Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22404
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by Ceisiwr »

Sam Vara wrote:
clw_uk wrote: How on earth can you say good actions lead to "beauty" when beauty is merely perception. It doesn't actually exist as a quality of the world.

For example a mountain doesn't have the charateristic of "beautiful". The notion of beauty is added to the mountain via the individuals perception.

It then seems strange to say that a particular action leads to beauty.
I don't, of course, have any insight into the workings of kamma at this level, but there are two possibilities which spring to mind. One is that if kamma can determine where we are born, and to which parents, etc., then it could presumably also determine (by the same mysterious process) how we are perceived by others. Secondly, in the case of human beauty, there are trans-cultural standards of what counts as attractive. These appear to be "hard-wired" into the organism, possibly as an evolutionary factor in reproduction and child-rearing, and consist of factors such as symmetry and proportion. Whereas our preferences in mountains are subjective (craggy or smooth?) we can all agree that a person whose body is asymmetrical, or lacking an eye or limb, is ceteris paribus less attractive than one whose features are perfectly regular.

The problem here is that someone else's Kamma then influences, or determines, my perception of them. That seems a real stretch.

Also there are some people who find "unsual" traits attractive, such as amputee fetishes. If one person finds you attractive and another unattractive you are, in essence, neither. From this the claim that actions can lead to beauty or ugliness seems to be a bizzare one.


To expand, let's say someone is born "ugly" but realises, through reflection, that ugliness and beauty don't actually exist as an inherent quality. They then won't be saddened by other peoples perception of them, which in a sense negates them suffering via their appearance due to past actions.
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Sat Jul 11, 2015 6:45 pm, edited 3 times in total.
“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.”
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by daverupa »

...unconjecturable... yet why do people insist?
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
LXNDR
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 5:15 am

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by LXNDR »

clw_uk wrote:
LXNDR wrote:
it's not inconceivable, it means that such action leads to birth in a society where the person's appearance will be regarded as either handsome or ugly

because it's really the public attitude towards physical features which causes their possessor happiness, sense of pride, accomplishment or moral suffering
So someone else's Kamma determines who I find attractive?

And besides, when did a whole society agree on beauty?

no, one's kamma determines in what society one will be reborn, and it's its social norms which dictate one who he finds beautiful or ugly rather than attractive, because attractiveness is very subjective, one may find attractive a maimed person, considered ugly by the popular opinion

neither did the whole society ever agree that telling lies was immoral, if you mean some formal act of agreement

the norms are usually get inculcated by opinion leaders
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22404
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by Ceisiwr »

LXNDR wrote:
clw_uk wrote:
LXNDR wrote:
it's not inconceivable, it means that such action leads to birth in a society where the person's appearance will be regarded as either handsome or ugly

because it's really the public attitude towards physical features which causes their possessor happiness, sense of pride, accomplishment or moral suffering
So someone else's Kamma determines who I find attractive?

And besides, when did a whole society agree on beauty?

no, one's kamma determines in what society one will be reborn, and it's its social norms which dictate one who he finds beautiful or ugly rather than attractive, because attractiveness is very subjective, one may find attractive a maimed person, considered ugly by the popular opinion

neither did the whole society ever agree that telling lies was immoral, if you mean some formal act of agreement

the norms are usually get inculcated by opinion leaders

Ok but that still doesn't get you to "don't do this action because you will be ugly" since they won't be ugly, as it doesn't exist as an inherent quality.

Let's say a being is born in a society that, as a general whole, perceives her as ugly. Now let's say this person is very wise and realises that they are neither ugly nor beautiful. They can then realise that other peoples perceptions of them as such are meaningless. They can then become indifferent to these opinions. How then is this "ugliness" a negative result of past actions, when the individual is unmoved by being perceived as "ugly"?
“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
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by Alex123 »

daverupa wrote:
LXNDR wrote:it's not inconceivable
Well, there are these four unconjecturables...
I heard that before...

Just like the "ways of the Lord" are unfathomable for us, mere mortals.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by daverupa »

Alex123 wrote:
daverupa wrote:
LXNDR wrote:it's not inconceivable
Well, there are these four unconjecturables...
I heard that before...

Just like the "ways of the Lord" are unfathomable for us, mere mortals.
That's not what that means at all, though. You've given that some sort of twist with 'mere mortal' that shows a strong connotation for you, but maybe unpack it here instead of oblique references.

It's simply the case that

(a) not everything is kamma-vipaka
(b) the specifics are unconjecturable
(c) specifics in the texts are probably narrative modes exploring un/wholesome consequences with an eye to motivation

But guesswork is vexing and bothersome, leading to e.g. certain junk ideas about those in poverty. The fact is, other than a very general & overarching idea of un/wholesome & liberative kamma, it's liberative kamma that's to be studied & undertaken, not un/wholesome kamma at all.

Most, if not all, of this is the cultural context of Magadha, not specifically Dhamma...

...in my opinion? <-- this is probably important to add
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
LXNDR
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 5:15 am

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by LXNDR »

clw_uk wrote:
LXNDR wrote:
no, one's kamma determines in what society one will be reborn, and it's its social norms which dictate one who he finds beautiful or ugly rather than attractive, because attractiveness is very subjective, one may find attractive a maimed person, considered ugly by the popular opinion

neither did the whole society ever agree that telling lies was immoral, if you mean some formal act of agreement

the norms are usually get inculcated by opinion leaders

Ok but that still doesn't get you to "don't do this action because you will be ugly" since they won't be ugly, as it doesn't exist as an inherent quality.

Let's say a being is born in a society that, as a general whole, perceives her as ugly. Now let's say this person is very wise and realises that they are neither ugly nor beautiful. They can then realise that other peoples perceptions of them as such are meaningless. They can then become indifferent to these opinions. How then is this "ugliness" a negative result of past actions, when the individual is unmoved by being "ugly"?
my interpretation is that reference to beauty and ugliness is just a folksy and concise way of saying that one will be born in a place where s/he will be viewed as beautiful or ugly and treated accordingly, to be sure what the Buddha really meant is unknown

i'm not sure that such an 'unfortunate' person is destined to suffer their entire life, neither beautiful people are going to enjoy their beauty forever

some may have their suffering alleviated some may not, which i think is also determined by kamma and circumstances, on the other hand their treatment by other people in social interactions still may cause them suffering
User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 4646
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala »

daverupa wrote:The fact is, other than a very general & overarching idea of un/wholesome & liberative kamma, it's liberative kamma that's to be studied & undertaken, not un/wholesome kamma at all.
Wholesome kamma such as:
"But here some woman or man when visiting a monk or brahman, asks: 'What is wholesome, venerable sir?... Or what, by my doing it, will be long for my welfare and happiness?' Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a happy destination... If instead he comes to the human state, he is wise wherever he is reborn. This is the way that leads to wisdom, that is to say, when visiting a monk or brahman, to ask: 'What is wholesome, venerable sir?... Or what, by my doing it, will be long for my welfare and happiness?'
BlogPāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22404
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by Ceisiwr »

That's not what that means at all, though. You've given that some sort of twist with 'mere mortal' that shows a strong connotation for you, but maybe unpack it here instead of oblique references.

It's simply the case that

(a) not everything is kamma-vipaka
(b) the specifics are unconjecturable
(c) specifics in the texts are probably narrative modes exploring un/wholesome consequences with an eye to motivation

But guesswork is vexing and bothersome, leading to e.g. certain junk ideas about those in poverty. The fact is, other than a very general & overarching idea of un/wholesome & liberative kamma, it's liberative kamma that's to be studied & undertaken, not un/wholesome kamma at all.

Most, if not all, of this is the cultural context of Magadha, not specifically Dhamma...

...in my opinion? <-- this is probably important to add

:goodpost:
“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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22404
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by Ceisiwr »

LXNDR
some may have their suffering alleviated some may not, which i think is also determined by kamma and circumstances, on the other hand their treatment by other people in social interactions still may cause them suffering
Unless they are indifferent to it, which would essentially mean it's not an unfortunate situation at all.
to be sure what the Buddha really meant is unknown
The idea seems to be that certain actions are more wholesome than others. He seems to have taught this using simple analogies, such as "action X leads to ugliness", so that a message could be put across to people who think in such simple terms.

However as pointed out by Daverupa, the Buddha taught that the outcome of kamma is unconjecturable. It therefore seems foolish to me to take these simple analogies as fact, which can lead to missing the deeper meaning. Instead it can lead to absurd claims that certain actions can result in being born "ugly".

To me the deeper understanding is that certain actions can lead to births into certain realms. For example acting on anger can lead to birth in the angry realm.
“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.”
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by daverupa »

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Wholesome kamma such as:...
Common to every religion, those things that so conduce; notice how it's the specifics that form the baseline disagreements between most religions, and not the inherent un/wholesome velocities in themselves. So, here and exactly here, vexation arises for those so engaged in seeking 'to be', seeking rebirth, and other blameworthy goal-setting astride speculative metaphysical structures.

Liberative kamma dodges past all of it.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
LXNDR
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 5:15 am

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by LXNDR »

clw_uk wrote:LXNDR
some may have their suffering alleviated some may not, which i think is also determined by kamma and circumstances, on the other hand their treatment by other people in social interactions still may cause them suffering
Unless they are indifferent to it, which would essentially mean it's not an unfortunate situation at all.
development of indifference or total indifference isn't all that easy even if one makes conscious effort at it, and it doesn't start right from the birthday, so until one grows wise enough to make that decision, there'll be enough suffering

if emotional suffering was incurable practice of Dhamma would probably lose much of its appeal
Kamma sutta (SN 35.145) wrote:
And what is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma? Just this noble eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. This is called the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma.
clw_uk wrote:
The idea seems to be that certain actions are more wholesome than others. He seems to have taught this using simple analogies, such as "action X leads to ugliness", so that a message could be put across to people who think in such simple terms.

However as pointed out by Daverupa, the Buddha taught that the outcome of kamma is unconjecturable. It therefore seems foolish to me to take these simple analogies as fact, which can lead to missing the deeper meaning. Instead it can lead to absurd claims that certain actions can result in being born "ugly".

To me the deeper understanding is that certain actions can lead to births into certain realms. For example acting on anger can lead to birth in the angry realm.
for some reason the Buddha didn't taught the visitor the 4 inconjecturables when he asked very specific questions about the workings of kamma, why? that's must be another inconjecturable :D
User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 7797
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by Aloka »

daverupa wrote:
Liberative kamma dodges past all of it.

:twothumbsup:
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by Alex123 »

clw_uk wrote:Hi,


I was wondering what fellow members think of this sutta?


Is this a justification for ignoring poverty? Has the text become corrupted with notions of the caste system?
What is wrong if being, poor, ugly, etc, is result of past kamma?


But doing bad things toward those people, that is make new, negative kamma.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Kamma and poverty - Culakammavibhanga Sutta

Post by Sam Vara »

clw_uk wrote:
The problem here is that someone else's Kamma then influences, or determines, my perception of them. That seems a real stretch.
For most people, the existence of any manifestation of kamma determining future existences is a real stretch. It would be a strange view which accepted post-mortem rebirth but rejected the idea that personal kamma could determine how a being is perceived. Do they have certain knowledge of a mechanism which supports the first assertion, but not the second?
Also there are some people who find "unsual" traits attractive, such as amputee fetishes. If one person finds you attractive and another unattractive you are, in essence, neither. From this the claim that actions can lead to beauty or ugliness seems to be a bizzare one.
You might be over-emphasising the subjective qualities involved, and mistakenly thinking that "beauty" as used here is a judgement entirely contributed by the perceiver. It might mean something more like "well-formed" or "regular"; rather in the sense that the English words "fair", "fine", "holy", etc. originally meant something much more objective than a type of evinced approval. Whether or not Sona's vina makes a pleasing sound is a different question from whether it is correctly tuned or not.

If your kamma determines that you will be an amputee, then presumably it can also determine whether you meet the type of fetishists you describe. Similarly,
let's say someone is born "ugly" but realises, through reflection, that ugliness and beauty don't actually exist as an inherent quality. They then won't be saddened by other peoples perception of them, which in a sense negates them suffering via their appearance due to past actions.
this would presumably be an example of mixed kamma (both dark and bright), or the interplay of dark kamma (which leads to the ugliness) and bright kamma (which leads to the insight).
Post Reply