What or who receives kamma's results?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
nrose619
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:32 pm

Re: What or who receives kamma's results?

Post by nrose619 » Sat Jan 12, 2013 5:56 pm

ground wrote:
nrose619 wrote:If the "self" is an illusion what receives the results of kamma?

all the best,
-Nick
Consciousnesses do arise in the context of self (consciousness "I", consciousness "me", consciousness "mine").That isn't an illusion isn't it? So consciousnesses may reap what they have sown :sage:
Didn't the Buddha say the opposite? "This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my self." The consciousness isn't an illusion but it's phrasing is. There can be awareness without the use of me, I, or mine.
"A silver bird
flies over the autumn lake.
When it has passed,
the lake's surface does not try
to hold on to the image of the bird."

Bakmoon
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: What or who receives kamma's results?

Post by Bakmoon » Sat Jan 12, 2013 9:10 pm

nrose619 wrote:
Bakmoon wrote:
nrose619 wrote:If the "self" is an illusion what receives the results of kamma?

all the best,
-Nick
I think that there is some confusion here about what the teaching of Anatta actually means. A lot of people think it means "I don't exist" but that's not quite right. It means something more along the lines of "My identity is only a concept, and not part of ultimate reality." The things that make a person up are real, but they are all impermanent and arise and cease, just like everything else in this conditioned world. There is no underlying "core" to a person that remains unchanged.
There's no confusion about the teachings of Anatta.. I know we exist but identity is an illusion, this is the ultimate reality. It's just the way kamma is sometimes described makes me confused. for example "what you do happens to you" well what "you" is that quote referring to? because "you" is saying there is a special identity and separateness. Unless its speaking in relativist terms as a way of teaching..
The word "You" is being used in a purely conventional sense, and not in an ultimate sense. We need to use conventional terms in speech because there are only four things that are part of ultimate reality, and they are: Rupa, Citta, Cetasika, and Nibbana. If we didn't use conventional terms, it would be impossibly complicated to describe anything in terms of these parts of ultimate reality, so we use conventional terms such as person, me, you, etc... in order to convey information.
The non-doing of any evil,
The performance of what's skillful,
The cleansing of one's own mind:
This is the Buddhas' teaching.

User avatar
nrose619
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:32 pm

Re: What or who receives kamma's results?

Post by nrose619 » Sat Jan 12, 2013 10:17 pm

Bakmoon wrote: The word "You" is being used in a purely conventional sense, and not in an ultimate sense. We need to use conventional terms in speech because there are only four things that are part of ultimate reality, and they are: Rupa, Citta, Cetasika, and Nibbana. If we didn't use conventional terms, it would be impossibly complicated to describe anything in terms of these parts of ultimate reality, so we use conventional terms such as person, me, you, etc... in order to convey information.
got it :twothumbsup: , so I guess kamma should be looked at as a combination of a source and actions coming back to that source. Kinda like when you drop a stone in the pond, the stone does not have a special identity but receives the actions of kamma because the results of the action come back to the place the action was initiated.
"A silver bird
flies over the autumn lake.
When it has passed,
the lake's surface does not try
to hold on to the image of the bird."

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: What or who receives kamma's results?

Post by ground » Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:23 am

nrose619 wrote:
ground wrote:
nrose619 wrote:If the "self" is an illusion what receives the results of kamma?

all the best,
-Nick
Consciousnesses do arise in the context of self (consciousness "I", consciousness "me", consciousness "mine").That isn't an illusion isn't it? So consciousnesses may reap what they have sown :sage:
Didn't the Buddha say the opposite? "This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my self."
The consciousnesses "I", "me", "mine" are not said to be "yours". But they still arise and that isn't an illusion. So what besides these conciousnesses, i.e. their perpetuated manifestations, may reap what they have sown by means of affirmative thinking, feeling, perceiving?
nrose619 wrote:The consciousness isn't an illusion but it's phrasing is.
The phrasing is the consciousness.
nrose619 wrote: There can be awareness without the use of me, I, or mine.
Maybe yes, maybe no. Explicit thoughts "I" or "mine" are not decisive but the concomitant sense is. :sage:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], JamesTheGiant and 98 guests