[feAilei1]

I found this article in the Victoria 'Times Colonist'. Its by Wayne Codling, described

as ''a former Zen monastic and a lineage holder in the Soto Zen tradition''.

Comments about the article are welcome.



Karma: What it Is and What it is Not

Even though most meditators in North America are not Buddhist, there are a significant number who are. Certainly Zen meditation will bring benefits regardless of religious allegiances, but it is particularly well suited to those who study the way, ie, Buddhists. This essay is for them.

Karma is an ancient idea; it has been around since long before there was a Buddhism. As an item of religious dogma, karma can become extremely complex and convoluted. Don’t be concerned, I will avoid all that, but there are a couple of basic points about karma that can be confusing. The intention is to keep it simple while not falling into the simplistic; starting with the word itself. The Sanskrit word ‘karma’ refers to action, activity; a process rather than any fixed thing.

Karma is intention. That is what the Buddha said. There are two possible ways to understand this statement. One: ‘karmic consequences’ are tethered to conscious intention. I would say that this is the usual understanding. But, another way of understanding the Buddha’s oft-repeated words is that nothing happens without intention. Practice then becomes a function of awareness of intention, since it perfumes everything.


Continued at the link:


http://blogs.timescolonist.com/2012/...hat-it-is-not/