I can assure you that I'm trying to get rid of all my wrong views.clw_uk wrote:So you adhere to the wrong view of the Ajivakas which the Buddha said was the worst of all the wrong views (even hedonistic materialism came off better). He did state that it would have been better for the world if Makkhali Gosala had not been born at all.As far as I'm concerned, according to the doctrine of kamma, A also causes B which causes C and so forth. Kamma is part of paṭiccasamuppāda. And the mind either has momentum and is part of kamma (the law of cause and effect that covers any substratum of existence), or it's set free through awakening.
Kamma doesn't = determinism. Kamma only occurs when there is clinging which gives rise to a "me" that intends. The result of kamma only ripens when there is a "self" to experience it.
When craving/clinging stops then there is no more birth of "I" and so no more intentional action (Kamma) and no result of intentional action (Kamma vipaka). This is D.O. and it's cessation.
To put it another way, the path of Buddha leads to the stoping of jati (birth) of self, and so kamma (intentional action) and it's result stops.
That's completely different from deterministic Ajivaka karma which you seem to support.
But I don't disagree with anything you said here. About the mind having momentum, I meant egoic mental/physical action and inaction also, which originate out of clinging, which brings about suffering. And awakening; realizing that nothing conditional-is-self. Hence wu wei
But I happen to have this idea that; awakening also depends on kamma, and not everyone has the capacity at any given time (it's what I observe as well). There must be some sort of a kammic barrier.