Past
Quotes of the Week
First way of going astray re. Karma —
Next, we’ll consider ways of wandering astray, that is, taking the wrong path. The first way of going astray concerns the most common karma question: Why aren’t do-gooders famous or rich? And why are some who do little good and a lot of evil famous or rich? These questions are asked all over the place. They’re a result of misunderstanding karma and fruits of karma.
I’d like to re-emphasize that karma is the action itself. Whether it is good or bad is determined in the action itself. It is good or bad already with the action’s completion. If we go and act in a way that is considered good karma, it is good right there and good is gained in that good karma itself. Bad karma is the same; the bad is accomplished when the action is completed.
Here, there are complicating factors, namely, the by-products of good and bad, for example, acquiring wealth and fame. These by-products can be confusing. For example, from doing good one can receive money and fame; from doing evil one can receive money and fame. The money or fame gained in either case may appear similar, but are, in fact, completely different. The money gained from doing good must be considered “good money.” The money gained from doing evil must be considered “bad money.” The fame gained by doing good is pure, untarnished fame. The fame gained by deceit is false fame.
Thus, one who does good must receive good, as well as good by-products, such as good fame and good money, if they receive any. One who does evil must receive evil, as well as evil by-products, such as evil fame and evil money, if they receive any. This is certain. There’s no way that evil and good can be mixed. However, those with really thick defilements will think that all money is good. So, they mix up good and evil, which makes a mess.
The genuine fruits of karma are not money, fame, or anything obtained according to desires. The true karmic-fruits are goodness and evil, which exist within the actions themselves. Doing good is good in itself; doing bad is bad in itself; from the moment the action is completed. If we take the things we hope for and desire as our measures, the results will be useless. Such is the religion or standards of dogs and cats. That is, they simply take what suits them or pleases them as correct, just, or good. We must look again to make sure whether the thing gained is good or evil, that is, does it come from good or evil action. Whether it is good money or bad money, it comes in line with its causes. If it comes from good karma, it’s good money; if it comes from bad karma, it’s bad money and will always be bad. When good money is used to take care of ones family, spouse, and children, they too are good through it. If bad money is used to support them, the whole family is dragged into evil.
There are no exceptions, but these things are invisible to our physical eyes. This is the first way that people go astray. They misunderstand that doing good doesn’t lead to goodness and doing evil doesn’t lead to evil. In fact, the principle is absolute. Doing good is good certainly. Doing evil is evil certainly. They are good already and evil already from the moment they are done. The by-products are gained in a good or bad way according to that Karma. Don’t go thinking that the external form is the same or that they are the same things. By clarifying the differences between bad money and good money, between true fame and false fame, there’s no way you will be confused about Karma.
[From “Karma According to Buddhist
Principles” in Dhamma for Judges (Dhammadāna Foundation, Chaiya), pp.
376-78.
Lecture originally given on 19 June 2500/1957.]
Old quotes ...
The Buddha and the West have chosen different strategies.
From a talk by Dr. Prawase Wasi (a leading social commentator, scientist, NGO leader, & lay student of Ajarn Buddhadasa):
Dukkha1 and happiness are interrelated opposites, just like hot and cold. If there is little heat, it is very cold; lots of heat, then little cold. If there is a lot of suffering, there is little happiness. If there is little suffering, there is a lot of happiness. If suffering is ended, there is supreme happiness. Nonetheless, the strategies for ending dukkha and creating happiness lead to completely different actions and consequences.
The Buddha chose the strategy of ending dukkha.
The West chose the strategy of creating sukha (happiness).
Creating happiness leads to craving, selfishness, competition, destruction, and violence, as we can see epidemic in the world every day.
Ending dukkha, conversely, leads to wisdom, compassion, and peaceful co-existence.
Before, we Thais thought that the strategy of wealth creation would help solve the problem of poverty. Instead, this has proven to be a fallacy. After following this strategy, the gap between poor and rich here in Thailand, and between poor countries and rich countries, has expanded and deepened ???. Wealth concentrates itself, as in the saying "rich collects, poverty spreads." For example, the 300 richest Americans own more wealth than the poorest 2 billion of the world's citizens.
This gap between rich and poor, and rich between countries and poor countries, creates political and social problems that can never be solved, e.g., violence and perpetual war.
Einstein thus said, "We shall need a radically new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive."
Larslo, Grof, and Russell say that Western civilization inevitably will lead the whole world into a crisis situation. Materialist, consumerist civilization cannot move forward without creating massive disruption and destruction.
The civilization of materialism and consumerism arises from choosing the happiness creation strategy. This leads to the excessive indulgence and consumption that the Buddha called "kamasukhalikanuyoga" (indulgence in sensual pleasures). This is one of the extremes to be avoided because it leads to conflict and destruction.
Thus, the future of our country depends on which strategy we will follow. Will we choose that of the West or of the Buddha:
Farang saranang gacchami (to the West for refuge we go) or
Buddhang saranang gacchami (to the Buddha for refuge we go)
-- which is it going to be?If we chose the West as our refuge, we will continue the policies of the last five decades, applying the strategy of creating happiness, increasingly enthralled with consumerism or kamasukhalikanuyoga (indulgence in sensual pleasures).
If, however, we choose the path of the Buddha, we will follow the strategy of eliminating suffering through the way of wisdom, namely:
Society has the wisdom to understand suffering.
Society has the wisdom to focus on eliminating suffering.
Society has the wisdom to effectively eliminate suffering.
When dukkha is eliminated, abundant happiness emerges.
1 Pain, discomfort, stress, suffering.
From a letter to "Sudhamma" ...
You asked what method there is for getting rid of thīnamiddha (sloth and torpor). This hindrance is quite normal for beginners, that is, those who are used to the drowsiness of ordinary people who get sleepy as soon as there is something to make them sleepy. When one consistently goes against this habit, it will gradually improve until one's character changes.
The upaya, here, is to find a way to increase one's satisfaction and motivation to the same level as when one is committed to doing something that requires skill, is satisfying and enjoyable, or brings one honor and glory. If something cruder is required, try changing position or place or posture. Open your eyes and look around. Some people get good results from sitting on a stool or bench that has no back support.
One must observe oneself, not letting sleepiness fall over one. Keep your face up, breathe deeply and evenly, whenever it gets drowsy. When, however, it's truly sleepy through lack of sleep, there's only one way — either sleep or walk. With these problems concerning drowsiness, try to find your own solution as much as possible. You will find a good method that suits you especially.
Buddhadasa Bhikkhu
5 July 2484 (1941)
From a letter to "Sudhamma" ...
That Metta doesn't arise is connected with clinging too much to somebody as being a "person" or "being." Every time we see certain people as "somebody," we hate them every time. If we could see them as "just nature," we might be able to laugh and forgive freely. Sympathy will happen by itself.
Sometimes, it is harder to think of their virtues and good points than it is to reflect on them not being a lasting person or being. If we see how there is no self or being there, we are also able to see the kilesa or demon in them as it spews its poison. What business do we have arguing with that demon possessing them? When their consciousness, which is naturally pure, is stolen, we ought to feel their pain and have sympathy for one fallen into the clutches of kilesa. In the end, we won't go crazy with them. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu
4 June 2485 (1942)
