Is karma real?

[Telmina]

I asked the Yi about this, as it is something I ponder over quite alot, and got 16: 4 to 2.
I suppose it is saying yes, as this is a line that speeks explicitly about attracting. So at least it is saying that you attract what is positive, from how I read it.
Amyone else in for a talk about this?

 

[floatsmith]

16.4 also contains (in many translations) the unambiguous statement “Do not doubt,” “Doubt not,” etc. — and the shining of this ‘faith’ or simple acceptance (of the Universe, of Reality, whatever concept we might apply to this) leading to connection & the devotion of the mare of 2. The mare doesn’t really question Heaven but goes with.

 

[booboo]

Wow, synchronicity rules! Gotta love it. Only last week i asked yi if karma was real and how it worked. Actually on february 19th. The response i got was 61/5,6 changing to 19. Im sorry i cant add my impression here atm. But i thought it was a good idea to share this here, now. Blessed be all.

 

[svenrus]

In general I think Hex. 16 is about what Bob's singing here:

​

A part of the ideograph of the tag, hex. 16 *), depicts an elephant and somehow elephant's memory's are said to be extraordinary good and their legendary known capability for empathy makes me think that - taking this picture as a sign - your question is answered here to be true.

* ) See Alfred Huang's explanation to the ideograph representing hex. 16, which tag he translates: Delight

 

[svenrus]

An excerpt from his book The complete I Ching:

 

[Freedda]

Is karma real?

I find myself asking, what do you mean by this? The word itself simply means 'action' but when people talk about 'karma' they often mean the concept or 'law' of karma, where the intentions of our actions have future consequences. Is this what you mean?

 

[Telmina]

I mean, by karma, that one sort of gets what one needs to develope on a spiritual level in life - that ones intentions leed to consequences in this life.

 

[svenrus]

Which is, like Freedda said the Law of Karma. In the West we learned about it in a more physical way, Action leads to Re-action, like pushing a pendulum which is absolutely real.
In the East, again as I see it, it's more abstract, I mean Reincarnation are involved also so in the most extreme degree one can be confronted with deeds done hundreds or thousands of years ago....
Is it real in that sense ? Or, is karma real in the sense that what I did a moment ago I'll be confronted with, good or bad ?

 

[rosada]

16.4 doesn’t necessarily mean attracting what is positive but rather “like attracts like.”

 

[Freedda]

Is karma real?

That seems to me to be a very, very, very broad question, and one which is open to all sorts of answers, interpretations, and even mis-interpretations.

So with such a broad-brush question, I'd like to approach it with a broad-brush, maybe 'outside the lines', response; and I've interspersed this with lines from Chapter 16 of Lauzi's Tao Te Ching (Hex 16 of the Yi and Chapter 16 of the Tao have no real correspondence nor connection, but I like these lines and they seem to fit.)

Starting with Hex. 16, which has the names 'Readiness', and 'Responsive Movement'. These more closely have the 'look and feel' of karma to me, especially the latter - where we have movement / action in response to one's intentions.

Looking at the trigrams - the two 3-line figures which make up the hexagram 16 - here we have Earth below, Thunder above: perhaps here we find ourselves living our lives upon this earth, but at some point - perhaps at the time of our deaths, or even before? - we become ready to make our leap towards the infinite ...

So here Thunder reaches up towards heaven, but ... with the moving forth line (here at the boarder of the inner becoming manifest) the whole effort is thrown off, and we have 'failure to launch':

We just don't have what it takes (maybe not enough of the correct kind of karma?) to make this leap, so instead we find ourselves landing smack dab back on Earth (the resulting Hex. 2), and we get to start all over again ....

This of course is not at all uncommon, and odds are this is where the vast majority of us will end up! The odds are, so to speak, stacked in favor of us coming back to try it again, and again, and again .... In fact the stack of chips is so high we can't even begin to see the top of it.

Tao Te Ching - 16
The myriad beings are as one
Through this we observe the return of beings
... each coming home to its roots​

But we are not left here without directions:

We are told in 16.4 that we should consider this a fresh start; that there is much still here for us to have and gain, and that companions are key to our time here. And with Hex. 2 we are told that persistence is a good thing, and that we should approach this with 'beginner's minds' as if we are apprentices and not experts.

(And concerning this idea of a fresh start: elephants had long been extinct in China by the time the Yi was written, so any reference to them in the word Yu (16), is perhaps only in hindsight and from a far ways off, maybe something like: 'elephants were - we believe - wise and had long memories - but that may not be our concern here - we instead are making a freash start and looking to the future and our upcoming intentions and actions.' Or ... maybe it concerns the memories of our myriad past lives and the wisdom we hopefully are gleaning from them.)

One of the points of Karma I think is how we answer the question: what is it that I should seek to have and to gain in this lifetime? We could for example, try to gather or increase our 'good karma' via merit, good deeds, right actions; or we could focus only on increasing 'bad karma' via or greed, vanity and the harm we cause others.

Some hints here (beside those that - at least to me - seem like obvious choices), are found on, with and within Earth (Hex. 2): here are lessons about acceptance, about being open to receiving earth's gifts, about nourishing others. And to understand that all this begins with our actions and intentions (and with the possibility of free will): 'Earth's actions will always lead to a result, but the result is decided by what Earth is given to work with".

Tao Te Ching - 16
To comprehend the enduring speaks of clarity
To not comprehend the enduring is to recklessly create suffering ...​

And lucky for us - because we are so dense and need so many countless lifetimes to learn these lessons - there are other signposts we've been given: one of these that I try to make use of ('try' being the operative word here) is the teachings of the Buddha - the 8-fold path. But other people may find it in the wisdom of native peoples, or from shamans, or with the Yi, or in the words of Jesus or Muhammad ... to name a few.

Tao Te Ching - 16
The path is ... continuous
The death of self is nothing to fear​

And finally, in order to keep our karma clean (including Svenrus') and to set the Karmic Record straight ... Bob Marley did not write and never recorded 'Don't Worry, Be Happy'. That was written and recorded by American musician Bobby McFerrin - who is, as karma would have it, the son of singers. (And the late Robin Williams makes an appearance in this video!)

And in correcting this, we are reminded of two important Rules of Karma:

1. Without ill intentions, something that is not truthful carries no bad karma (or at least not as much), so Svenrus is off the hook. And ...

2. Not everything you see, hear, and read on the internet is true!

Best, D

 

[Olga Super Star]

16.4 doesn’t necessarily mean attracting what is positive but rather “like attracts like.”

Which is exactly how I have always interpreted karma! You do good, you get good, you do bad, you get bad. Maybe not in this life, but in the next one for sure

 

[rosada]

I think of it as our physical bodies are an illusion. We are not just one body controlled by one mind, or idea. The appearance of one body is created by a parade of like ideas endlessly circulating which - as more like minds are attracted together and aline as one flow - eventually manifests in a pattern that appears to be solid but is really just circulating thoughts creating thought forms. Our habitual thoughts which repeat and repeat without personal awareness are what create karma. That is, we create our karma by mindless living. There can be good karma, which comes from mindless good habits - and bad karma which comes from bed habits. But all karma, both good and bad, creates imbalance. The superior man sees things as they are fresh in the moment and acts not from mindless habit but with presence and awareness. In this way he can move through experience leaving no disturbances - karma clean!.

 

[Freedda]

I think of it as our physical bodies are an illusion ....

Hmm, You may be right .... and I will ponder this as I finish my illusionary breakfast and sip my equally illusionary coffee. Ah, much better, so now ....

With these 'big picture' questions: what is the Yi, is there a god, what is karma ... do I want fries with that? - I think if 1,000 people asked one of these questions, almost all of them would get a different answer, out of the 4,096 possible responses from the Yi.

So, I think that any one question and answer we get about karma - as Telmina has done here - is giving us one part of the picture, of the meaning, and perhaps it's the one aspect that the querent (or we) can or needs to hear.

A core teaching in Buddhism is the idea of non-self, and the insubstantial (without substance) nature of existence - which means in my view, that all being and things exist as a verb, not a noun. There is then this state of karma, where all this is being played out. And with all this, there may be the possiblity to recognize, or come to know a state, where we're not creating karma of any kind, which might be samadhi, or enlightenment, etc.

But the Buddha - being a practical sort - thought, 'hmm, given that countless beings have lived across countless lifetimes, all within the countless universes have been created and destroyed, I'd bet that most all of you are not going to end your cycle of birth and death in this lifetime' ...

... so part of the Buddhist teachings then are about how to live in this world, and I thnk it is no accident that he made distinctions between good and bad karma, and good and bad actions, livelihoods, ways of relating to others, etc. So, in some ultimate sense good=bad karma, but within the contxt of our present, 'of this earth' existence, our good and/or bad actions and intentions do matter.

And that is what I think this reading may be about.

Best, D

 

[svenrus]

Without claiming a deeper understanding of "The Law of Karma" (as buddhism has never interested me) I lean toward the common known about it: that no matter how guarded one feels himself his deeds, good or bad, will be responded ie doing a living being harm will return with harm upon oneself and vice versa.
I believe in reincarnation out of the (strange) fact that Nothing doesn't exist.

 

[svenrus]

#10

Freeda: "........... Bob Marley did not write and never recorded 'Don't Worry, Be Happy'. That was written and rec ..........."
Thank You for information. When this song came in to my mind it were actually because I followed this wonderful TV series with Cosby and I searched YouTube for that word and up came this cut with "Bob Marley", but mainly to show how hex. 16 *) occured to me expressed with a song expressing happiness/joy

*) Where A. Huang got Delight as tag for this hexagram K. & R. Huang got Weariness.

 

[Freedda]

I lean toward the common known about it: that ... his deeds, good or bad, will be responded ie doing a living being harm will return with harm upon oneself and vice versa.

I don't really know if 'karma' exisits, but I try to live my life with some sense of honesty and non-harming, because - if for nothing else - it was how I was raised, and it's probably best to hedge my bets just in case it is true!

I do not think, however, that karma is alwasys 'instant', nor do I think of it as some sort of bargain I'm making with the universe: 'I'll be good and in return you will make me happy and give me what I want'. No, sorry, it just doesn't work that way. After all, bad things happen to good people all the time!

Bob Marley did not write and never recorded 'Don't Worry, Be Happy'. ..........." Thank You for information.

It's an easy mistake to make, given that if you search for it, most of the videos that come up indicate it's a Bob Marley song (note however, that all of these vidoes only have his picture and none of them actually show him performing the song) ... and this leads to my second law of Karma:

* Not everything you see, hear, and read on the internet is true!

Where A. Huang got Delight, K. & R. Huang got Weariness.

And closely related, not every I Ching book we find or read is going to be accurate - or speak to us or be useful to us.

Looking at Bradford Hatcher's webpage, Yijing Hexagram Names and Core Meanings, K&R Huang's name is really only one of a few which we might say has a 'negative' spin on Hex. 16. Most others are along the lines of: enthusiasm, enjoyment, happiness, etc. and some of are a tad more neutral, like: readiness, anticipation, and responsive movement ....

So, it seems to me that instead of always taking these at face value (e.g. Huang calls it this, Hilary calls it that, Wilhem says ...), we need to put on our thinking caps and ask, what do the words and images (hexagrams, trigrams) mean for me (and for the reading), and what might be a good title or 'handle' to encompass those meanings?

Looking at 16's imagery, I see thunder rising from the earth. I've read that this describes a time in spring when thunder awakens from its winter slumber within the earth, proclaims itself, and shoots up from earth towards heaven (one person calls thunder the 'voice of heaven') ....

So given this imagery (which I used in my reading), it makes me wonder, does this depict the time just before (anticipation, readiness), or just at/during (enthusiasum, happiness), or just after Thunder's proclamation? And I suppose this 'just after' period might be where thunder feels 'weariness', or .... that this is when it starts (or continues) a cycle of 'responsive movement'.

D

 

[svenrus]

#16
Freedda:
".................... So, it seems to me that instead of always taking these at face value (e.g. Huang calls it this, Hilary calls it that, Wilhem says ...), we need to put on our thinking caps and ask, what do the words and images (hexagrams, trigrams) mean for me (and for the reading), and what might be a good title or 'handle' to encompass those meanings? ................... "

I can only agree.

The only author I know who haven't translated the chinese (pinyin-) tags into english are James Legge. Whether he then avoided that because he knew what a confusion it would (later) entail ??? - probably not, but today, referring to the list You gave from B. Hatchers www-site, we would maybe be better served without the english translations of these tags.

 

[Freedda]

The only author I know who (hasn't) translated the chinese (pinyin-) tags into english (is) James Legge .... Whether he then avoided that because he knew what a confusion it would (later) entail ??? - probably not ....

.... but referring to the list you gave from Hatcher's site, we would maybe be better served without the english translations of these tags.

So. is this what you think - that we're better off not looking at the Hexagram names? Or are you just posing this as a question? That is not clear to me? (And I believe this question deserves it's own thread in Exploring Divination, which I think I'll start soon.)

As to Legge, I am not all familiar with his translation, and it's not one I use at all. But I'd maybe approach the question a different way: since there seems to be only on Yi author (Legge) out of over 80 on the list who doesn't offer translations or meanings to the hexagrams names, it seems like it makes sense to understand their meaning.

(And interestly, I just looked again at Hatcher's Yijing Hexagram Names and Core Meanings webpage, and I see he does list Legge among the authors?)

Best, D

 

[svenrus]

I see, B. Hatcher got James Legge on his list.

Unless B. Hatcher agree that this english tags ascribed to J. Legge there are his own translations of the tags out of interpreting what J. Legge may have meant..... I don't know. I've had J. Legges translation for a very long time, nearly next after buying R. Wilhelms edition and as far I'm informed Legges first and original translation only got the pinyin-tags.
And YES, if I'm posting if we're better served without an english translation of the tags as a question....
Because I'm not a sinologist/scholar I am pleased with their translations into english but on the other hand it can cause confusion - as seen above when tags translated by different authors diverge too much: Delight versus Weariness (Hex. 16, Alfred vs Kerson & Rosemary Huang).
I'm not into all of this stuff whether it should be posted in this or in that thread.

And NO, authors in the West should translate the tags and here's where your hint to an understanding comes in, quote (again)

#16
Freedda:
".................... So, it seems to me that instead of always taking these at face value (e.g. Huang calls it this, Hilary calls it that, Wilhem says ...), we need to put on our thinking caps and ask, what do the words and images (hexagrams, trigrams) mean for me (and for the reading), and what might be a good title or 'handle' to encompass those meanings? ................... "

So: in short I'll say that it could be comfortable to be able to understand the original pictorial chinese tags but on the other hand, as not being a scholar/sinologist, people like me, newbees/amateurs are dependent on the translations that have been offered.

 

[svenrus]

I forgot to add that I understand yours - and others here - questionings as to what I meant by this and that due to the fact that this is not my native language and by repeting myself in different ways I hope to eliminate possible misunderstandings....
I now and then considers my ability to participate in some of the discussions here but on the other hand: it's a good way to learn your language

 

[Freedda]

... on the other hand, as not being a scholar/sinologist, people like me, newbees/amateurs are dependent on the translations that have been offered.

Yes, that is quite true, and it may lead to confusion, but then again, how people translate the actual text in so many different ways can also be confusing - regardless if they include the hexgram names or not! I'm not sure how to resolve that.

... but on the other hand: it's a good way to learn your language

And it's a good way for us to learn it too!

 

[remington]

Our faith refutes the existence of karma, this is fiction!

 

[Freedda]

Our faith refutes the existence of karma, this is fiction!

Hmm, or is it that your faith doesn't allow you to understand or consider that Karma might exist (a.k.a. 'blind faith')? And does your faith (... not mine or anyone elses') also refute what the I Ching is saying?

And more to the point ... how is what you you're saying here related to Telmina's reading: 16.4>2? Do you somehow see this refutation of Karma in the reading, and if so, how and where?

D

 

[moss elk]

Our faith refutes the existence of karma, this is fiction!

He didn't even bother to state what his faith was. Creating an account just to lob a turd grenade....
Not a great way to earn respect or be taken seriously.

 

[Freedda]

He didn't even bother to state what his faith was.

Actually, he did not tell us what 'our faith' was or is! So, is that the royal we? As in 'our faith is not amused!'

d.

 

[svenrus]

I think it's important, in the context of this thread, what Alfred Huang mentions on the ancient tag Yü depicted above on #5:
"........... Taken as a whole it is a picture of the act of giving and receiving........" (The ideograph of the standing elephant and the two hands holding something. Note: in Richard Rutt's translation of the I Ching * the Tag for hex. 16 is straight forward: Elephant. ). Depending on the definition of what Karma is it could overall also be seen as an act of giving and receiving..... example: I have stolen something from You and thou not eventually received it from You in the proper way it will - according to the Law of Karma - be taken away from me again/someone will again steal it from me. In this Ideograph an answer to Telmina's inquiery could be seen.

* Alfred Huang, see #5. One of the thing that attracted me when buying his book years ago were as a matter of fact his explanations to these tags

 

[radiofreewill]

“Is Karma Real?”
16.4 to 2 ~ Where there is selfishness, Yes.

Karma is translated as selfish ‘actions’ of body, speech and thought which bigfoot (thunder) the cosmic action of Mother Nature (earth).

People find great delight, joy and enthusiasm in exerting control (thunder) over Mother Nature’s power (earth) in order to gratify their self-interests.

So, for instance, Mother Nature selflessly produces iron in the ground, and that involves no karma. Further, when there is no selfishness involved with action that serves the greater good, as, for instance, when people smelt the iron to make farm implements, then there is no karma, either. But, but, but, when humans fashion the iron into weapons for the purposes of attacking or defending each other, then there is karma.

In Taoism, action without selfishness is called wu-wei, and action with selfishness is called you-wei. Wu-wei acts naturally without selfishness ~ effortlessly doing the Right thing ~ and has no karma; while you-wei acts selfishly with effort ~ to get what I want ~ creating karma and engaging karmic retribution.

So, by extension, when a person grasps selfishly (thunder) at the objects in the world (earth) ~ they are creating karma:



And, when a person is simply present to the objects in the world ~ moved by nature without personal effort ~ then there is no karma.

Some basic rules of karma are:

~ Your karma is your own. Nobody can put their karma on you, and you can’t put your karma on anyone else, either.​

​

~ If the intent behind your actions is selfish, like hoarding, then the universe will take something away from you.​

​

~ If the intent behind your actions is noble and unselfish, then the universe will plus you up.​

The common belief that if I do something ‘good’ then I will get something ‘good’ in return is not actually how it works. More precisely, if I do something good *unselfishly* ~ then I will receive something good in return. But, if I do something good with a selfish motive, like giving to charity to advance my social standing, then I won’t receive any benefit, and the retribution will be that my integrity takes a hit, instead?

So, rather than grasping onto the objects of the world selfishly (ego) ~ we are incented by Nature to act unselfishly (sagely):

Accept what is given,​

Do the Right thing,​

Make nothing of it.​

​

[wash, rinse, repeat]​

Just let the world ‘be’ as it is ~ Hexagram 2 ~ and flow with it naturally ~ this is the difference between the Great Person and the small person in the i-Ching.

I hope this helps!

 

[Freedda]

"Is Karma Real?” 16.4 to 2 ~ Where there is selfishness, Yes.

Karma is translated as selfish ‘actions’ of body, speech and thought which bigfoot (thunder) the cosmic action of Mother Nature (earth).

I am not sure what part of your response is based soley on your opinions of what Karma is versus what part is an actual response to the reading? It feels mostly like the former, and very little of the latter.

My opinion is that Karma IS NOT about 'selfish' actions; it is about actions and our intentions - and how these work and manifest in the universe.

For example, how can you apply Karma or the law/rules of karma to natural phenomena like Thunder (which is not 'selfish'), or say that good karma applies to mineral development within the Earth, when it simply just is, and is not 'selfless' nor 'selfish')?

Using your criteria, I could conclude that the Earth is creating bad karma and is selfish when it 'creates' volcanoes or hurricanes which kill millions of people, or I could also conclude that Thunder represents good karma because it is the harbinger of Spring.

But then again, that would be a very silly thing for me to do!

D

 

[fai_35]

Telmina, you asked if karma is real, and the Book responded 16.4 to 2. And your reading:

I suppose it is saying yes, as this is a line that speeks explicitly about attracting. So at least it is saying that you attract what is positive, from how I read it.

is fairly in accordance.

Hexagram 2 points to receptivity - you'd do well to be receptive to the idea/teaching/law of 'karma'.
16.4 - if you harmonise, incorporate considerations of karma into your life, there is much to be gained. Have no doubt that the law of karma applies - much like hair comes together via a hairpin. (This is somewhat along your understanding of 'attracting'; that is like energies 'attract' each other, although it is not possible for a person to always only attract what is positive.)