yes your past karma from all your previous lives is with you at birth,
and determines your birth.
When someone reaches enlightenment/buddahood (they awake to the true
reality of existence) they no longer have any karma binding them to life
and are then able to avoid rebirth, and exist permanently in nirvana.
As to the second question, yes I suppose I am into this, I became a
Buddhist fairly recently (I was an atheist). It's the first religion
that I really feel at home with, for two main reasons - there is no god
in Buddhism, and it is based upon reason and logic.
That last part may sound a bit strange, but to quote Einstein:
"The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should
transcend a personal god and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both
the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense
arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual and a
meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any
religion that would cope with modern scientific needs, it would be
Buddhism".
The rebirth (not reincarnation BTW) stuff is probably the most difficult
part to explain logically, not because there isn't any logic behind it
but because there is a need to understand a lot of other things first.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Smyth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 November 2003 16:49
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Karma was RE: Email
i thought karma could be inherinted from a previous life also?
you're really into this?
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Putterill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 November 2003 16:44
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Karma was RE: Email
:)
Nope - it still clouds the mind, just in a different way.
Many Buddhists follow the spirit of that precept rather than the letter,
even some of the ordained people I know enjoy an occasional drink, and I
don't think many of them could survive without tea or coffee.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Doom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 November 2003 16:33
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Karma was RE: Email
So, if we're supposed to get bad karma from intoxicants that cloud the
mind, do we get good karma from caffeiene?
heeheehee....
--benD
Wayne Putterill wrote:
> The standards in Buddhism are the five precepts:
>
> 1. Not killing or causing harm to other living beings
> 2. Not taking the not-given
> 3. Avoiding sexual misconduct
> 4. Avoiding false speech
> 5. Abstaining from intoxicants that cloud the mind
>
> Each of the precepts also has a positive side which produce good
karma:
>
> 1. Love
> 2. Generosity
> 3. Contentment
> 4. Truthfulness
> 5. Mindfulness
>
> I can't comment on other eastern religions take on the issue, but I
> believe they have basically the same principles.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 18 November 2003 15:10
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Karma was RE: Email
>
> Well i was just being sarcastic and using the taking of jobs as an
> example off the cuff.
>
> So if karma is based off what you feel is right and wrong (Cliche
> warning) does that mean Saddam or Hitler have excellent karma because
> i'm sure they thought they were doing right. I would think karma has
to
> be based off some standard and i would also think its not social
> standards or norms because so many times social standards and norms
are
> repressive and not a true reflection of an actions good or bad rating.
>
> Maybe karma comes down to the golden rule? Don't do things you
wouldn't
> want others to do unto you? AHh such deep thoughts time to have some
> cinnamon tea now
>
> --
> Bill Wheatley
> Senior Database Developer
> eDiets.com, Inc.
> (OTCBB: EDET)
> 3801 W. Hillsboro Blvd.
> Deerfield Beach, FL 33442
> V: (954) 360-9022 ext. 159
> F: (954) 360-9095
> E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> W: <http://www.ediets.com/> www.ediets.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Doom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 9:55 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Karma was RE: Email
>
> What follows is mostly speculation:
>
> Karma is based more on what you feel is right or wrong, rather than
any
> hard and fast rules.
>
> For example, you mentioned hurting the jobs of others by providing
cheap
>
> labor. My question is, isn't that what the US has been promoting for
> years? Haven't we been pushing the capitalist model on the world
since
> we decided communism == bad? So what right have we to get upset about
> them taking jobs that people in the US want more money to take?
>
> More to the point, if you were hungry and unemployed, would you worry
> about taking someone else's job by doing it cheaper? Or would you
worry
>
> about feeding your kids?
>
> --benD
>
> Bill Wheatley wrote:
>
> > So what hurts and helps karma? I mean if they are so worried about
> karma
> > why wouldn't care about hurting the jobs of others by undercutting
it
> > with cheaper labor? I'm just thinking abstractly I suppose. Because
> you
> > can get to a point where you could say its bad karma to breath
because
> > you are depriving the earth of air. Or by walking you're hurting
earth
> > by killing things that are so tiny you can't even see them with the
> > naked eye. Who is to say where the line is drawn in regards to what
is
> > positive karma and what is negative karma? Is there reading
material
> > with a +/- chart on Karma?
> >
> >
> > Abstractly Yours
> >
> >
> > --
> > Bill Wheatley
> > Senior Database Developer
> > eDiets.com, Inc.
> > (OTCBB: EDET)
> > 3801 W. Hillsboro Blvd.
> > Deerfield Beach, FL 33442
> > V: (954) 360-9022 ext. 159
> > F: (954) 360-9095
> > E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > W: <http://www.ediets.com/> www.ediets.com
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ben Doom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 8:58 AM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: Re: Email
> >
> > That's patently unfair to Indians. I mean, people so careful of
their
> > karma are *not* going to work for Awful On Line.
> >
> > --benD
> >
> > Dana Tierney wrote:
> >
> > > your garden variety AOL tech has no idea how to whitelist anyone
> and
> > is in
> > > India anyway....
> > >
> > > Doug White writes:
> > >
> > > > AOL has instituted blocking from certain types of domains as
> part
> > of
> > > their
> > > > anti-spam initiative.
> > > > To get the fastest results, your AOL customers need to
contact
> > AOL
> > > support
> > > > (the more the better) and ask them to whitelist your mail
> server.
> > > >
> > > > Also your mail server MUST have a reverse DNS set up
> > > >
> > > > ======================================
> > > > Stop spam on your domain, use our gateway!
> > > > For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com
<http://www.clickdoug.com>
> > > > Featuring Win2003 Enterprise, RedHat Linux, CFMX 6.1 and all
> > databases.
> > > > Suggested corporate Anti-virus policy:
> > > http://www.dshield.org/antivirus.pdf
<http://www.dshield.org/antivirus.pdf>
> > > > ======================================
> > > > If you are not satisfied with my service, my job isn't done!
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Haggerty, Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 2:01 PM
> > > > Subject: Email
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > | I set up a site that is capable of sending automatic
mailings
> to
> > > > | registered users, and we are getting a lot of bouncebacks
from
> > AOL. The
> > > > | specific reason provided is that the server has been
> repeatedly
> > used to
> > > > | transfer unsolicited bulk email. Not a good thing, and I
need
> to
> > solve
> > > > | the problem.
> > > > |
> > > > | Any ideas? The email is not coming from our domain, but we
are
> on
> > a
> > > > | shared server and need to get the mail out.
> > > > |
> > > > | M
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > >
> > >
> > _____
> >
> >
> _____
>
>
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
