[Jifyicyfuhpop]

dear friends

i found this today, whilst doing so research: Karma From His Own Lips: by Ajahn Buddhadāsa

it is a collection of Pali suttas about kamma, with commentary by Ajahn Buddhadasa

it may be of interest

kind regards

[ultimda horaf]

Nice one element.

[Obenuearema]

Thanks Element!

[Kennypor]

Thank you for providing that for us, Element.

[patuvammnogoo]

Any action that one has carried out with greed, arising with greed as its cause, and having greed as its
origin; that action bears fruit within the aggregates that are the basis for ones individuality. In whichever
individuality that kamma bears fruit, one experiences that karmic fruit within that very individuality,
either immediately, soon after, or some time later.

(The exact same description is applied to hatred and delusion, word for word.)

Friends, this is comparable with plant seeds that have not broken, rotted, or been destroyed by wind
and sun, that have been chosen for their soundness, carefully stored, and planted by someone in a well
prepared plot with good top soil. Further, the rain falls according to the season. Those seeds will sprout,
develop, and thrive most certainly. In the same way, any action that someone has carried out with greed
… hatred … delusion, arising with greed … hatred … delusion as its cause, and having greed … hatred
… delusion as its origin; that action bears fruit within the aggregates that are the basis for his
individuality. In whichever individuality that kamma bears fruit, he experiences that karmic fruit within
that very individuality, either immediately, a moment later, or some time later. Looks similar to alaya ("storehouse consciousness") in the Mahayana tradition. Maybe this is the original source for that teaching?

[KellyLynchIV]

Looks similar to alaya ("storehouse consciousness") in the Mahayana tradition. Maybe this is the original source for that teaching?

Except for that annoying little problem that Asanga's 4th century C.E. invention/contrivance of alayavijnanna is an Atman for a reincarnation scheme.

[inhitoemits]

Looks similar to alaya ("storehouse consciousness") in the Mahayana tradition. Maybe this is the original source for that teaching?

Consciousness or vinnana is sense awareness. That which "stores" seeds (i.e. tendencies/habits: anusaya/asava) is the citta. The citta is the same as sankhara khanda. This is why the notion of re-linking/storehouse consciousness does not make sense. Consciousness does not have the capacity to "store". To the contrary, consciousness "cleanses" or "purifies". If the mind is accutely conscious of greed, that greed fabrication produced by the citta/sankhara khanda will dissolve.

Consciousness merely reflects. It is the citta than stores. It is the physical body that stores. For example, if the mind is angry, that anger will spread through the nervous system in the physical body, where is stored, to be purged at a later time.

This is "reappearance". The mind gets angry, feels satisfied; then the same anger reappears at a later time, needing to come out of the body/mind; needing to purge; like going to the toilet purges.

[nasdfrdg]

Looks similar to alaya ("storehouse consciousness") in the Mahayana tradition. Maybe this is the original source for that teaching?

Hi Lazy,

Yes, looks similar as a Coral snake looks like nonpoisonous snakes which show similar strand patterns.

As stuka has pointed, the idea of an Alaya is an invention for an Atman. I do not know about the Mahayana religious philosophical oeuvre but at least I know about different "Alayas":

1) In Theosophy Alaya is found in the out most Mahayana system, the Tibetan Religion. Alaya is about Mulaprakriti as the essence and origin of all phenomena. In short: Atman, Universal Consciousness or Self; any of them endures in every person and is the responsible of rebirth but the most Orthodox Theosophical knowledge speaks about Reincarnation where the new physical body with all its tendencies or Karmic seeds sprout in a next life because this Atman who is the essential and unchanging Self.

I really doubt that the historical Buddha has taught that or something of his teaching leads to this speculative view.

2) The other Alaya, the Alaya Vijñana, in Theosophy is about the Budhi Manas or Superior Manas which works too, as a storehouse of all the intellectual and spiritual experiences of past lives and eventualy the Karmic fate of a human being.

I really doubt that the historical Buddha has taught that or something of his teaching leads to this speculative view.

3) Other Alaya, the Thich Nhat Hanh Alaya, is a courious mixture of both where, as has been pointed out in other posts, Thich not only is giving his very personal understanding as his teaching but also states in his book "The Heart of the Buddha's Teaching" in the Chapter that talks about the Aggregates where the fifth aggregate is taught as an Alaya plus the Alaya Vijñana. Both are presented as if those were teachings of the historical Buddha. Both Alayas, the Mulaprakriti and the Storehouse of seeds of Karmic fate that sprout as consiousness and consiousness as the root or essence of the mental fabrications and the rest of all the aggregates.

The historical Buddha taught:

Dwelling at Savatthi... "Monks, I will describe & analyze dependent co-arising for you.

"And what is dependent co-arising? From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.

Dependent Origination
Thich tells that Alaya Vijñana is a storehouse with seeds of karmic fate: Good ones and bad ones...; where is all what we are and the origin of our mental fabrications (principle of ownership). His personal teaching is contrary to what the Buddha taught where we can see that Ignorance is the requisite condition (seed?) of fabrications (views) and fabrications are the requisite condition (seed?) of Consciousness as it is told in the quote above. The requisite conditions of the Buddha are not the seeds of the "Alayas" as Karmic fates and prinicples of personality (or self) traits.

4) In another Alaya, the Mahayana and Tibetan one, found in the Lankavatara Sutra there are eight kinds of consciousness instead of seven in the Abbidharma where the Alayavijñana is the support of the rest of the seven ones:

In the same way that the waves in their variety, are the rough ocean, so the variety of so-called consciousness is produced in the Alaya. The thinking mind, the mind and consciousness differ in appearance, but substantially the eight should not be separated from each other at all here because there is neither qualified nor qualification. ("The Lankavatara Sutta, T. Suzuki. Rouledge and Sons, 1932).

From: Diccionario Akal del Budismo. So, here, Alaya, is Mulaprakriti or Atman or Universal Consciousness. Thich is doing mental games with all this religious material suggesting a substance that can explain literal rebirth.

Also, in the Vijñaptimatratasiddhi, the Alayavijñana is described like this:

[Alayavijñana] indeed is retribution (Tib. rnam-smin) resulting from positive and negative acts that project in the Self one of the six destinations. It is the vital principle that is perpetuated in series, from life to life.

From: Diccionario Akal del Budismo. And the teaching goes on and on, endlessly, around this ideas that are really sophisticated and out the concern of cessation of suffering because the (Mahayana) Alayas seem to be views for rebirth and/or reincarnation theoretical frames.

Finally, Lazy, I don't know if the quote you have given is from a Pali Sutta.

Of course my appreciation of all this material can be wrong.

[Zaebal]

Consciousness or vinnana is sense awareness. That which "stores" seeds (i.e. tendencies/habits: anusaya/asava) is the citta. The citta is the same as sankhara khanda. This is why the notion of re-linking/storehouse consciousness does not make sense. Consciousness does not have the capacity to "store". To the contrary, consciousness "cleanses" or "purifies". If the mind is accutely conscious of greed, that greed fabrication produced by the citta/sankhara khanda will dissolve.

Consciousness merely reflects. It is the citta than stores. It is the physical body that stores. For example, if the mind is angry, that anger will spread through the nervous system in the physical body, where is stored, to be purged at a later time.

This is "reappearance". The mind gets angry, feels satisfied; then the same anger reappears at a later time, needing to come out of the body/mind; needing to purge; like going to the toilet purges.

Very clear... thanks Element,

[uchetrip]

... an Atman for a reincarnation scheme.

Seems to me the Atman problem also exists in the passage which Ajahn Buddhadhasa quoted. What is this "individuality" in which kamma ripens, and within which one experiences the fruit?

Here is the passage again:

Any action that one has carried out with greed, arising with greed as its cause, and having greed as its
origin; that action bears fruit within the aggregates that are the basis for ones individuality. In whichever
individuality that kamma bears fruit, one experiences that karmic fruit within that very individuality,
either immediately, soon after, or some time later.

Friends, this is comparable with plant seeds that have not broken, rotted, or been destroyed by wind
and sun, that have been chosen for their soundness, carefully stored, and planted by someone in a well
prepared plot with good top soil. Further, the rain falls according to the season. Those seeds will sprout,
develop, and thrive most certainly. In the same way, any action that someone has carried out with greed
… hatred … delusion, arising with greed … hatred … delusion as its cause, and having greed … hatred
… delusion as its origin; that action bears fruit within the aggregates that are the basis for his
individuality. In whichever individuality that kamma bears fruit, he experiences that karmic fruit within
that very individuality, either immediately, a moment later, or some time later. Aside from rebirth/reincarnation, my understanding is that the alaya model was put forward (by Vasubandhu, actually, not his brother Asanga) in order to address a more fundamental issue: how, in the absence of an atman, can kamma produce a vipaka? And more generally, how can a thought-moment at one time affect a thought moment at a later time?

We see from the passage above that kamma arises in connection with mental behaviors: greed, hatred and delusion. So it is essentially something that happens within the conscious mind. And the conscious mind is where vipaka is experienced as well. But without an atman, what connects the two experiences?

The problem comes up regardless of whether we are speculating about multiple lives or limiting the discussion to continuity across a present life.

[Cinzomzm]

. Consciousness does not have the capacity to "store".

It does in Yogacara, though -- because of the two additional levels of consciousness that were added to the six recognized in the nikayas. (Correct me if I have the details wrong).

[frequensearules]

It does in Yogacara, though -- because of the two additional levels of consciousness that were added to the six recognized in the nikayas. (Correct me if I have the details wrong).

Meaning, made-up in order to support an Atman for a reincarnation scheme.

Which is fine if one is an Asanga-ist, but the Buddha taught differently.

[Gaxiciverfere]

Seems to me the Atman problem also exists in the passage which Ajahn Buddhadhasa quoted. What is this "individuality" in which kamma ripens, and within which one experiences the fruit?

That would be the person: the Buddha says "within the aggregates" right there in the sentence you highlight. You and Namdrol are grasping at straws.


(Buddhadasa): ...within the aggregates that are the basis for ones individuality The clause "that are the basis for ones individuality" describes "the aggregates".

Aside from rebirth/reincarnation, my understanding is that the alaya model was put forward (by Vasubandhu, actually, not his brother Asanga).... Asanga:

Alaya Vijnana
Store Consciousness
By Ven. Dr. Walpola Rahula

In the Yogacara (Vijnanavada) School of Buddhism, alaya Vijnana is one of the most important doctrines developed by Asanga (fourth century C.E.). ....not that it matters that much who of the two Brahmins made up their own version of "dharma" to stuff in the Buddha's mouth a thousand years after he kicked it.



...in order to address a more fundamental issue: how, in the absence of an atman, can kamma produce a vipaka? And more generally, how can a thought-moment at one time affect a thought moment at a later time? In other words, how to support a karma-and-reincarnation scheme by circumventing the Buddha's explicit teaching of six and only six forms of vinnana, all of which he explicitly defined and delineated as acute sense awareness of a specific sort of stimulus.


We see from the passage above that kamma arises in connection with mental behaviors: greed, hatred and delusion. That is decidedly not what is said above:

Any action that one has carried out with greed, arising with greed as its cause, and having greed as its origin; that action bears fruit within the aggregates.... The Buddha teaches:

'After doing an intentional kamma by way of body, speech and mind (whose result is) to be felt as pleasure, he feels pleasure;
after doing an intentional kamma by way of body, speech and mind (whose result is) to be felt as pain, he feels pain;
after doing an intentional kamma by way of body, speech and mind (whose result is) to be felt as neither-pain-nor-pleasure, he feels neither-pain-nor-pleasure' — Claiming that either the Buddha or Buddhadasa limited intention, action, and result to just greed, hatred, and delusion is rather simplistic.

So it is essentially something that happens within the conscious mind. And the conscious mind is where vipaka is experienced as well. That is not what is being said there.



But without an atman, what connects the two experiences? The khandhas.

The problem comes up regardless of whether we are speculating about multiple lives or limiting the discussion to continuity across a present life. It is only a "problem" for one who is attempting to get around the Buddha's liberative teachings in order cobble together a karma-and-reincarnation scheme that doesn't belong in the Dhamma. Or grasping at straws in an attempt to drag the Buddha into the same cesspool of speculative view as the superstitions one is trying to prop up...

[Qahtwugc]

It does in Yogacara, though -- because of the two additional levels of consciousness that were added to the six recognized in the nikayas. (Correct me if I have the details wrong).

hi

I am referring to the reality of psychological experience rather than Yogacara's theory.

The thinking mind (citta) generates anger and stores anger.

The conscious (meditation) mind allows anger to rise from storage & dissolve.

This is basic psychological reality.

In spirituality, the practise is to become conscious in order to 'release' mental defilements.

So, imo, all of the theories of rebirth/alaya consciousness are contrary to spiritual reality.

Thus the Buddha strongly admonished those (such as Bhikkhu Sati in MN 38 ) that asserted consciousness is reborn.

My view is it is impossible for consciousness to be reborn. It could be possible for a mental formation to be reborn, such as a frog living a certain pond deciding to jump into and makes its home in another pond.

My impression is even the Buddha had the self-respect to never ever declare consciousness is reborn. If he did, he would be censured by both the foolish and the wise.

Even religious folks have the good sense to believe "the soul", "personality", "life force", "atman", etc, is reborn.

But to believe consciousness or sense awareness (mere knowing) is reborn simply does not make sense, imo

[Flikemommoilt]

Meaning, made-up in order to support an Atman for a reincarnation scheme.

Which is fine if one is an Asanga-ist, but the Buddha taught differently.

Sure, as this is the hallmark of Mahayana (and other traditions) thought: "Ad-ons" to bring back the psychological need of a self and the self as a psychological need. The basic frame of the teachings of the historical Buddha prevents over and over about this. It is clear that the very challenge of the teachings of the Buddha will still be "Non Self". Once this is slightly understood, any doctrine even with a subtle suggestion about Self, is felt as non sense.

[cQT6nmEc]

What is this "individuality" in which kamma ripens, and within which one experiences the fruit?

Buddhadasa is seeking to bring to reader into the here & now. This "individuality" conventionally refers to each individual set of five aggregates.

That's all

With metta

[Markdogas]

Buddhadasa is seeking to bring to reader into the here & now. This "individuality" conventionally refers to each individual set of five aggregates.

How does this "individuality" differ from a "mindstream"? Both terms refer to conventional reality; however "mindstream" suggests flux and impermanence, whereas the concept of an individual has connotations of substantiality and self.

That would be the person: the Buddha says "within the aggregates" right there in the sentence you highlight. You and Namdrol are grasping at straws.

And this "person" -- how does this concept avoid "even a subtle suggestion about Self", which Kaarine warned us about?

What does Namdrol have to do with it? Sounds like you have added "guilt by association" to your arsenal of logical fallacies.

[Enjknsua]

You appear to be confusing Element and Stuka in #17, LazyEye.

Your first quote is from Element #16, but the second quote is from Stuka #13. The fact that you are quoting from 2 different people hasn't been made clear to anyone reading your post.

[eduptultyt]

You appear to be confusing Element and Stuka in #17, LazyEye.

Your first quote is from Element #16, but the second quote is from Stuka #13. The fact that you are quoting from 2 different people hasn't been made clear to anyone reading your post.

I thought Element and Stuka were the same guy, practicing Shadow Clone Jutsu.

(Kidding). Sorry about that -- have fixed the attribution.

[Fekliopas]

How does this "individuality" differ from a "mindstream"?

It differs in no small order in that it is not part of a karma/reincarnation scheme.

Both terms refer to conventional reality; That is a contrivance of your own concoctions; the Buddha and I do not share your chosen paradigm.

however "mindstream" suggests flux and impermanence, whereas the concept of an individual has connotations of substantiality and self. Only in the framework of your concocted paradigm.

And this "person" -- how does this concept avoid "even a subtle suggestion about Self", which Kaarine warned us about? It is not party to a karma-and-reincarnation scheme.

What does Namdrol have to do with it? Sounds like you have added "guilt by association" to your arsenal of logical fallacies. It is a reminder of your previous attempts at army-gathering, and that the arguments you present may not be your own, in which case you probably do not fully understand what is being discussed, as has been shown by your misrepresentations elsewhere of what has been discussed here, and you probably do not understand the arguments you are being spoon-fed to present here, as has been the case previously.

(Lazy Eye): "I'm embroiled in a huge angry discussion on another forum, and the argument seems to be that Shakyamuni Buddha's teaching of dependent origination (in the nikayas/agamas) did not necessarily extend to all phenomena -- whereas sunyata clearly does. Therefore, the argument goes, sunyata represents an unwarranted ontologization of D.O. and thus a departure from the Buddha's intent." If you think that I have presented any logical fallacies in my arguments, do not hesitate to point them out. Otherwise, your claim "your arsenal" is merely presumptuous ad hominem, which is already a part of your own arsenal.