section 11, The Increase in Merit Gained by Bestowing Food

"The Buddha said, "Giving food to a hundred bad people is not as good as giving food to a single good person. Giving food to a thousand good people is not as good as giving food to one person who holds the Five Precepts. Giving food to ten thousand people who hold the Five Precepts is not as good as giving food to a single Srotaapanna. Giving food to a million Srotaapannas is not as good as giving food to a single Sakridagamin. Giving food to ten million Sakridagamins is not as good as giving food to a single Anagamin. Giving food to a hundred million Anagamins is not as good as giving food to a single Arhat. Giving food to one billion Arhats is not as good as giving food to a single Pratyekabuddha. Giving food to ten billion Pratyekabuddhas is not as good as giving food to a Buddha of the three periods of time. Giving food to a hundred billion Buddhas of the three periods of time is not as good as giving food to a single person who is without thoughts, without dwelling, without cultivation, and without accomplishment."

from Sutra in Forty-Two Sections
Translated by the Buddhist Text Translation Society
http://www.cttbusa.org/42s/42sections.asp.html
This does’t support your position. If anything, it supports the argument that it’s better to “give to the dharma” (Buddhist temple; dharma center) than to a stranger on the street. The point is, giving to a source of dharma, one which benefits countless beings (and in your example mentions “a single good person; one who holds the five precepts; a single Srotaapanna, a single Sakridagamin, etc), is better than just giving to anyone who needs it. This doesn’t exclude giving to those in need. It doesn’t mean that you can’t give some guy on the street a dollar.

So, yes, I’m a sense it is true that
“the person or being to whom you give, really does affect your merit” as you say. But the amount of merit gained still does not depend on whether the recipient actually receives the gift, which is what we were discussing:
Aemilius wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 9:51 am Does it matter if the recipient of one's generosity does not actually get one's gift?
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 12:40 pm The potential to gain merit is there whether the gift is received or not.
Aemilius wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 1:22 pm If you happened to be the potential & needful receiver, you would quite certainly think otherwise.
What you are suggesting is that the more the recipient is in need, the more merit you gain by giving, because the receiver thinks, “I need it more than they do”.
This isn’t supported by the teachings.

Suppose I desperately need $10,000 for life-saving medicine.
Suppose you spend weeks doing everything you can, calling everyone you know, begging for money, to raise that money for me. Would you say that your merit is great because of my need, because of your selfless efforts?
I would think the merit would be very great.

Now, suppose Elon Musk sends me $10,000, which is like what he would easily spend on a pair of cuff links. Would his merit be the same as yours? And if his motivation for giving was actually to boast about it to improve his reputation, would that affect his merit?

I’d still be getting the money. So, by your argument, his merit would be the same as yours because I need the money.

Yes, you’d both gain merit. But yours would be much greater than his.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Natan
Posts: 3685
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Natan »

A lot of people make the mistake of thinking merit is an outer manifestation like wealth and good looks. How merit manifests in Buddhism is stability of mind. 3 Bodhichitta and 3 Spheres are not for building anything in the world. They are for samadhi. Samadhi is what carries the four Buddha activities which are like the sweet scent of flowers attracting bees.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Aemilius wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 3:20 pm On the contrary, it seems evident that Shantideva has got it wrong. Think for yourself! Is there equal merit if one doctor intends to heal your sickness, and another doctor actually heals it? Is there equal merit if someone intends to give you food to eat, and another one actually gives you food and satisfies your hunger?
Yes. Their merit is the same.

But you use the word “intends” so if you mean “oh sooner or later when I feel like it” then that doesn’t count as intentions.

The merit that one accrues is a reflection of their intentions. I recently had a double lung transplant. Most transplant failures occur because of complications with the receiver of the organ. Does the merit of the surgeon somehow decrease if, a month after the surgery, the receiver’s body starts to experienced organ rejection?
Last edited by PadmaVonSamba on Fri May 06, 2022 6:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Aemilius wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 3:20 pm On the contrary, it seems evident that Shantideva has got it wrong. Think for yourself!
Of course! that’s the most sensible explanation.

So, thinking for yourself, tell me this:

A hungry person asks you for some money for food, and you give it to him.
Did your merit just increase or decrease?

But instead of food, he goes and buys beer and cigarettes with the money.
Did your merit just increase or decrease?

But because he was buying beer and cigarettes, he was in the right place at the right time and stops someone with a gun from robbing the store. He wouldn’t have been there if you hadn’t given him the money.
Did your merit just increase or decrease?

In arresting the suspect, the police kill him, and people riot in protest and three more people die. This all started with you giving that guy some money.
Did your merit just increase or decrease?
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14456
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Queequeg »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 6:44 pm
Aemilius wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 3:20 pm On the contrary, it seems evident that Shantideva has got it wrong. Think for yourself!
Of course! that’s the most sensible explanation.

So, thinking for yourself, tell me this:

A hungry person asks you for some money for food, and you give it to him.
Did your merit just increase or decrease?

But instead of food, he goes and buys beer and cigarettes with the money.
Did your merit just increase or decrease?

But because he was buying beer and cigarettes, he was in the right place at the right time and stops someone with a gun from robbing the store. He wouldn’t have been there if you hadn’t given him the money.
Did your merit just increase or decrease?

In arresting the suspect, the police kill him, and people riot in protest and three more people die. This all started with you giving that guy some money.
Did your merit just increase or decrease?
Its like the stock market - your good deeds are like stock bets that can vary in merit depending on the beneficiaries of your actions. Past results do not guarantee future performance.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9437
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Queequeg wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 6:50 pm Of course its like the stock market - your good deeds are like stock bets that can vary in merit depending on the beneficiaries of your actions. Past results do not guarantee future performance.
Except merit isn’t really like stocks. Merit is more like the the skill one develops by practicing the piano or a foreign language, or exercising every day. It’s an accumulation of qualities.
When one gives selflessly, one practices generosity. Likewise with patience and so on.
If you stop practicing, the skill begins to fade.

This is why it has nothing to do with what the receiver experiences or the object given. Buddha doesn’t need a bowl of fruit laid out on your home altar or a bunch of cups of water or candles or incense. And statues need them even less. But it’s the practice of making offerings every morning that guarantees you start your day with the practice of generosity. If you then become a person who is spontaneously generous, patient, compassionate, and so on, it shows you have acquired a lot of merit.

Merit in this sense is sometimes also called “blessings” although for some reason that term makes my skin crawl a little. It sounds a bit to churchy for my tastes.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Queequeg
Former staff member
Posts: 14456
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:24 pm

Re: karma and its fruit or fruits

Post by Queequeg »

Yeah. That was a joke.
There is no suffering to be severed. Ignorance and klesas are indivisible from bodhi. There is no cause of suffering to be abandoned. Since extremes and the false are the Middle and genuine, there is no path to be practiced. Samsara is nirvana. No severance achieved. No suffering nor its cause. No path, no end. There is no transcendent realm; there is only the one true aspect. There is nothing separate from the true aspect.
-Guanding, Perfect and Sudden Contemplation,
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”