0

According to Nagarjuna, the second causal link (sankhara, motivations) and the tenth causal link (bhava, gestation) are two karmas through which sentient beings trigger seven sufferings identified in the Twelve Nidanas, and from this arises the revolving rebirth cycles.

The 7th link is from contact with the world, and is called Vedana:

Feeling or sensations are of six forms: vision, hearing, olfactory sensation, gustatory sensation, tactile sensation, and intellectual sensation (thought). In general, vedanā refers to the pleasant, unpleasant and/or neutral sensations that occur when our internal sense organs come into contact with external sense objects and the associated consciousness.

So I take it that when the light [or equivalent in Buddhism] from an object makes contact with the eye organ, it generates Vedana.

Is it, then, incorrect to say that the object itself has karma: if the contact and feeling of it is karmically conditioned?


I'm asking because I wondered whether, when the meditator is in the fomrless absorption, or is reborn in a formless realm, she or he still experiences what most people [I know I would] class as the shape of visual consciousness, because this itself is not form, or consciousness, but itself karma.

  • sorry if my questions come off as very scattered. – sorta_buddhist Jan 21 at 6:38
  • 1
    your quotes do not have links. where are you getting this from? if you insist on pursuing such questions I would advise that you refer to the root sources (ie, Nagarjuna's own texts/words) rather than scholarly articles. – Yeshe Tenley Jan 21 at 14:43
  • Phassa is the liknk of the questions arising or non arising. So olso vedana on it. – Samana Johann Feb 20 at 20:07
  • And what is touched? Avijja. No avijja, no arising of Vedana. – Samana Johann Feb 20 at 20:13
  • And giving instead of claiming would lead to the possibility of the path to and ending of avijja. – Samana Johann Feb 20 at 20:15
1

Vedana and Sañña arise only if three conditions were present in he first place: sense organ/faculty, sense-stimuli and consciousness specific to that organ/faculty. These three conditions are what is known as 'contact'.

Kamma can be understood as intentional deeds and as the continuation of habitual intentions underlying thoughts, words and bodily actions.

As far as we know with our current understanding of physics, biology and psychology, in order for something to have intentions, that something must have the capacity to sense, to interact, to respond, to interpret, to learn, to modify its behavior according stimuli from the surroundings and from its inner world. According to what I've said, "visual objects" (if understood as entities belonging the outside, "objective" world) only would create kamma if they present the capacities above described.

I'm not sure if this answer your questions, but at least it may provide some lines for future thoughts.

Kind regards!

|improve this answer|||||
0

Is it, then, incorrect to say that the object itself has karma: if the contact and feeling of it is karmically conditioned?

Or perhaps there is something in the person who perceives that generates vedana. In yogacara, we'd call that a transformation. There are three of them that occur. A sense perception is ultimately warped first by the store house consciousness and latent seeds, next by the manana (or self-conceit), and finally by the thinking consciousness. The sensate data itself is neutral. It has no karma or condition other than what the other three consciousness impose on it. To take a contemporary example, let's say you see a picture of Donald Trump. First, you see a picture. Why yes, that is Donald Trump your thinking mind says. You've identified him. Next, your manana might contribute something like how seeing him makes you damn proud that you are an American! #MAGA Your store house consciousness might then supply something like an inherent respect to persons of authority. Perhaps you're also intimidated by the gravity of his office and are overcome by the awe-inspiring regal majesty he represents. (This actually happens in the reverse order from how I've described it, but for the sake of brevity, this will do for now.) All of this is overlaid on top of that picture of Donald Trump. How you react to it, what you feel (i.e. good, bad, or neutral), and what mental karma you generate is wholly dependent on your past karma and how you elect to deal with what comes up in that moment of perception. You aren't seeing the picture as it really is, but rather how your past deeds, memories, prejudices, and personal obstacles distort that picture.

I'm asking because I wondered whether, when the meditator is in the fomrless absorption, or is reborn in a formless realm, she or he still experiences what most people [I know I would] class as the shape of visual consciousness, because this itself is not form, or consciousness, but itself karma.

I'm not following. If it's arupa, then it is, by definition, not dependent on form. No form, no eyeballs, and no sense objects.

|improve this answer|||||
0

Yes objects that we see have karma.

For example in the story of Arahant Aṅgulimāla, we see that after attaining Arahanthood, Aṅgulimāla got hit by stones and other objects that were thrown at someone/something else. As Aṅgulimāla had to pay off the bad karma he accumulated by killing over 1000 people he got hit by those objects in retaliation. Karma is the reason everything happens.

|improve this answer|||||

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for?Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.