Results of past karma

[santa100]

I just explained what types of causes/effects in this life are not kamma and why.

You can explain all you want but you have proven absolutely nothing. No proof, no sutta references, no literature, no answer to my questions, nothing!

[polo]

Is it true that most of the things we experience now is the result of past karma?

If so, do these results only manifest as outward events (such as illness, accident, winning lottery, etc.)?

Or do they also manifest as our subjective experiences like anger, sadness, etc.?

Kamma is a long-term process of causes and conditions, and it is insanely complex as it goes unseen while handling millions of things and situations of all material and mental world deminsions with regards to 1 particular living being (owner of this very kamma). So, the fruit of kamma always manifests itself in this or that material or/and mental phenomenon by these or those material or/and mental conditions. However, many mental and material phenomenons may have their own conditions in which kamma as a process doesn't take place at all.

you included all actions done since countless previous life times up until

I'm pretty sure "countless previous lives" kamma theory is wrong. Kamma is quite limited, not unlimited.

but a bright student could also flunk the same exam because of his instant kamma of being overconfident

This is not kamma.

Hello Zom (or whatever your real name is). Your short description on Karma is very interesting . I wonder if you can direct me to any website or blog on Karma that you know. Some articles on Karma that I read were rather boring, or else I find them not making sense. More on the imaginations than anything else.
After reading what you wrote I thought there must be more that you can show us. Cheers

[sentinel]

Kamma/karma alone would not suffice to explain everything . One thing that probably being forgotten is the millions conditions of present life which could affect and change it .

[bridif1]

Hi!

I don't know if this was brought up before, but I'll put it anyway, in case it could point to something useful:

SN 36.21:

On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove Monastery, the Squirrel's Feeding Place. There Moliyasivaka the wanderer went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One, "Master Gotama, there are some brahmans & contemplatives who are of this doctrine, this view: Whatever an individual feels — pleasure, pain, neither-pleasure-nor-pain — is entirely caused by what was done before. Now what does Master Gotama say to that?"

[The Buddha:] "There are cases where some feelings arise based on bile.[1] You yourself should know how some feelings arise based on bile. Even the world is agreed on how some feelings arise based on bile. So any brahmans & contemplatives who are of the doctrine & view that whatever an individual feels — pleasure, pain, neither-pleasure-nor-pain — is entirely caused by what was done before — slip past what they themselves know, slip past what is agreed on by the world. Therefore I say that those brahmans & contemplatives are wrong."

"There are cases where some feelings arise based on phlegm... based on internal winds... based on a combination of bodily humors... from the change of the seasons... from uneven[2] care of the body... from harsh treatment... from the result of kamma. You yourself should know how some feelings arise from the result of kamma. Even the world is agreed on how some feelings arise from the result of kamma. So any brahmans & contemplatives who are of the doctrine & view that whatever an individual feels — pleasure, pain, neither pleasure-nor-pain — is entirely caused by what was done before — slip past what they themselves know, slip past what is agreed on by the world. Therefore I say that those brahmans & contemplatives are wrong."

When this was said, Moliyasivaka the wanderer said to the Blessed One: "Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to point out the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. I go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, & to the community of monks. May the Blessed One remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge from this day forward, for life."

Kind regards!

[Zom]

Hello Zom (or whatever your real name is). Your short description on Karma is very interesting . I wonder if you can direct me to any website or blog on Karma that you know. Some articles on Karma that I read were rather boring, or else I find them not making sense. More on the imaginations than anything else.

This is because Buddha himself never explained working mechanism of kamma fully and in all details. So buddhist schools had their own theories about this (same with abidhamma - different schools had different abhidhammas, again because Buddha never taught abhidhamma no matter what some people say). What we know are just some facts which are there in the suttas like, not everything which happens to you is due to kamma you created, certain kamma has certain fruits (you can't kill and become poor because of this kamma; or, even, you can't kill and go to jail because of this kamma; but you can kill and have a decease or even short life because of that). So when someone comes up with his kamma theory we should check if this theory fits well with all those facts in the suttas (ignoring commentaries, because they have some really crazy ideas).

[Volo]

(you can't kill and become poor because of this kamma; or, even, you can't kill and go to jail because of this kamma; but you can kill and have a decease or even short life because of that).

Which sutta does say this? What i found is a sutta about a minimal consequence for this or that action in case the person is born as a human, not that a certain results is fixed after action:

40 (10) Conducive
(1) “Bhikkhus, the destruction of life, repeatedly pursued, developed, and cultivated, is conducive to hell, to the animal realm, and to the sphere of afflicted spirits; for one reborn as a human being the destruction of life at minimum conduces to a short life span.
(2) “Taking what is not given, repeatedly pursued, developed, and cultivated, is conducive to hell, to the animal realm, and to the sphere of afflicted spirits; for one reborn as a human being taking what is not given at minimum conduces to loss of wealth.

It is difficult to say, what means "at minimum". But if suffering is concerned, short life can cause a small suffering (if say a person dies in a sudden accident). Being poor or going to jail might bring more problems.

What is impossible is that a good action brings a bad result and a bad one causes a good one:

284 (17)–286 (19)
(284) “It is impossible and inconceivable, bhikkhus, that a wished for, desired, agreeable result could be produced from bodily misconduct … (285) … that a wished for, desired, agreeable result could be produced from verbal misconduct … (286) … that a wished for, desired, agreeable result could be produced from mental misconduct; there is no such possibility. But it is possible that an unwished for, undesired, disagreeable result might be produced [from bodily misconduct … from verbal misconduct …] from mental misconduct; there is such a possibility.”

287 (20)–289 (22)
(287) “It is impossible and inconceivable, bhikkhus, that an unwished for, undesired, disagreeable result could be produced from bodily good conduct [29] … (288) … that an unwished for, undesired, disagreeable result could be produced from verbal good conduct … (289) … that an unwished for, undesired, disagreeable result could be produced from mental good conduct; there is no such possibility. But it is possible that a wished for, desired, agreeable result could be produced [from bodily good conduct … from verbal good conduct …] from mental good conduct; there is such a possibility.”

[Zom]

It is difficult to say, what means "at minimum". But if suffering is concerned, short life can cause a small suffering (if say a person dies in a sudden accident). Being poor or going to jail might bring more problems.

Kamma is not about social justice. Kamma is not about "punishing" you with whatever means. It has particular impersonal (without an agent who will judge you) "mirror" results, if you like. And yes, MN 135 perfectly shows that.

It is difficult to say, what means "at minimum"

Not difficult. "at minimum" means at least this effect, but more (similar) effects may appear, like desease or mutilation (in case of killing) or poor family (apart from loss of wealth) and so on along with these lines.

Kamma doesn't work this way: You killed a person (caused suffering) and because of that your wife starts cheating on you (as your kammic painful result of killing).

As for jailing - this thing as kammic result might happen if you, for example, were an animal trader (a type of livelihood Buddha condemned).

[Volo]

Kamma is not about social justice. Kamma is not about "punishing" you with whatever means. It has particular impersonal (without an agent who will judge you) "mirror" results, if you like. And yes, MN 135 perfectly shows that.

Not difficult. "at minimum" means at least this effect, but more (similar) effects may appear, like desease or mutilation (in case of killing) or poor family (apart from loss of wealth) and so on along with these lines.

Kamma doesn't work this way: You killed a person (caused suffering) and because of that your wife starts cheating on you (as your kammic painful result of killing).

As for jailing - this thing as kammic result might happen if you, for example, were an animal trader (a type of livelihood Buddha condemned).

I don't see how the above is supported by the suttas.

[Zom]

I don't see how the above is supported by the suttas.

Reread MN 135 to see how.

[Volo]

I don't see how the above is supported by the suttas.

Reread MN 135 to see how.

I read it. But it's clear for me AN 8.40 proves that short life is one "minimal" consequence, other are possible as well. We disagree, it's okay.

[Zom]

MN 135 is not just about "minimal" consequences. It is about general consequences, it shows ways how kamma works - this is the very essense of the sutta.

This is the way, student, that leads to short life...
This is the way, student, that leads to sickliness...
This is the way, student, that leads to ugliness...
This is the way, student, that leads to being uninfluential.... etc etc etc

[cappuccino]

This is the way that leads to beauty, that is to say, not to be angry or given to much rage; even when much is said, not to be furious, angry, ill-disposed or resentful, or to show ill-temper, hate or surliness.

Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta