July 27, 2008
The Karma Hypothesis
Where did I come from?
What makes me, me?
Why am I here?
What happens to me after I die?
I’ve spent most of my life not so much avoiding those questions, but denying that they exist. As a Christian it was pretty simple really: do good things and go to heaven or do bad things and go to hell. And it worked better if I didn’t actually read the Bible because there was a lot presented in it that was contradictory and I would have to compartmentalize the information. But I’ve long since gotten into the ritual of pondering my life. Now I think about those questions all the time.
In 1644 Evangelista Torricelli wrote to his friend in Rome, Michelangelo Ricci, to explain an experiment which lead to the discovery of air pressure and the invention of the barometer. It also created something that the Church of Rome claimed couldn’t exist: a vacuum.
“Natural philosophy was dominated for nearly two millennia by the ideas of Aristotle, which were then reinterpreted by the Scholastics in order to bring them into line with the dogmas of the Christian faith. This is the case, for example, with the Aristotelian thesis of the logical impossibility of the void. In the thirteenth century, Scholastic philosophers and theologians debated this idea, in which they saw the denial of divine omnipotence: if God wanted to, he could, in fact, create a void. They reaffirmed, though, that it was impossible to produce a void in nature with "natural" forces.
Developing ideas from the Physics, some medieval authors elaborated the theory of nature's abhorrence of the void: a constitutional horror of the void made nature adapt in any which way to avoid its production.
The theory of the abhorrence of the void was used to interpret various natural phenomena: the difficulty of separating two closely fitting perfectly polished surfaces; the difficulty of opening well-sealed bellows; the refusal of liquid to flow from small holes in the base of a water container whose top is completely closed; and the height limit to which pumps and siphons managed to raise water by suction. The abhorrence of the void was also used to explain why sealed bottles filled with water broke when they froze: it was claimed, wrongly, that when water froze, it reduced in volume, so that nature forced the bottle to break to avoid, as a consequence of this contraction, the creation of a void.”
From The Institute and Museum of History of Science-Florence, Italy
Of course the Church had been using a simple but effective means for putting out fires, which utilized what they claim couldn’t exist, the vacuum. It was a fire extinguisher, which was basically a giant syringe. Stick the nose in a bucket of water, pull back the plunger sucking up the water, and then push the plunger, squirting out the water at the fire. Ricci had to be discreet. Galileo, who had just past away a few years earlier, had been under house arrest the remainder of his life for addressing similar issues. But this line of questioning all started in order to get water seeping into silver mines extracted. Once it started paying off, and the Medici’s started paying off the Church of Rome, the church eventually relinquished it’s hard line stand on the void.
“As science advances, there seems to be less and less for God to do.” Carl Sagan
From the SGI Dictionary of Buddhism:
“According to this concept of karma, one's actions in the past have shaped one's present reality, and one's actions in the present will in turn influence one's future. This law of karmic causality operates in perpetuity, carrying over from one lifetime to the next and remaining with one in the latent state between death and rebirth. It is karma, therefore, that accounts for the circumstances of one's birth, one's individual nature, and in general the differences among all living beings and their environments.”
The concept of karma, as presented to me, was as good an explanation for “why this” or “how come that” as anything I heard in any other religion. And the precepts were not too dissimilar from any other religion: do the right thing and go to heaven or nirvana. Heaven in Christianity being a gilded version of life on earth, and the reward in the karmic sense was either extinction (thank God we don’t have to do this again) or another life on earth with perks. But I never thought about the issue that there really isn’t any proof. I don’t remember past existences so I can’t call upon them for evidence. Looking at my present condition isn’t proof of past existences. I can’t foretell the future either. And in the present day, those who claim to do so, I personally think of as crackpots or charlatans. If someone says “I was Cleopatra in another life” I chalk that up to eccentricity and wishful thinking a la Auntie Mame.
On the other hand, if you’re J.Z. Knight and claim to channel the spirit of Ramtha;
Wikipedia: a Lemurian (Madagascar is where lemurs live) warrior who fought the Atlanteans (you know, from The Lost Continent of Atlantis) over 35,000 years ago (that would make him a Neanderthal). She says that Ramtha led an army of over 2.5 million across the continents, conquering two thirds of the known world (known by Neanderthals in the know), which was going through cataclysmic geological changes. According to Knight, Ramtha led the army for ten years until he was betrayed and almost killed.(I think I've heard this story somewhere) Knight says that Ramtha spent the next seven years in isolation recovering (He must have been so traumatized) and observing nature, among other things. He later mastered many skills, including foresight and out-of-body experiences (Numchuk skills?), until he led his army to the Indus River (In Pakistan?) while in his late seventies. Ramtha taught them everything he knew for 120 days, until he ascended before them;"
I love that he ascended! How original! But people eat this up with a spoon. Why? Why do I accept the concept of karma so readily; because someone said so? Should I also accept Ramtha because J. Z. Knight says so? Should I believe Auntie Mame was the queen of the Nile because she says so? Did Abraham actually hear the voice of God command him to sacrifice his son? Or was he one of the first schizophrenics on record? And why did people believe him?
Fyodor Dostoyevsky from the Brothers Karamazov,
“So long as man remains free he strives for nothing so incessantly and so painfully as to find someone to worship.”
Again from the SGI Dictionary:
“Buddhism therefore encourages people to create the best possible karma in the present in order to ensure the best possible outcome in the future. In terms of time, some types of karma produce effects in the present lifetime, others in the next lifetime, and still others in subsequent lifetimes. This depends on the nature, intensity, and repetitiveness of the acts that caused them. Only those types of karma that are extremely good or bad will last into future existences.”
Unfortunately there is just no way to objectively prove this statement and it is rendered into the realm of supposition.
If I have to take the notion of karma on the misnomer “faith” I might as well get into bed with St. Thomas Aquinas (you have a choice to make), Kant (your choice goes beyond casual experience) and Pascal (hedge your bets).
Aquinas believed that God was not beyond reasonable proof for the common man. That cavalier attitude got him excommunicated posthumously. Kant dissembled Christian dogma and he did it in such a mentally challenging way not even the church could follow it. Then came up with his own. Pascal had a religious epiphany that he never told anyone about, wrote it down, and had it sewn into the lining of his cloths. He also said it’s statistically more profitable to believe in God because the pay off is the same for the true believer and the atheist if he doesn’t exist. If he does exist, then the true believe goes to heaven but the atheist goes to North Dakota. And they all believed that man had a choice about dealing with original sin, which is somewhat akin to fundamental darkness, or primordial ignorance in that it refers to a condition into which humans are born rather than one committed in the present.
The Anthropic Principle
Without getting into the copious examples of the math involved this basically states that the universe is a design by design with an inherent goal of providing itself with observers. In other words, the apparent delicate balance needed to enable life, as we know it, could only be by purpose. The Creationists saddled up their dinosaurs and rode this teleological argument into town, wrapping themselves up in what they claimed to be scientific proof of God through intelligent design. Of course it isn’t science, but pseudo-science because there isn’t any bases for the assumption in the first place.
This has similarities to pañicca-samuppàda co-dependant origination or co-arising, the Buddhist doctrine expressing the interdependence of all things. It professes that no beings or phenomena exist on their own; they exist or occur because of their relationship with other beings and phenomena. Everything in the world comes into existence in response to causes and conditions. That is, nothing can exist independent of other things or arise in isolation.
Or stated another way:
“When there is this, that is.
With the arising of this, that arises.
When this is not, neither is that.
With the cessation of this, that ceases.”
As an egocentric anthropos, I can look at the Buddhist gods, those metaphorical deities, which not only enable me to exist because of the environment I exist in, but because we co-exist/co-arise, they come to my aid when beckoned, as me and my environment working as one. That makes me the co-deity. And this is perhaps a unique area in which an individual may create subjective proof (that's rationale without a visa) of what influence one can have in the here and now. Karmically speaking that is. But it isn’t science.
Joe,
I am going to start over. The ritual of pondering is a human device, can't be helped. Our brain has it's function, does things on automatic, as our heart, blood flow, etc. I have often thought it tries to figure out the impossible (dream) automatically to keep us in the quagmire of the cycle of birth and death (illusions).
We can trace our origins and cell development to evolution, things have developed over millions and billions of years. We as a human race have not been here so long. It is hard for us to imagine our eyes may have taken a long time to develop, or things came from the ocean, thus the religions come along with a quick fix.
This is the beginning of the end for the human race, it cuts off the rational thinking process, it gives us the belief we just came into existence? Aliens brought us here? God made us in seven days? We lived with Dinosaurs? Everything starts looking upside down, and when people question they look upside down and like Galileo they are thrown in prison for saying the Earth goes around the Sun.
I have been bullied saying the Lotus Sutra does not promote the Karma theory in Mappo, and Joe, because we live in a degraded time, and people here are terrible people (except for you and I) they cannot make the good causes to escape this bad condition we live in.
Now we come to the Lotus Sutra. It says, we were Bodhisattvas (doesn't say we were humans) practiced with the Buddha many billions of eons ago, and then lived under the earth. As a human we could not live under the earth, unless we were a worm (speak for yourself).
And then we appear at the Ceremony in Space as a Bodhisattva (doesn't say human) and Buddha transfers all his merits to us, and sends us back to the Saha World for us to appear now and spread the merits so people can escape this illusion of birth and death. And we do so as a Human.
As a human, we have Buddha Nature, and we can see Buddha in our mind that produce Ichinen Sanzen.
That is why in Mappo all practice and pre-lotus teachings have not the strength to allow people to escape the Burning House, we came back fully prepared, fully loaded, gassed up. But if you look at the world upside down, it seems we have to run to other sects, other religions, other sects, because we forgot our roots.
I admire your seeking thoughts, I hope we can communicate without throwing rocks to pursue and fine tune this discussion.
Bruce
p.s.
Culture Club makes no sense without my name
It does, "Karma Chameleon"
Posted by: joe at July 29, 2008 07:40 PMI actually read your entire post. I usually scan anything this long.
I don't understand. It's my karma to not understand.
Isn't the purpose of religion to answer the "Why are we here?", "What happens after death?" kind of questions? If so, then we, as humans, pick the religion and therefore the answers that best suit us. If we want proof, we're not going to find out until we meet Greg again (aka die). If I meet Greg after I die, then I'll forget about it when I'm reborn. Damn, then it starts all over again.
So, my point... in my younger days, I had no spirituality. Didn't know, didn't care, wasn't happy. Now, I like thinking that I will be reborn and meet Greg in some way. That makes me feel better. Can I prove that it will happen? No, but that doesn't change my feelings.
Bruce, you can tell me again how deluded I am, but that's your opinion and our karma.
Nancy
Posted by: Nancy at July 30, 2008 08:29 PMNancy,
"I actually read your entire post. I usually scan anything this long."
That's why I put all those pretty filler pictures in.
Careful not to bait Bruce too much. He's too easy. But I've already warned him about his acrimonious disputes. I've become a secret ninja and if he gets too ornery I'll have to come out of my ninja closet and remove his spleen.
Belief systems and behavior go hand in hand. The whole idea of this article was to ask that if I believe in something that can't be proven, then what is the bases for my belief? And in asking or answering that question, will my behavior change or not?
Here's something from Nichiren: The Doctrine Of The Three Thousand Realms
"We may wonder whether, without reciting the sutra, it is possible simply through the meditation of the mind-ground* alone to attain Buddhahood. The fact is that the meditation on three thousand realms in a single moment of life and the method of meditation known as threefold contemplation in a single mind are contained within the five characters, Myoho-renge-kyo. And these five characters , Myoho-renge-kyo, are also contained within the single life of each of us. Thus T'ien-t'ai's commentary states,: "This Myoho-renge-kyo represents the depths of the secret storehouse of the original state, the enlightenment attainted by the Thus Come One of the three existences."
*A term comparing the mind to the ground, or earth. The earth gives rise to five kinds of grain, the mind gives rise to five stages of learning: still learning, nothing more to learn, self-awakened, bodhisattva, and the Thus Come One.
"The great teacher T'ien-t'ai was a reincarnation of the bodhissatva Medicine King, and in his commentarries he discussed the merits of reciting the sutra and those of meditation. To begin with, in his commentaries he defined four guidelines for interpreting the words and phrases of the Lotus Sutra, namely causes and conditions, correlated teachings, theoretical and essential teachings and observation of the mind. But persons who do not understand the importance of these four types of interpretation are likely to apply only one type of interpretation, turning all their attention to the way in which the passage relates to the theoretical and essential teachings, or turning all their attention to how it relates to observation of the mind."
Here's the kicker!
"Those who are knowledgeable may practice both sutra recitation and meditation. Those uniformed may simply chant the diamoku, for in doing so they will be abiding by the principle of the sutra."
Posted by: joe at July 30, 2008 09:22 PMGreg is all about critical Buddhism. If we just take what is told to us without questioning, then we are not practicing Nichiren Buddhism. So, you are questioning - using critical thinking? That's cool. But, like our friend Bruce, you seem to ask questions, but arrive at no answers. Is your goal to get us to think about these subjects and not just take what we are given? Even if you had some another goal, I've been thinking about this today. Thanks, Dude.
Nancy
Posted by: Nancy at July 31, 2008 04:13 AM"Bruce, you can tell me again how deluded I am, but that's your opinion and our karma."
When did I say you were deluded? I just said you were taught wrong about Buddhism for Mappo. I didn't know you were a spinner, I better be careful.
And Joe, is partly correct with his snippet.
"...chant the diamoku, for in doing so they will be abiding by the principle of the sutra."
Daimoku is not just Myoho Renge Kyo, it is not just a magic word. Consider Myoho Renge Kyo like a cheesburger. I can be from Burger King, McDonalds or Wendy's. Someone can write a book on Witchcraft and make the title Myoho Renge Kyo and if you chant that title, good luck.
It is the Myoho Renge Kyo of the Lotus Sutra Nichiren talks about. The various sects don't have you chant that. They have you chant something else, it looks like Myoho Renge Kyo, but doesn't even contain Buddha, or the Entrustment (I bet you never even heard of it).
Nichiren had people chant, sure, but not mindless chanting, and not NAM.. Nam Mu Myo Ho Ren Ge Kyo of the Lotus Sutra. When people could not understand Ichinen Sanzen, he had them chant.
In Mappo people are too far gone to initiate a new practice, a new path, they cannot make a cause great enough for an effect big enough to have then leave the burning house.
So, we see the Buddha in our mind, we have have Buddha nature. You think you need to practice something like Tendai did in Zoho, you are misguided by your incorrect teachers you baited you with false promises.
Maltzaroonie is your friend, but you want to kick and punch him, you are not the first and you won't be the last.
I did it my way,
Bruce (and Elvis and Sinatra)
See this is how stuff starts.
I'm sure Nancy misunderstood your intention. Perhaps because people feel words and take them to heart. Whenever it was that you pointed to her being "taught wrong" it may have been about something she feels strongly about. And labeling her a "spinner" is bad. So cut it out! That is a leap of presumption which starts a chain of action taking the form of argument, not debate, because it's not about the topic but the person. This is not the first time on my blog you have accused people of deliberately twisting things. I could just as easily accuse you of saying that you called Nancy a "baiter" because that's what you wrote: "by your incorrect teachers you baited".
But that's not what you meant to write, is it?
Great minds discuss ideas;
Average minds discuss events;
Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Nancy,
My topic was a subliminal subterfuge to get readers to watch My Name Is Earl and dress like Boy George. Apparently it's working. But I'm having a difficult time getting this eyeliner on straight.
You're a better man than I, Joe, if you can figure out what the hell Bruce is talking about.
You're right, Karma can't be proven scientifically. I hate it when people use bogus science to try to show a link between Buddhism and science. More on that in my blog (just click on my name below).
Posted by: Vanya at July 31, 2008 07:15 AMI would never call Nancy deluded, or Joe or even Vanya. For her to say I said that was very insulting.
In 1978 I was in an auto accident, hit by 14 cars, died for 5 minutes. Since the accident, this is the way I write, if you met me in person I am quite different. But there is no excuse to turn my words around.
I used to write songs, jokes, before the accident, I was totally different. There is not a mean bone in my body. If I didn't care about you, I wouldn't take the time out of my busy life to write to you.
I thank Joe for allowing me to express myself, and I hope he can help me fine tune my grey matter.
Bruce
"you can tell me again how deluded I am"
"I didn't know you were a spinner"
"For her to say I said that was very insulting."
We are all vulnerable to words and they make us react.
I urge everyone to take responsibility regardless.
There is a scene in the movie Tombstone where a man is trying to get Wyatt Earp's horse offloaded from a train. The horse won't co-operate so he whips it. Earp takes the whip from the man, lashes him in the face and says "Hurts, don't it!"
OK, let's fix this right now. I was trying to be funny. It was not my intension to hurt you or insult you. I will try to remember to put a :-) when I am trying to be humorous. I thought we had enough of a relationship that I could kid you, Bruce, but it must not have come across that way in my writing. I am sorry for the confusion.
Now, don't call me deluded again :-) or I'll spin your words :-)*
Nancy
* That was meant to be good-natured kidding - irony - humor. Just setting it straight.
N
Nancy, Joe is sitting back at the O.K. Corral With Doc and Wyatt, maybe even with Hugh O'Brien, thinking he stopped a gunfight between us. From the short time I know him, he appears to be a warm person but it could be deceptive.
I know you were not trying to hurt or insult me, you are sweet person, and you also know that I am pretty much bullet proof, but the fact you apologized, blew me away! I am not used to that sort of thing, I had to reach for my nitro tablets.
As Elvis said to Judy Tyler in Jailhouse Rock:
"It ain't tactics Honey, It's the Beast in Me" ;)
Bruce
"Nancy, Joe is sitting back at the O.K. Corral With Doc and Wyatt, maybe even with Hugh O'Brien, thinking he stopped a gunfight between us. From the short time I know him, he appears to be a warm person but it could be deceptive."
Hey, keep it down. I can hear you. If you're going to talk about me, do it in private. :-)
Posted by: joe at August 1, 2008 04:22 PMChild prodigies have always fascinated me. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart or Pablo Picasso, our pre-packaged software came from somewhere, but was it from a former human life?
Everyone can sing, but not every can sing like Caruso.
Is there a difference, or only we think there is a difference? And Buddha Nature is not an entity, yet we talk freely about it. Behind its back.
Buddha nature is not an entity and if it does not manifest in acts while one is deluded, in what sense can it be said to be there at all inside that deluded person?
Yet the Buddha Nature mentioned in the Sutra specifically asserts that the deluded also possess Buddha nature. How can this be?
Bruce
Posted by: Bruce Maltz at August 4, 2008 06:34 AMMozart was a prodigy. Picasso wasn't. But he was one of the first artists who earned more than a living during his own life time instead of posthumously and that's why he's unique. Personally, I sing like a fish and dance like a bird.
"Is there a difference, or only we think there is a difference?" In what? Evolution and inherited genetics or karma? Your statement is very unclear.
"And Buddha Nature is not an entity, yet we talk freely about it. Behind its back." Okay, you just made "it" sound like an entity. So what's your point?
"Buddha nature is not an entity"
Who says it is? You?
"and if it does not manifest in acts while one is deluded, in what sense can it be said to be there at all inside that deluded person?"
That's a reasonable question.
"Yet the Buddha Nature mentioned in the Sutra specifically asserts that the deluded also possess Buddha nature. How can this be?"
What do you think?
First things first..
Top 10 Child Prodigies
Sources: Wikipedia
1. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
(January 27, 1756 – December 5, 1791)
2. Pablo Picasso
(October 25, 1881 – April 8, 1973)
I am pretty tired now, but you talked about Karma, JZ Knight, past lives, and I am trying to tie it into a nice little bundle of a conversation with you. Where did Picasso learn to paint? Mozart learn to compose? Did it have to be in a former life?
Good night,
Bruce
"First things first..."
From The List Universe
"Top 10 Child Prodigies
Sources: Wikipedia""
"This article or section has multiple issues. Please help improve the article or discuss these issues on the talk page.
It needs additional references or sources for verification. Tagged since September 2006.
It is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. may be able to help recruit one.
It may require general cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Tagged since June 2007"
Also on the list:
Tiger Woods
Tatum O'Neal
"Where did Picasso learn to paint?" From a master painter. Tiger learned to play golf, and he learned to focus from his father and years of dedication. Tatum O'Neal is on the same list because she won an Oscar for one performance as a child. Now if she had won an Oscar for every performance, then you might have a reason to put her on a list.
Since some self proclaimed somebody picked Picasso, I self proclaim myself, just as qualified, to un-pick him.
I rest my case.
Joe,
with your understanding of life, perhaps you can share how children are born into unfavorable circumstances; abuse; and yet have not been alive long enough to create any karma; good or bad; to receive the treatment they receive prior to any real actions beyond suckling from their mother's breast?
I understand this concept as causes and effects made from life time after life time as Nichiren teaches.
PS wikepidia is not a real dictionary, but people selected version of their truth!
Patrick
Posted by: Patrick at August 4, 2008 05:13 PMPatrick,
I understand your argument. I'm asking what's your proof of past existences? I can point at the same results and say bad luck, good luck, or genetic disposition and you can ask me the same question: what's my proof?
If you believe in past existences then you may also believe in future ones. This belief may influence your present behavior. I am asking what proof do you base your belief system upon, which in most cases people use to justify behavior. This behavioral action can take all kinds of forms: promulgation for salvation; lending a helping hand; genocide.
"people selected version of their truth!" What's yours?
Posted by: joe at August 4, 2008 06:13 PMJoe,
The infants condition is just the point of karma extending from one existence to the next existence.
If you want to apply Nichiren's approach; by observing the present, you can understand the past; the theory can be applied quite simply.
If in this life, you never committed a specific act; i.e. physical abuse as the essential cause; you should not receive physical abuse as an essential effect of the current life of the infant.
Where did the latent cause lie regarding the abused and not the abuser in this manifest effect?
If an infant receives specific effects in their life, it becomes arguable that a specific cause did not initiate in this life, and therefore has to have an origination in some life prior, just as Nichiren's predicts.
Regarding my behavior in regards to the possession of this knowledge, allows me to accept life's outcomes as my own property; irregardless of the source; as my causes are the source and mine to correct in my actions at that moment and no other moment.
Regarding the forms of my behavior as as varied as the aspects of my life; three thousand; and my either deluded or enlightened response to each of those moments. No separation between Buddhism and this reality.
Examples include on my job, at home with my family, friends, SGI, everywhere I go my karma is awaiting me to change at that moment. The purpose lies in my behavior as a human being.
Patrick
Posted by: Patrick at August 4, 2008 10:46 PM"The infants condition is just the point of karma extending from one existence to the next existence.
If you want to apply Nichiren's approach; by observing the present, you can understand the past; the theory can be applied quite simply."
Nichiren's simple approach, eh? This is his applied theory you say? Hmm? Nichiren says,“Who knows what slander I may have committed in the past? I may possess the soul of the monk Superior Intent or the spirit of Mahadeva. Perhaps I am descended from those who contemptuously persecuted Bodhisattva Never Disparaging, or am among those who forgot the seeds of enlightenment sown in their lives. I may even be related to the five thousand arrogant people, or belong to the third group [who failed to take faith in the Lotus Sutra] in the days of the Buddha Great Universal Wisdom Excellence. It is impossible to fathom one’s karma” (WND, 303).
"If an infant receives specific effects in their life, it becomes arguable that a specific cause did not initiate in this life, and therefore has to have an origination in some life prior, just as Nichiren's predicts."
Where exactly is this prediction? You're breaking down components as an expedient which is pre-lotus sutra.
"Regarding my behavior in regards to the possession of this knowledge, allows me to accept life's outcomes as my own property; irregardless of the source; as my causes are the source and mine to correct in my actions at that moment and no other moment."
Okay, you're taking responsibility for your actions. That's nice and not what I'm talking about. Sometimes people murder other people as a cause and want the responsibility laid directly upon their shoulders because of their beliefs which grant them a positive result.
And "irregardless", regardless of how you use it irrespectively of your content, isn't a word people trying to make a point should get into the habit of using, because it isn't a word. I did, however, witnessed Chris Hedges, author, correspondent, and apologist, get so discombobulated with Sam Harris that he mistakenly used it in a debate. Everyone gasped.
Joe every source in the galaxy lists Picasso as a U Know What.
10 child prodigies
(who actually ended up doing something)
By Rick Chillot
Mental Floss
-- Being a child prodigy is no guarantee that you'll grow up to be rich, famous or happy. You might have a breakdown and fade into obscurity (like that guy in the movie "Shine"), quit the scene altogether (like chess maestro Bobby Fischer), or turn to a life of petty crime (insert the name of your favorite child actor here).
In fact, experts say the road from kid genius to adult dud is a well-traveled one. But if you or someone you love happens to be a budding brainiac, don't despair. There are instances of wonder boys and girls who bucked the trend and grew up to be smart cookies.
Here are 10 notable examples.
BLAISE PASCAL (1623-1662)
Areas of expertise:
Math, physical science and philosophy
Notable achievement: Making a bet with God
Secret to his success:
Doing geometry when his dad wasn't looking
MARIA AGNESI (1718-1799)
Areas of expertise: Mathematics and astronomy
Notable achievement:
Proving that chicks are good at math, too
Secret to her success:
Time management;
FELIX MENDELSSOHN (1809-1847)
Areas of expertise:
Piano, organ and orchestra
Notable achievement:
His "Wedding March,"
MARIE CURIE (1867-1934)
Areas of expertise:
Physics, chemistry and radioactivity
Notable achievement:
First woman to win a Nobel Prize;
PABLO PICASSO (1881-1973)
Areas of expertise: Painting, drawing, sculpture
Notable achievement:
The most famous name in modern art
Secret to his success: Quantity and quality
Everyone knows that Picasso achieved artistic fame and success as an adult, but little Pablo was quite the prodigy, too. In fact, it's said that Picasso had an interest in drawing even before he could speak. Perhaps that's why, once he finally could talk, he immediately started demanding that his father (an artist himself) give him his paintbrushes. And when he became old enough to go to school, pushy little Pablo said he would only go on the condition that, while there, he could draw as much as he liked. Fortunately, the headmaster and the other students recognized Picasso's gift, and more or less allowed him to come, go and work as he pleased.
Years later, the adult Picasso attended an exhibit of children's drawings and commented that he could never have been in such a show because at age 12, he "drew like Raphael." A little modesty might have done him some good, but in fact, drawings that survive from his childhood suggest that prepubescent Pablo could indeed have given the great Renaissance artist a run for his money. Picasso's many contributions to modern art -- including cubism, "Guernica," and people drawn with two eyes on one side of their face -- are too exhaustive to list here. By the time of his death, he'd created over 22,000 works of art.
(http://www.cnn.com/2007/LIVING/worklife/12/10/mf.child.prodigies/index.html)
The word irregardless is a double negative. It does not exist in standard English. The primary use of karma by Nichiren, is to point out how rare it is to be born a human. Buddha says when we are a Buddha we know all our past lives. If we struggle to seek that knowledge as a human in the Saha World we will be stuck in the burning house (Chapter 3 Lotus Sutra).
I used Wiki as a tool, not as a tool of truth. The SGI Buddhist Dictionary that Joe uses, is a sub-standard non scholarly effort with many flaws and mistakes. This could go on all night.
When I first read your blog, I was under the impression you were interested in how other people thought about these same topics. If you don't let people express their thoughts without jumping on every word, it is ijime.
“Worthless people blame their karma”
Burmese Proverb quotes
Bruce
I need a water break.
"If you don't let people express their thoughts without jumping on every word, it is ijime."
I want people to explain what they're talking about in terms of the topic and ijime.
For amorphous dogma I might as well go to a Ken Ham lecture at the Creation Museum, listen to my congressman Buck McKeon, or maybe I'll pick up Nancy and well go to a Kosen-rufu gongyo together.
"Is he havin' a laugh? Is havin' a laugh?" :-)
The Karma Hypothesis will cause discomfort but more importantly, when you ask someone to think outside their group they will face the terrifying prospect of disagreeing with their dominant social group.
Throughout most of human history, it usually meant death to do this and our biology was set up on that basis. Sharing this kind of thing is useful in my view because it illustrates how quickly the world can move from dark to light when one has the courage to press ahead at a time when it is terrifying to do that.
For example it was terrifying to stand against the Soka Gakkai and Nichiren Shoshu and declare the DaiGohonzon was not authentic.
There is a struggle between rational and irrational forces in the religious world that has been nicely chronicled by many scholars.
When people join a sect, that sect defines what Karma for their members. I openly criticize those groups for impairing the decision making and learning of their living beings.
You probably find Ken Ham absurd and wonder how anyone could believe such logic. I find it hard to believe how anyone could just chant Nam. I have heard the reasons. There is no logic. It is all damage control.
As is the case with most decisions, perspective is often what is required to overcome fear and make good decisions. I hope the perspective in my comment in Joe's Blog is useful to some who read it.
Bruce
Posted by: Bruce Maltz at August 5, 2008 07:07 AMBruce,
That was well written, to the point, and totally ijime. :-)
Joe,
Latent cause and manifest effect are in the expedient means chapter. you recite them three times each prayer.
Nichiren offers the understanding of karma. Nichiren says, as I posted earlier, "to understand the past, one must only study the present moment."
The past, present, and future are based on Nichiren analogy of karma and past and future lives. Nichiren was smart on these things.
You asked me how my understanding effects me, but the answers are not good enough for you, and you attempt to belittle them. Your cause and effect and not mine.
Later
Patrick,
I apologize. Guilty as charged
You are correct.
The applied theory is quite simple as Nichiren presented it.
And my pre-Lotus sutra statement was incorrect as I presented it. The idea of changing karma becomes secondary, expedient, to the intention of manifesting Buddha nature. Because of how we view karma, especially when coupled to the idea of past and future existences, we so often think of eradicating karma as the purpose of practicing.
I almost forgot. You're the self appointed and anointed gosho thumping born again buddhist morality police. This is you too:
Byrd,
Sorry to disappoint you, but it is just me. I reported this blog-site for it's gossip of members to my friends in the SGI.
Patrick
Posted by Patrick at April 5, 2008 10:57 AM
So if this is an example of your belief system in action, that makes you a fascist.
Guess who I'm not a reincarnation of; Bodhisattva Never Disparaging. I'm Bodhisattva Billy Jack.
Everyone says we practice Buddhism. The practice is discarding expedients. Read carefully that you have already practiced with the Buddha, and inherited the lifetime of merits from the Buddha.
The Lotus Sutra
Translated by Burton Watson
Chapter Fifteen: Emerging from the Earth
"With regard to this great multitude I now say to you. Ajita, these bodhisattvas and mahasattvas who in immeasurable and countless asamkhyas have emerged from the earth and whom you have never seen before in the past - when I had attained anuttara-samyak-sambodhi in this saha world, I converted and guided these bodhisattvas, trained their minds and caused them to develop a longing for the way. These bodhisattvas all have been dwelling in the world of empty space underneath the saha world..."
TRANSMISSION
The Lotus Sutra
Translated by Burton Watson
Chapter Twenty-two: Entrustment
At that time Shakyamuni Buddha rose from his Dharma seat and, manifesting his great supernatural powers, with his right hand patted the heads of the immeasurable bodhisattvas and mahasattvas and spoke these words: "For immeasurable hundreds, thousands, ten thousands, millions of asamkhya kalpas I have practiced this hard-to-attain Law of anuttara-samyak-sambodhi. Now I entrust it to you. You must single-mindedly propagate this Law abroad, causing its benefits to spread far and wide."
When we look up into space we are looking at the origin of earth's reality. We are it and it is we. When we look up we see Buddha's Three Thousand Worlds or actually his Thousand million fold worlds form a major world system. This major world system comprises one billion worlds. There are thought to be countless major world systems in the universe, the end has no beginning and the beginning has no end, it is infinite universes.
Why is the human race so disconnected from actual corporeal reality and instead living in its own spirit world of virtual deluded reality? How did humans find themselves in this deluded dead-end situation? The group mistakes allow humans to build up safe ports in the storm of life in which they hide, they have institutionalized themselves. The Original Buddha tells the story of institutionalized flawed thinking within which the human race in his parable of the "Burning House."
The Bodhisattvas of the Earth are magnificent, powerful, and are described in the sutra sections below…….. We have no business marching in parades and playing the clowns and playing the fool for parasite leaders and priests. We are the Sons and daughters of the Original Buddha Shakyamuni.
Pasta la vista,
Bruce
Joe,
Your back-handed comment is lost here. But it is still a back-handed comment meqant to insult me. Congratulations on making that cause for life.
Calling me some christian name as a bible thumper is way off base. I have been practicing buddhism since childhood without any christian influence.
I also see you use an alias. I do not and you want to villify me!
Your characterization of me as someting else is just that apoor characterization.
Call me anything you want, assert anything you want, it is your karma and your causes you are making.
I understand you now, and I will not participate in your blog ever again, as you make distinctions regarding others, and reserve that right to be a non-buddhist in your attitude towards others.
Later
Posted by: Patrick at August 6, 2008 08:47 PMPatrick,
I'm sorry if you thought that comment was back handed. I meant it to be pretty straightforward. If I was going to be back handed I might have said, "After reading your comments and how obsequiously you comport yourself, I became self aware of the sycophant in us all."
And there are those that may find this hypocritical in light of what I have written earlier in this very comment section. And they'd be as right about me as I am of you. The name of this blog is, however, Joe Isuzu's Daily Slander. (Joe Isuzu is of course a lying, smarmy car salesman.) Karmically speaking, breaking even is the resulting tag line. As far as me having a "non-buddhist attitude", which leads me to believe that you believe that there is an attitude that is indicative of how a Buddhist should behave, like fundamentalistic believers of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, the title of Fraught With Peril used to contain the phrase, "BUDDHISM WITH AN ATTITUDE". Well I definitely have an attitude about your behavior which I see as holding back the promulgation of this Buddhism by making the SGI look like a petty cult when reflected in your myopic eyes.
Posted by: joe at August 7, 2008 06:24 PMBut Joe, SGI is a petty cult in most people's eyes, and the others must be wearing rose tinted glasses. I guess turning people on to a perverted form of dharma has it's benefits, and is certainly not criminal, but pure and simple SGI is a cult and seems to become more and more so with the passage of time.
clown hidden
Clown,
Trainer: You're doing great champ. He hasn't laid a glove on ya!
Boxer: Then keep your eye on the referee, because somebody's beating the crap out of me!
Okay, I set myself up. That was too easy for you.
"Why there's nothing petty about our cult. It's a first class cult."
So what's the un-perverted form of dharma? You know, from your cult.
Posted by: joe at August 8, 2008 01:36 AMHi Joe,
Will you be about to come to the memorial for Byrd at the Gathering at the Anker's tomorrow? I happen to know she thought very highly of you.
Michele
Posted by: Michele at August 10, 2008 02:27 AMI don't think there is any un-perverted form of the dharma. Everything is only an expedient means. My creed would be to take everything with a grain of salt and, if you can manage it, don't believe anything.
ch
Posted by: clown hidden at August 11, 2008 06:38 PM"Everything is only an expedient means." Accordingly, that's perverted too then, and if you respond "exactly", then accordingly, I shouldn't believe you.
Posted by: joe at August 11, 2008 07:39 PMClown, Joe is just a broken down Isuzu, leave him alone ;) OK, there's no way I can even begin to respond in any kind of systematic fashion to what you wrote, so instead I will contribute a few things, some serious and some light, which in aggregate and combination may shed some light on the pas de deux hôben "expedients" or "accomodations." Term expressing the Mahayana Buddhist doctrine that the Buddha devises innumerable means to adapt his teachings to different sentient beings depending on their capacity for understanding. In the "fireflies" chapter of Genji monogatari, Genji argues that fiction can, when serious, become a means toward enlightenment.
Bruce
Everything is an expedient means is also an expedient means, but remember expedient means are not to be discarded. You can only comprehend the limited amount of truth which it is possible to to percieve and concieve of. Of course you shouldn't believe me either that would be the worst thing for you to do, believe someone else's version of the truth. Don't even believe your own version let alone what you think mine is.
ch
ch,
I was just thinking about why expedients aren't to be discarded and what they lead to and what they can become. I was.
Expedient means is one translation of upaya another is skillful means. What works works when it works, if there was some means of enlightenment that worked all the time for everyone then everyone could just do that but it doesn't seem that there is. Some one could say that their method works for everyone but I can't accept that as true, all parctices have been abandonned by someone as unhelpful. Bruce has abbandoned all practices altogether and seems no worse for it. On the other hand if a practice or concept is helpful to you you should keep it even knowing it is not the supreme absolute truth.
Posted by: clown hidden at August 12, 2008 09:02 PMClown..there is no practice to abandon!!!!
When you accept the merits from Shakyamuni at the Ceremony in Space, you accept all his practice from the beginningless time. Can you think of any thing else you want to cram in there? You have them all, all the merits of all the pracitce.
That is the illusion, you think there is more. when you say let's chant, WHY?? Meditation? Walk on fire? It's all burning house, we didn't start the fire (Billy Joel), within the fire is Buddhahood. All the practice is a trap. Nichiren religion is a trap. All the leaders lead the good life, the members are like worker ants. This is not the Lotus Sutra. This is Corporation Nichirenism Inc.
I have been around Ikeda have you? nothing special at all.
Bruce
"Bruce has abbandoned all practices altogether and seems no worse for it."
Or, HELLO, badda-bing, ANY BETTER!
Thank you, thank you ladies and gentlemen! You been a great audience and it's been a business doing pleasure with you...HEY-YO! I'll be here all week, my name is Joe and don't forget to tip your waitress. Thank you again! You're beautiful!
"On the other hand if a practice or concept is helpful to you you should keep it even knowing it is not the supreme absolute truth."
Unless you're...HEY LADY!...deluded.
Posted by: joe at August 13, 2008 01:43 AMDefinitely!
Posted by: joe at August 13, 2008 03:00 AMThere are two categories of religious people, the deluded and the dangerously deluded. May I say that all people who practice religion, of any kind are deluded wake up and see that you are wasting the very short lives that you have.
The Eternal Original Maltz
Posted by: Bruce Maltz at August 13, 2008 05:27 AMWhat about people that religiously warn others about what they believe to be everyone else's religiosity? Like yourself who apparently isn't preaching anything on a regular basis.
Posted by: joe at August 13, 2008 05:40 AMJoe,It should be obvious that the most deluded people are the people who unquestioningly accept whatever they think as true. It's not just religious people, although for the most part nothing beats religion for spreading delusion.
Bruce, there is always more, no matter how much you nail down reality in any formula there is more. Do you really believe that the merits of the buddha consist not only of everything that has existed but everything that will ever exist any where for all of eternity? Sounds like an unconfirmable religious belief system to me.
Clown, I can't answer your whole question in this little box. The Lotus Sutra is not a Book. When we talk about merits, they are not like badges handed out at Boy Scout meetings. When we talk about Buddha Nature, it is not an entity. When we talk about what exists and will exists, think about no existence, or why there is existence, are there other forms of existence. Why did Buddha say death was an expedient? What is religion? I have no beliefs, I don't believe. The Buddha never asked people to believe, they were asked to have confidence, translators made the word belief. So, yes, the elements that formed me, formed everything else, the evolution not magic developed the earth and man, there was no belief, no gods, no one chanting, no one meditation, no master and disciple, no min-ons with the cavemen, so the message is don't look outside your life, everything is within. Everything that made the universe made you. Within the universe is Buddha Nature, and in you is Buddha Nature. There is no more practice needed.
This has been the theme of my life since birth, my dreams, thoughts. Wasn't till I read the Burning House I found something that finally made sense. I already told you about my telephone pole.
Bruce
Posted by: Bruce Maltz at August 13, 2008 06:15 PMBruce I also accept cause and effect as a sufficient explanation of things but theoretical physists make a good argument for non-local and even non-linear events I don't understand most of what I've read about them but I can't take cause and effect as absolute either. A very good answer to many questions is to admit that I just don't know.
ch
I understand C&E, however if things are empty or eternal they are without cause, or causeless, so they are without cause that is the illusion, that is why there is no practice, you cannot make a cause. This is really the Lotus Sutra, not chanting to a piece of paper and going to meetings, this is ichinen sanzen, it is not Karma or consciousness, it is what is in us but we don't know is in us, the unborn, causeless, dark matter. If you read the Burning House, I mean really read it, and then look at the Nichiren sects..what the heck are they doing?
I think I will carry this to my blog..
Bruce
Things are described as empty but I don't see how that rules out cause and effect. The forms of things are not eternal forms if they were they could be said to be causeless, this would be a whole 'nother level than existence as we percieve it.
Posted by: clown hidden at August 14, 2008 08:14 AMI'm going to agree with a part of what Bruce has said in his last comment, without agreeing with his conclusions, but if something is eternal, then there is no original first cause and it didn't transform from something else. Cause and effect exist only in a state where there is time, and you can only have time if things change.
But I think I am misunderstanding what you're trying to say here:
"The forms of things are not eternal forms if they were they could be said to be causeless, this would be a whole 'nother level than existence as we percieve it."
Could you elaborate?
Posted by: joe at August 14, 2008 02:43 PMThis is the reason, Joe, language is an expedient used by Buddha to explain Buddhahood in the first fourteen chapters of the Lotus Sutra. It was beyond the understanding of ordinary humans to comprehend what a Buddha is, and it was not until chapter 15 Buddha announced he did not become Buddha under the Bodhi Tree, he was always Buddha. Go to my blog and read the Burning Brain blog, too much to write here. We think there is something, but there is nothing. We are in a deluded state of mind.
The form of Buddha is not Shakyamuni of India, that was an expedient form, a form used for explanation. We have to shake off that expedient.
I want to rationally carry the conversation with you, so please read what I wrote.
Bruce
I'm just saying there is nothing eternal that we are aware of all things are impermanent and to describe anything as eternal is just a phantasy. On the other hand there may be something eternal but we have no contact or awareness of it. I hope that's clear even if you disagree.
Posted by: clown hidden at August 15, 2008 03:05 PMOf course, I always agree to disagree. I think the term eternal has a problem in "language". If something has no beginning or ending, how can it be?
Our deluded mind can't deal with it. That is the point of the burning house. We are stuck in the burning house thinking everything is not eternal because of our deluded mind. Agree or not agree, doesn't matter we are friends, and have Buddha Nature, point is to openly talk about things without hitting each other on the head and throwing rocks.
Joe is very funny, sometimes SUPER funny, but alienates people at the same time. I have had to look through that to see his mind. I know you, and you are struggling with the language of the Buddha, but the language is nothing more than expedients not the dharma itself.
Take care,
Bruce
Great minds discuss ideas;
Average minds discuss events;
Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Wow. I like that. Maybe I could channel her? I always say, "It is not about who is right, it is about what is right."
See how great I am. I just amaze me. Move over Bruce. I always figured it was because I do not give a rat's behind about people or events. I get accused of indulging in pleasurable but unproductive mental activities. Or trying to count the number of kami that could dance on the head of a pin.
.
Posted by: robin at August 25, 2008 08:33 AM"But people eat this up with a spoon. Why?"
The spiritual gene. It prevents us from dying of acute anxiety. All sentient beings have an anxiety response when confronted with the unknown. Well, most do. Natural selection tends to weed out those that do not have an effective anxiety response. Thwy tend to plunge recklessly into the unknown and get eaten by monsters. While we can not predict the future in minute detail, we do know that we are going to get old and sick. Being anxious about this is not crippling; but it does tend to motivate us to be prudent. We work and save money because it makes us feel safer and more secure.
We can also speculate about things outside our experience. Everything, it seems, has a beginning and end. So does the universe have those? If so, what was before it began, what we will be after it is over? Moreover, everything seems to have boundaries. Does the universe have boundaries? If so, what lies beyond those boundaries? Enquiring minds need to know. Not knowing is the unknown, and that elicits anxiety. We even fear the dark. That makes sense; if we are not familiar with what is there, we might bump a shin. Or if we have kids, step on a jack with bare feet. Children have monsters lurking under their beds at night. When adults lock up. or execute, criminals, or invade other countries; they are attacking the monsters that lurk under the bad.
Another way to overcome fear of darkness is to become familiar with it. The same applies to fear of what lies on the other side of the mountain or river. Once we know what is there, we can find a way of dealing with it, and it no longer provokes anxiety. Si instead of attacking or scaring away the monsters on the bed, we can take a cautious peek. We also know we are going to die. That is the big one. The fear of death is the mother of all anxiety responses. It is the big unknown. So that is where the spirituality gene comes in. There are probably some closely related genes; the kindness gene, the compassion gene, the patience gene, the generosity gene; all of which help the species survive; which keep us from killing each other off. They also help us cooperate with one another; thus protecting our own survival.
The Big spirituality Gene enables to believe that we will still be alive after we dies. And we associate that with other feel good emotions or desires like loving kindness, compassion, and so on. It makes sense that those who possess those qualities will live a better after life. There are also spiritual seekers among us who go on vision quests and such, to encounter and deal with our / their deepest anxieties. They help fill in the blanks. So, spirituality tells us what to expect on the other side of death. The end result is that those who had these spirituality genes were less stressed out, more emotionally healthy, and tended to be better at surviving and reproducing.
That is oversimplified, but it does give a reason why we are predisposed toward spirituality; it counters and balances out the anxiety response. It overcomes fear of monsters under the bed. It makes emotional sense. One more thing. we tend to approach our altars the same way we might approach and explore new places; head down and cautiously; while displaying non-threatening body language. Why? Because people who approached unfamiliar surroundings that way tended to create peaceful and prosperous cultures. They survived and reproduced themselves. In some failed religions, there might have been warriors dancing around the altar with spears raised, or ritual sacrificial killings going on. Those kinds of religions might have reflected another way of dealing with anxieties about the unknown; the attack the monsters under the bed method.
Posted by: robin at August 25, 2008 12:27 PMRobin,
I've been contemplating the relationship between genetics, evolution and spirituality for some time, thinking of writing, but it's all pretty speculative. Fear of the dark, snakes, etc. seems hardwired into a large portion of us who have made it thus far on this branch of the tree. Don't got out at night because you wont come back and the body may not be found because something ate it. Anxiety is survival. It will make your body react quicker: run faster, jump higher climb better. The spiritual part of survival could possibly be where you distract the sabor tooth while your neighbors in the cave get away, which insures the continuation of the species. Marry that to an imprint of an ancient hand on the wall of a cave as if to say "I was here" or "I existed" and you have a complex being and the start of culture and spirituality.
Joe,
I was thinking some more. Even in warrior cults there are probably messengers of peace and conciliation. Even in religions of peace; there are conquests, crusades, inquisitions, and witch hunts. Anxiety, aggression, and spirituality all seem to be closely linked in our make up. I think it is pre-human. When my dog was ailing, I did a kuan yin water blessing for her. When the chanting started, my dog looked at the altar and sat in the begging posture. More recently, when she came up from surgery, she went straight to the kito honzon altar, sat, and looked at it with the dog smile expression.
Apparently there are mammalian postures, gestures, and expressions that evoke compassion, and which work cross species to an extent. There are probably pherenomes and maybe even subtle healing energy waves associated with evoking spirituality responses. In humans, the arrow, the rifle, the bomber enabled us to kill at at a distance; so we do not have to see or sense the non-threatening, conciliatory, body language.
Mild anxiety -- vaso-dilation, smooth muscle action, enhanced strength and agility, sharpened sensation, does prepare one to run or fight. Flushing, hair standing on end, fierce gesticulating, certain facial expressions, and so on, also make us look threatening. Another thing is the extreme panic response -- vaso-constriction, muscular tautness, clumsiness, dulled sensation, pallor, clamminess, shaking. On one level, these responses help the body survive blunt trauma. On another, the body looks diseased and unappetizing to most predators. Maybe it is fight, flight, make friends, or panic and play dead?
There is also a non-emotive side to spirituality; the wisdom-insight side -- perception that all conditioned existence is impure; stressful, inconstant, and based upon a fabricated sense of self. On the other side of purification, there is said to be unconditioned beauty, bliss, constancy, and an authentic selfless sense of who we are. At any rate, I am just thinking in cyber space. Your topic provoked these thoughts on anxiety, spirituality, genetics, and survival; which I have been mulling over for several life times.
Posted by: robin at August 26, 2008 12:30 AM