[kristloken]

I will start with the law of Karma. The other day i was watching a video for a buddhist monk talking about the law of karma and that the vast majority of people misunderstand it. He started by talking about the tsunami (he was in Thailand at that time) and that many people were trying to interpret the tsunami as a punishment or as a bad karma. According to this monk, if those people understood the law of Karma they would have started rebuilding the damaged city rather than wasting time asking useless questions!!

He gave another example which is: what would you do if you find a mango seed in the middle of the road that might be hazardous to passers-by if they step on it (they might slip down). According to this monk, if you truely understand the law of karma you would not remove it from the road and simply throw it in the trash pin, but you would implant it in your garden so it will be transformed into a fruitful tree which everyone can enjoy!!

To sum up, the law of Karma according to the abovementioned monk is about being positive, proactive, turning negative/possibly hrmeful things into positive/useful stuff. I found his explanation of the law of Karma very impressive.

On the other hand, i found all of the above contradicts with other aspects of Buddhism hence i became confused.

Any beginner to buddhism would probably start with the four nobel truths. Buddhism starts with a very NEGATIVE notion: life means suffering!!! While i personally agree with this to a large extent, i wonder: do i have to be depressed/very negative to become a buddhist? is there an objective way to verify that life is suffering? i know many people who strongly disagree and find life beautiful/joyful so can a happy person become a buddhist? Even if we agree that happiness is impermenant, should not we agree that also misery/suffering is impermenant? dont you guys agree that buddhism as a philosophy always look at the half empty part of the glass? even when we look at the ultimate goal of buddhism: to break out of the cycle of rebirth by achieving nirvana, do you guys see that life that bad?

I ve read few books and article talking about buddhism and oriental phiosophies in general. What they share in commin is that they focus on the inside, not the outside. To make my point clear i will share the following metaphoric stories:

A poor man, Depra, once found an enormously valuable jewel. Being a person of little desire and content with his small income, Depra pondered to whom he should give the jewel. He tried to think who was most in need and suddenly was inspired to give the jewel to king Prasenajit. The king was stounded as there were many poor and needy people, but Depra said: "O king, its you who is the poorest, because you lack contenment".

As you can see from the above story, the criteria being used to determine richness is how content you are with what you already have! However, does that mean that being ambitious is a bad thing!! what do we mean by being ambitious? isnt it to not be fully satisfied with what we have? if we fully satisfaction with what we have then how would we get motivated to do anything in life? I agree that its a virtue to learn how to control your desires and learn how to be happy with what you have but if we look at some countries like Burma, dont you guys agree that this Phiosophy (being passive and indifferent to whats happening outside) enabled their dictators to rule them out without any opposition and steal the wealth of a poor nation!!

According to the Zen philosophy, we should learn how "to go with the flow" be passive, and never resist whatever life through in your face (i dont know how can this be reconciled with the law of Karma as explained above) to explain my point a bit further please read the following story:

"It happened that one Zen master was passing through a street. A man came running and hit him hard. The master fell down. Then he got up and started to walk in the same direction in which he was going before, not even looking back.
A disciple was with the master. He was simply shocked. He said, "Who is this man? What is this? If one lives in such a way, then anybody can come and kill you. And you have not even looked at that person, who he is, and why he did it."
The master said, "That is his problem, not mine." !!!!
So what all of this is about? being self-centred? is this the way to make the world a better place?

In a different article i ve read the following: "Buddha sitting under his bodhi tree...if the whole world suddenly disappears, will it make any difference to Buddha? -none. It will not make any difference at all. If the whole world disappears, it will not make any difference because he has attained to the center"
Great!! so if the Buddha sees someone suffering why should he bother helping? to help others we should be motivated, we should have some sort of desire, isnt it.

One of my favourite movies is "Samsara" its about the spiritual jounry of a buddhist monk. In the movie he recieved a letter his teacher asking him "what is more important: to satisy one thousand desires or conquering just one!" from my understanding (and please correct me if i am wrong, the only desire a buddist would have is LIBERATION from all desires!!! so if i liberate myslef from all desires (which sounds good to me) and i become free, why should i bother doing anything in life!! I would just sit there doing nothing (a complete dispassion, no attachement whatsoever) and wait for death to come and wish that i break out of the cycle of death and never come back to this miserable world.

One last point is in relation to "living in the presnt moment" and in the "here and now" what buddhism say about planning? is planning for the future a bad thing according to buddism?

I have a lot fo other examples and questions, but i think this is enough for my first post in the beginners forum. I wish i can have some answers from those who have better understanding of buddhism than myself.

Your input will be highly appreciated.