Re: Life is easier without karma - a dicussion.
Ambers ji,
Frankly, I thought we were simply going to discuss Karma and not this below. But I'll give a response even though I see it as philosophical and therefore not so useful.
So, if all is Hukam and there is no Karma then every action is the Lord's will. We then enter hard determinism, in which everything that a person does or receives is simply the Lord's will. This makes life easier because 1) I don't have to question why I am rich/poor or lucky/unlucky. There is just acceptance. Life is easier in the sense that I do not have to change anything.
Actually at the deeper level, the Buddhist understanding regarding conditionality and karma also points to the fact that “nothing can be controlled” and therefore leads to a kind of acceptance. But of course this comes as a result of understanding the nature of a present moment reality, by virtue of which, there is detachment. So really it is more about detachment rather than acceptance. And yes there is no element of determinism involved, since it is the Middle Way, and this directly does away with determinism on one hand and free-will on the other.
What you infer about the Sikh position cannot happen in reality, according to the Buddhist understanding regarding conditionality and non-control. One, thinking is not understanding, two, what the thinking thinks, this is dictated by the realities conditioning it from moment to moment. If therefore there is ignorance and craving, these dictate what one moment will be the object of thinking and what the next.
And we are moved from the moment we wake up to the time that we sleep, by ignorance and craving to think about this and that all day. When understanding arises in the moment it knows such realities as thinking, perception, consciousness, feeling and the attachment, aversion, kindness etc. which is the conditioning force. To follow instead the particular thought means therefore that no understanding has arisen to know any of this. No understanding and if no kindness, generosity, morality and such either, means that it must be ignorance and craving which weaves those thoughts and follows them.
Just this thought as “I will do good” if not understood as being only thinking, must be motivated in fact by attachment to results. How much more so what follows from reading some set of teachings and thinking subsequently to follow them. This is the problem of “self-view” which the Buddha taught about. And it is from this kind of understanding that life then becomes gradually easier.
Easier in the sense that we don't end up making good, yet another object of attachment. Easier in the sense that it is only with understanding the present moment that there is real detachment. Anything else is just more ignorance and craving and therefore can never be “easy”. Worse is when self-view is the motivating force, because this involves wrong thinking which sometimes leads to all kinds of wrong practices (rites and rituals). Even if this is just the thought, “I'll follow”.
Much evil is done by people following one religion or another as a result of the intention to do good.
Is life 'better' or more divine for this acceptance? Personally I see dilemmas as one is equally able to act on ill intentions considering that intention good e.g. Stealing or murdering because it feels like Hukam to do so. The issue here is grave misunderstanding, even ignorance. Ignorance is pretty much the cause of samsara and suffering, so to consider everything Hukam may lead to harm without the guide of the Guru (God/Sri Granth).
As I've tried to show above, I see a problem in the very idea of following, more so when this is in fact an abstract idea.
One very important understanding arrived at from a correct interpretation of the Buddha's teachings is that it is descriptive of the way things are and not prescriptive of actions to follow.
Should we now begin to discuss about what karma is?
