Lam-rim 37: Four Factors Involved in Pathways of Karmic Impulses

These days, I have been reading The Sutra of Golden Light quite a lot. It’s a typical Mahayana sutra in the sense that there is an enormous, enormous audience. This is very significant. They always say that when there are Mahayana teachings, one should imagine that an enormous, an unbelievable number of beings are present. One has to get into a certain frame of mind imagining the Buddha sitting there and inviting a hundred million of a hundred million of a hundred million Buddhas, Tathagatas, these Thusly Gone (Buddhas). In every pore of their bodies are another hundred million, hundred million Buddhas. Then he invites all the hundreds of millions of gods from the Realm of the Gods of the Thirty-three, and all the different kind of beings are there. It’s as if every atom of space around the Buddha were filled with beings. There are enlightened beings who are observing and giving their approval and other beings who are listening. And we are a part of that. This mind-frame of thinking in terms of such vast numbers of beings is really the Mahayana state of mind. 

Imagining All Buddhas, All Bodhisattvas, All Sentient Beings – The Mahayana State of Mind

You could say, “Come on, this is ridiculous,” but if you try to actually imagine it, your mind can be enormously expanded. This is what you really need for bodhichitta because you are trying to think in terms of benefiting all beings. Well, how do you start to think of all beings? If you just say “all,” there’s not very much weight to it. But starting with these sutra descriptions, imagining a hundred million of this type of Buddha and a hundred million of that type, each pore of each one being filled with a hundred million other Buddhas (they have all these enormous numbers) – and taking it seriously – is a very, very effective way of opening up and expanding your mind. This is the whole idea of Mahayana. 

If you are working for enlightenment, then you think of these hundreds of millions of Buddhas. If you are thinking of benefiting others, you think of these hundreds of millions of others from countless worlds and how, in previous lifetimes, they were this and heard this and did that and so on. There are extensive descriptions. So, this is very, very good. 

In the Nalanda tradition, you imagine the Dharma teacher as a Buddha and that you are in a pure land with all these beings around you. You imagine that you’re receiving teachings from the Buddhas and that everything is totally perfect. But if you look at the sutras, you’ll see that only sometimes does Buddha actually speak. Buddha is there, but it’s somebody else who, inspired by the Buddha, gets up and gives the teaching or asks a question. So, somebody asks a question of Buddha, and Buddha just sits. Then somebody else, by the inspiration of the Buddha, gets up and delivers a teaching or delivers one part of a sutra, and then somebody else delivers another part of the sutra. At the end, Buddha says, “Well done,” and all the Tathagatas, the hundreds of millions of them who are there as witnesses, all agree that this was really answered very well. 

If you don’t have this mind-frame of seeing the teacher as a Buddha, if that is something too difficult to imagine (especially if you know the teacher very well), then you could imagine the teacher being inspired by the Buddha and that all the Buddhas are there. As I say, this is an incredible state of mind that you get into, one that is very, very helpful. Even when you are at work or wherever, the world is filled – every atom is filled – with Buddhas and various beings. You are in their presence, and whatever you are doing is benefiting them. 

When you think of the tree of assembled gurus, you might complain, “Oh, come on. There are so many figures!”– especially the Gelugpa one, which has more figures than the other traditions. I forget the exact number, but for the sake of discussion, let’s say there are seventy-two different figures on it – which is the simple form. The full form has each of them with their full mandala and with all the deities in the mandala. So, you go, “Oh, my God. How can you possibly think that?” That is small stuff compared to the actual number of Buddhas and bodhisattvas. And then there are all these zillions of beings all around you as well. This is very helpful. 

Very often we tend to totally ignore the sutras and don’t even bother to read or recite them, but doing so is a major part of the so-called real-thing Buddhism. That’s how Buddhism is practiced by traditional Buddhists in the Asian countries. Reading the sutras is not to be looked down upon as something that only they do: “That’s the devotional side. I just want to meditate,” or “I just want to study.” If you can really get into it, it can be extremely, extremely inspiring. But you have to read the sutras over and over and over again – not just one time. If it’s only one time, you tend to say, “Come on, this is too much.” But if you read them again and again, as they do in the traditional way of practicing Buddhism – and you take it seriously – then you really start to get into a Mahayana state of mind, which is what it’s all about.

That’s why I say, to leave it at “all sentient beings” or “all the Buddhas” doesn’t mean very much. For example, when you take the bodhisattva vows and recite “all the Buddhas and bodhisattvas come”… well, you say that in one sentence. It doesn’t mean very much because you don’t have a picture of it. But when you visualize all these numbers – and even though you might say the numbers in the sutras are arbitrary – a much bigger impression is made on your mind. That’s the framework within which you would want to study this lam-rim, these graded stages. So, you imagine being in this enormous audience of others.  

Also, when you are trying to analyze, trying to meditate and so on, you imagine you are leading all of these other beings. It is always said that you should imagine yourself as the chant leader when you are chanting and doing stuff like that, so that everybody is participating, not just you. That way, you are not only acting on behalf of everybody when you’re doing your practice, you are also leading everybody in it. This is, again, the Mahayana state of mind. Sometimes we overlook how vast a state of mind it is and tend to be very glib about the Mahayana motivation by reciting a few perfunctory words at the beginning and end of our practice. That doesn’t have very much substance to it. So, having this mind-frame is very helpful, I find. 

So, read these sutras. I can particularly recommend this Sutra of Golden Light, which you can find translated into many different languages on the FPMT website, where you can download them for free. 

The Precious Human Rebirth

So, we started with the precious human rebirth. We think how fortunate we are to have precious human rebirths and to have the temporary freedom it affords us from the worst states of rebirth. Especially if we start thinking in terms of all these other life forms coming to the teachings, we can then start to really appreciate the idea that “hey, this precious human rebirth is pretty rare.” When we think about the causes for it, we appreciate even more how rare it is and how difficult it is to attain. 

Death and Impermanence

We need to put it to good use because we are going to lose it. Death will come for sure; we never know when. The only thing that is going to be of help at the time of death – given the fact that mental continuums are endless and that we will be reborn again and again (although samsaric rebirth can end with liberation and enlightenment) – are the preventive measures we have taken to avoid being reborn in one of the worst realms, one of the worst states. Money, friends, power, positions and these sorts of things are not going to be of any help at all. These are not things that are going to influence our future lives. The only things that are going to influence our future lives are the instincts and potentials, both positive and negative, we have built up from what we have thought and done, which includes the positive meditation habits we have built up – which is what meditation means: to build up a positive habit. These things that we build up are going to carry forth into future lives as instincts and are going to shape, in a sense, those future lives. We take that very seriously. 

Dreading Worse States of Rebirth

Next, we think about the worst states of rebirth. Frist, we think of rebirth in one of these joyless realms, the so-called hell realms, where we would be trapped for an unbelievable amount of time. We think of all the terrible types of physical suffering that we would have and how absolutely awful that would be. (Everybody here is coughing and sneezing – that’s nothing compared to the physical difficulties and discomfort of being in a hell!) We then think of rebirth as a clutching ghost, being totally frustrated and never getting what we want. We can never get any food or anything to drink. We are always tormented and paranoid. Everybody is chasing after us. It’s a horrible state of mind, horrible state of existence. Then we think of rebirth as an animal, a creeping creature, being hunted by humans or being eaten by other animals, all of which are eating each other, or being exploited by humans who want to make dog food out of our flesh and stuff like that. How awful that would be.

Safe Direction

Then, we think, “Is there a way to avoid this?” And, yes, there is a way to avoid this. The situation is not a hopeless and helpless one. We can put the safe direction of refuge in our lives, the direction of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. And doing this Mahayana visualization, seeing countless Buddhas around us, helps to remind us that there is some sort of positive direction that we can go in to achieve the deepest meaning of the Dharma – namely, (1) the true stoppings of all the disturbing emotions, karma, and so on, on our mental continuums and (2) the true understandings of voidness, the four noble truths, etc., that bring those true stoppings about. This is the direction that we want to go in. The Buddhas have achieved this in full and the Arya Sangha has achieved it in part. And thinking of so many Buddhas – there are hundreds of millions of them in these Mahayana sutras – gives us encouragement. We become confident that we can achieve that as well. 

Gaining Inspiration and Confidence from the Sutras

One of the things that we find in these sutras is tremendous praise being expressed for the sutras themselves. We might think, “Come on. More than half of the sutra is talking about the benefits of listening to the sutra.” But if we look at what was going on when these Mahayana sutras emerged, we see that this was a time when people were basically worshipping relics, stupas, and things like that. What is being communicated by heaping praise on the sutra itself is that it is so much more beneficial to actually listen to and think about the teachings than just to circumambulate stupas and make offerings of incense to a relic. Even though it says, sure, there is a lot of merit or positive force built up from making all these offerings, it is far better to listen to the actual teachings and prophecies. 

In the Sutra of Golden Light, there are accounts of beings who become bodhisattvas who hear prophecies made by the Buddha about certain people who are going to become Buddhas. Then those bodhisattvas actually become Buddhas themselves. Accounts like that encourage us to believe that we can actually become Buddhas ourselves. That’s very important for refuge, for safe direction. We need to be convinced that, yes, it is possible to become a Buddha. And it’s important not just from the standpoint of logic – namely, to know that it’s logically possible (which is what we have been emphasizing: a logical point of view) – but also from the standpoint of inspiration. Inspiration is something that often we – or at least I – tend not to pay too much attention to. However, if we can be inspired by thinking of all these Buddhas, taking it seriously that all these Buddhas really exist, then we get a very confident feeling that “yes, all these guys have done it, and I can do it as well.” So, then we go in that direction; we take safe direction. 

Refraining from Destructive Behavior

To go in that safe direction, we need to engage in the various trainings that keep that direction in our minds all day long so that we don’t ever lose it. We went through that. Then we spoke about how, on a very practical level, we go in this direction on the initial level. The initial level deals with ethical behavior – ethical self-discipline – as it relates to karma. And given that it will likely take many, many human rebirths before we attain liberation, that initial level motivation is one that needs to be maintained throughout the entire path.

Buddhism says very clearly that if we commit destructive actions, the result will be to have one of the three lower rebirths that we spoke about and that if we commit constructive actions, the result will be to have one of the three better rebirths – namely, as a divine being, one of these gods, as one of these quasi-gods, the so-called anti-gods, who are always jealous and fighting with the gods, or as a human. I have emphasized that it is the precious human rebirth that we want. 

Aiming for Rebirth in a Heaven

The Sutra of Golden Light talks about being reborn in the Heaven of the Thirty-three Gods, which is the Hindu heaven of the Hindu gods. It talks about how these tens of thousands of beings listened to this sutra and that they were then reborn in the Heaven of the Thirty-three Gods. Then they, along with all of these other gods and other beings from these heavens, came and listened to the Buddha’s teachings. If we think about this in terms of lam-rim, the graded stages of the path, we could image that not only people within an Indian context and from an Indian background would be motivated to be reborn in a heaven (obviously, the heavens would be the heavens that they would be familiar with, namely the heavens of the Hindu gods, the so-called Heaven of the Thirty-three Gods. They have a polytheistic type of system) but that people from other types of spiritual backgrounds would be motivated to go to a heaven as well. 

If some kind of heavenly rebirth is being presented as what can be achieved, then, though we can be reborn as humans with precious human lives, why would we want that kind of rebirth? Basically, it’s because it’s easier to deal with the bodhisattva path as a human. But these gods also help others, and they can come for teachings and so on. So, although rebirth in a god realm is not the optimum type of rebirth for achieving liberation and enlightenment, thinking about such a rebirth could be a very encouraging thing for a lot of people who are into going to heaven. They could be very encouraged to aim for such a rebirth. 

Later, in the intermediate scope, the disadvantages of a heavenly rebirth are talked about. But according to how these higher rebirths are presented in the Buddhist teachings, here, in the initial scope – and also as they are presented in the context of the Mahayana sutras – we wouldn’t just be hanging around in one of these heavens enjoying ourselves. Instead, we would come to teachings and even be able to listen to the Buddha teaching sutras as well; therefore, we would be able to go further on the spiritual path. So, actually, these teachings are using a very skillful means.

If we as Westerners approaching the Dharma are into going to heaven, then, OK, we can fit that motivation in here. If we are not into going to heaven, then we don’t have to emphasize that on this initial scope. Instead, we can focus on engaging in constructive types of behavior in order to be reborn with precious human rebirths. Everything depends on the dedication, the prayers – what one is directing the positive force toward. 

That’s a little bit of an introduction to these Mahayana sutras. I wanted to give it since I am in this frame of mind these days. It’s very helpful, actually.

Now we are thinking in terms of karma. We’ve gone through the four general principles of karma.

Last time, we were talking about ethics in general – our attitudes about ethics, our reasons for being honest, and so on. It’s very interesting to think about that. I have been thinking a little bit more about that myself. Why would we want to refrain from destructive behavior? What’s emphasized here is wanting to avoid the consequences of destructive behavior, namely all the actual suffering that would be the result. From a Mahayana point of view, we would want to avoid that type of suffering because we wouldn’t be able to help others. If, as the result of being in a lot of pain, we were severely restricted in what we could do, or if, as a result of lying, gossiping, or chattering all the time in a meaningless way, nobody believed us or took what we said seriously, how would we really be able to help others? So, from a Mahayana point of view, we think like that.

But what I was thinking was, do I really fear experiencing negative consequences? No, not really. Then why do I want to be honest? Why do I not want to cheat others? Why do I want to refrain from killing a fly or something like that? It’s because of a feeling. It’s hard to describe, but there’s sort of a feeling that, well, it’s just “not right” to do that – to lie or whatever. 

Participant: It feels better when you don’t.

Dr. Berzin: Right. It’s uncomfortable to act in these destructive ways. But it’s not just that it feels uncomfortable; in addition, there’s a sense that it’s just not right. This goes back to what we were saying before. It’s not that there are some laws that I have to follow and that, therefore, I have to be obedient; rather, it’s that I have this sense of it just not being right. It doesn’t feel right. 

This just reaffirms the qualifications that Vasubandhu gave, which we discussed last time. He said that a destructive action is always accompanied by two mental factors that automatically make it destructive: 

• Having no sense of values – in other words, lacking respect for positive qualities or persons possessing them. 
• Having no scruples – in other words, not refraining from behaving negatively. There’s no sense of needing to restrain ourselves. 

Does that restraint really have to be conscious? I don’t think so. I think it’s sort of an automatic thing. Because of having that sense of values, that sense of what’s right – what feels right, what seems right – automatically, the thought comes, “I just wouldn’t do that negative thing.” That’s this restraint, this sense of scruples. We just wouldn’t do it. 

This reaffirms Asanga’s definitions of these same two mental factors:

• No moral self-dignity
• Not caring how our actions reflect on others.

So, when I have a sense of values, I have a sense of self-dignity. I think more of myself, though not in an egotistical way, than to behave in this destructive way. Also, I am really concerned about how, especially in an Asian culture, my actions reflect on my family or how, in an Indian culture, they reflect on my caste. But it could also be how my actions reflect on my nationality, my religion, my gender, and so on. 

These definitions are not just abstract ideas to memorize. The more that we think about and work with them, the more we find – at least I do – that they conform to our experience. We might not use the same definitions, but lying, cheating, or going around hunting or fishing – killing just for the fun of it, for the sport of it – just doesn’t feel right. 

Additionally, most destructive behaviors are motivated by one of the poisonous disturbing emotions or attitudes: 

• Lust, attachment, greed – we exaggerate the good qualities of something. If I don’t have it, I’ve got to get it; if I have it, I don’t want to let go; and no matter how much I have, I want more because what I have is not enough. 
• Anger and repulsion – we exaggerate the negative or deficient qualities of something. If I don’t like something, I’ve got to get rid of it, or – even stronger – I’ve got to destroy it, damage it. 
• Naivety – we have naivety about cause and effect. We don’t understand that there will always be consequences of what we do – effects on myself, effects on others. And we have naivety about reality, about how things exist – that things are interdependent, etc. 

That’s what we have been talking about.

Not Living Up to the Sense of Values We Have

Participant: Suppose I have the value of being kind but that I don’t always live up to it. For instance, when something irritates me, I yell at or nag my husband. Would that then be the second factor of not having scruples? Or would it just be that I lack discipline?

Dr. Berzin: She is saying that although she has (and not just she has, but many people have) a sense of values, wanting to be a kind person, wanting not to hurt others and so on, nevertheless, sometimes a disturbing emotion… you didn’t say it that way, but sometimes a disturbing emotion such as anger becomes quite strong and you yell at your husband or somebody else. Is that because your sense of scruples is not strong, so therefore you don’t restrain yourself from acting in a destructive way? Yes, I think you could explain it that way. You don’t live up to the sense of values that you have. 

The thing is that we forget it; we are not mindful of it any more. Sometimes a sense of values accompanies a moment of consciousness; sometimes it doesn’t. So, to say that you have a sense of values doesn’t necessarily mean that you have it all the time. 

Developing Unlabored Ethical Behavior

It’s like bodhichitta. Bodhichitta, the Real Thing bodhichitta, unlabored bodhichitta, is what you have when you, as a Mahayana practitioner, achieve the first of the five paths, or pathway minds, of building up positive force, the building-up pathway mind (path of accumulation). “Unlabored” means that you don’t have to generate the bodhichitta aim through a line of reasoning, going through “everybody has been my mother,” etc. You don’t have to generate it anymore in that labored way. Instead, it is just there. And this direction, this aim in your life is so firm that, as Shantideva says, even if you are asleep or drunk, it is still there as the main aim of your life and continues to build up positive force. 

I think that by analogy (which is always dangerous – to argue by analogy; it’s not always a hundred percent reliable), you could say the same thing about compassion, about love, about a sense of values, about a sense of scruples. You could say the same thing in that you would have to work really hard to develop these emotions and attitudes to the point where they’d be so dominant that, even when you are asleep – even if your husband annoys you – they would be there. 

Does that mean that you never get angry? That would be hard to say. When is a sense of values so sufficiently manifest that you don’t have disturbing emotions anymore? That’s hard to say. I think that building up that unlabored state is a matter of mindfulness – being able to recognize when a disturbing emotion comes up. And then, if you’ve acted on a disturbing emotion, it’s a matter of feeling regret and apologizing as quickly as possible – so, correcting. That’s similar to shamatha meditation, concentration meditation, where, when you notice that you have deviated from the object of constant focus, you bring your attention back. You start doing that with your ethical behavior. Shantideva describes it that way. You start with your behavior – to correct it. As soon as you notice that your attention has gone astray, you bring it back. Or if you’re under the influence of a disturbing emotion and are about to yell at your husband, you shut up. “Remain like a block of wood,” he says. These things are very helpful. 

Before you can correct yourself, you have to remind yourself. You have to generate a labored state of this sense of values in order to remind yourself. Sometimes it will come up automatically but sometimes not. That’s why one has to meditate. To meditate means to focus on these things – and not just focus on one thing like the breath or a Buddha-image or something like that. Those are just exercises for gaining concentration. The list of the objects of focus for achieving shamatha is huge. And there are all these different states of mind. Those are what you want to be able to develop. 

So, if having this sense of values is something that your attention has gone astray from, you then bring your attention back to it and remain mindful of it. “Mindfulness” (dran-pa) is like the mental glue. It means to “hold on.” It’s the mental factor that holds on to the object of focus and doesn’t let it go – in a relaxed type of way. It shouldn’t be too relaxed, though. That’s the middle path that one needs to achieve. 

Again, study of these mental factors – how they work, how to deal with them – is something that is very, very helpful at all the different stages of the path, the different stages of practice. It’s very, very practical.  

What I wanted to start going into now is the analysis of the various destructive types of behavior. The analysis is usually given with respect to destructive types of behavior, but the same analysis can be applied to constructive ones as well. 

The three of body are: 

• Taking the life of others 
• Taking what was not given to us (stealing)
• Engaging in inappropriate sexual behavior

The four of speech are: 

• Lying – saying something untrue to deceive others 
• Speaking divisively  – saying something, whether true or not true, that causes others who are friendly to part or causes those who are already apart to be further apart. In other words, it’s causing disharmony by what we say
• Speaking harshly – saying something that hurts others 
• Chattering meaninglessly – just wasting one’s own and other people’s time with meaningless chatter and interrupting others with the feeling that what I say is so important when, actually, it’s not important at all.

The three ways of thinking:

• Thinking covetously – thinking about getting what another person has, whether an external object or an internal quality, and deciding to try to get it. Jealousy is there; a lot of disturbing emotions are there. We are not talking about just wanting to achieve enlightenment; we’re talking about desiring to possess something for selfish reasons, thinking it over and deciding definitely to get it 
• Thinking with malice – thinking over whether to hurt somebody and deciding to do it 
• Thinking distortedly with antagonism – stubbornly thinking to “repudiate” (that is the technical term) what is true. It’s not just disbelieving, for instance, in cause and effect or in the value of doing anything positive, nor is it disbelieving that Buddhas exist or that enlightenment is possible and stuff like that. Instead, with a closed-minded, antagonistic attitude, like “People who think this are really stupid. This is ridiculous. Why would anybody think like that?” And then thinking it over and deciding to refute it. So, it’s quite an antagonistic state of mind. It’s not just “I don’t believe it.”

We can go into all of these destructive types of behaviors in detail if you like. But for the purpose of analysis, let’s just stick with the first type, which is killing, taking a life. 

First of all, just because there is this list of ten destructive behaviors doesn’t mean that there are no other destructive behaviors. These are general categories, so a lot of other types of destructive behavior can be included here. For instance, beating someone up is not actually killing, not taking a life. However, it is certainly destructive, and it would, according to the general spirit of these destructive types of behavior, come under the umbrella of taking a life. We have to think much more broadly than just specifically killing somebody. 

There are various factors determining the completeness of a karmic action that are given in the abhidharma texts. Tsongkhapa puts a lot of these factors together from various of these texts, although the main points can be found in Vasubandhu’s and Asanga’s abhidharma texts, as well as in the Pali canon presentation of karma. Please bear in mind that when we speak of the completeness of a karmic action, we are actually talking about the completeness of the pathway of a karmic urge, or impulse – usually just called the pathway of karma, or karmic pathway (las-lam). As Tsongkhapa explains in his Grand Presentation of the Graded Stages of the Path, the pathway is the support upon which the karmic impulse is based and with which the impulse engages. Therefore, the pathway doesn’t just include the method for causing the action to occur but several other factors as well. The karmic result that follows from the pathway depends on the completeness of these factors. In other words, it depends on how complete the pathway of the karmic impulse is.

The factors of completeness are those that determine whether a karmic action will give the fullest, most complete results. For example, if you attempt to kill somebody by shooting them, but you miss and they don’t die, will the karmic result be one of hurting somebody rather than the karmic result of killing somebody? This is what these factors of completeness are talking about – whether the action of killing is complete and will give the full result of the karmic action of killing. Also, in a sense, the variable of the heaviness of the result comes in here, but as we go through the analysis, the differences between these factors will become clearer.

Throwing Karma and Completing Karma

Participant: I thought that “complete” had to do with what has the power to bring about a new rebirth.

Dr. Berzin: He brings up a good point. There is a difference between what’s called “throwing” karma and “completing” karma. Throwing karma is a karmic impulse, the result of which, when it ripens, has the force of actually determining the type of rebirth state that you’ll have – whether it will be in an animal realm, a human realm, or one of the other six realms. I don’t know if it also determines what type of being you’ll be in those realms – for example, whether a zebra or a horse, in the case of an animal rebirth. Those sorts of details I have absolutely no idea about. Maybe that’s more in the area of completing karma. Completing karma is what completes the circumstances of that rebirth – whether you are a street dog in Calcutta or a pet poodle of some rich person in an apartment, whether you have enough food to eat, and so on. 

The variable that affects whether the karmic impulse for an action is a throwing or a completing one is the strength of the emotion, whether a disturbing emotion or a positive one, that motivates the action. It’s not so much the action itself. So, if a karmic impulse is accompanied by a very strong disturbing emotion, it can have the strength of a throwing karma. That’s usually how the difference is stated. Again, whether the pathway of the karmic impulse for an action has all the factors complete can also be a factor that affects its strength, but I don’t think that’s an exclusive factor. 

I think there is a common misconception that if one of these factors of completeness is missing, the action is no longer a destructive one. However, it is still a destructive action. It’s just that it devolves into a different type of destructive action – for instance, you shoot to kill somebody, but they don’t die. 

So, now let me give the list.

According to Tsongkhapa, there are four factors that need to be present at the time of a physical, verbal, or mental action for the pathway of the karmic impulse for that action to be complete and to give the fullest result. These are: 

[1] A basis (gzhi) at which the action is directed. In the case of killing, the basis is a person who could die as a result of your action, 

“Person” means an individual. It could be an animal or even an insect. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a human. So, there’s a basis at which the action is directed. 

[2] A motivating mental framework (bsam-pa)

A motivating mental framework has various parts to it, which we’ll get back to. 

[3] An implementation (sbyor-ba) (of a method that causes the action to occur) – you have to actually do something to bring the killing about,

[4] A finale (mthar-thug) – namely, the person has to die as a result of your action. 

Participant: How does this fit together with this other quite popular list, which talks about an action being complete if you have, first, the intention to do something, then you do it, and then after it has happened, you rejoice?

Dr. Berzin: That fits into this. The intention is part of the state of mind, the motivating mental framework. Then you implement a method to carry the intended action out, for example, by stabbing the person. The action reaches its intended finale when the person dies. Rejoicing over it or regretting it afterward is going to affect the strength of the ripening. 

Motivating Mental Framework – Unmistaken Distinguishing, Motivating Intention, Motivating Emotion

The motivating mental framework has three parts. Let’s consider the case of the destructive action of killing:

[1] First, there has to be an unmistaken distinguishing (’du-shes ma-’khrul-ba) of the person or being that you want to kill. 

[2] Then a motivating attitude (kun-slong-gi blo, motivating aim). Motivating attitude, here, refers to the motivating intent, or intention.

Remember, we had a whole discussion about what intention means. According to Asanga, an intention (’dun-pa, Skt. chandas) is “the wish for an intended object and the wish to do some intended action involving that object.” So, you are aiming to do this action. You’re certain about what you wish to do and to whom or what you wish to do it. The intention accompanies the karmic urge that draws your body into doing the action, which you may or may not have thought about for a long time beforehand. That’s another variable that affects the heaviness of the result – whether you deliberate committing the action for a long time beforehand and come to the decision to kill. Deliberating killing and deciding to do so is a destructive mental action.

[3] A motivating emotion – in the case of destructive actions, it’s one of the three poisonous disturbing emotions or attitudes (nyon-mongs). With killing, it’s usually hostility. 

Causal and Contemporaneous Motivations

We’ve talked a little bit about the difference between the causal motivation and the contemporaneous motivation. The causal motivation is the initial motivation that draws you into the action of thinking about doing the action. It could have compassion as the motivating emotion. For instance, you want to kill the mosquito that is going to disturb your baby’s sleep and possibly give it malaria. So, you have compassion for the baby – though not really compassion for the mosquito. 

The contemporaneous motivation is the one that draws you into actually committing the action. At the time of the actual action, the contemporaneous motivating emotion could be very different from the initial one. In the case of killing the mosquito, it’s very hard to kill it without thinking, “Die, you bastard!” You really want to get it. If you miss, then that hostility comes up even more strongly as you go around hunting to find it. So, in fact, the motivating emotion and motivating intention both become stronger. I always imagine an Indian Raj scene in which I’m putting on my pith helmet and going around hunting for the mosquito. If you have that visualization, you start to get the impression that this is really ridiculous. Here I am, going on a hunting safari and running around the room in order to get this mosquito! In any case, it’s the contemporaneous motivating emotion that determines whether the action itself is constructive or destructive. 

The analysis becomes even more complicated when you consider that there is a motivating mental framework for each of the three stages of the action itself. There’s the state of mind with which you begin the action, the state of mind with which you continue the action, and the state of mind with which you to stop the action. Think about it: When you step on a cockroach – which is a rather large insect that is going to go “squish” and make a mess on your shoe and on the floor – your state of mind changes very much between the time when you first start to put your foot down and when you go “ugh!” as you’re actually stepping on it. There can be a little bit of regret at that point. So, the state of mind can change. 

So, we have a basis, a distinguishing, an intention, a disturbing emotion, an implementation of a method to cause the action to occur, and a finale. Those are six variables conflated into four. 

Deconstructing Actions

I think that there’s another thing that we should keep in mind when talking about karma – and here I am using the word “karma” in a non-technical sense to refer to behavioral cause and effect in general. Remember, in our discussion of the principles of karma, we spoke about how, after you have committed an action, there is the karmic aftermath, the karmic potentials and tendencies – that they are not like little globules of stuff on our mental continuums with the results just sitting there, waiting to pop out. These tendencies and so on are quite amorphous – though that doesn’t mean that they are amorphous substances. The best image to use is that of voidness, which is to see that they don’t exist in impossible, concrete ways. They’re influenced by all sorts of factors and circumstances. 

We need to deconstruct karmic actions in a similar way by looking at all the various factors that are involved. There is a basis. There is a motivating mental framework: a distinguishing of that person or being, an intention to commit the action, and an emotional state in which we commit it. There is an implementation of a method, a way in which we carry the action out. And then there is a finale. So, we examine: If we try to kill someone, do they actually die, or if we lie to someone, do they actually believe us? For the karmic action of lying to be complete, the other person has to understand and believe what we say. If they say, “This is ridiculous,” and don’t believe us, it’s not complete. Nor is it complete if they don’t hear or they mishear what we say. 

So, there are various factors that need to be present in order for a karmic action to be complete and for it to give its fullest result. Just to consider that, I think, is helpful (maybe next time we’ll go into the basis and all these other things). So, when we’re talking about an action, we’re not talking about some solid clump, some “thing.” There is no action that ipso facto results in a worse rebirth, a short life, sickness, and stuff like that. There are many parts to an action. We have to deconstruct it, to put it in modern philosophical terms. That’s what understanding voidness is very much about: deconstruction. 

[meditation]

Things are not as solid as they might seem to be. So many factors, so many variables affect what we do, what we experience, and what the consequences of what we do will be. Everything arises dependently on many parts, on many causes and conditions and so on.

Are Karmic Potentials Forms of Energy?

Participant: I find it easier to look at karmic potentials as forms of energy, something that can be more easily molded or more easily brought in a certain direction because it is not solid. Is there something wrong with that?

Dr. Berzin: There are three types of nonstatic phenomena: (1) ways of knowing (shes-pa, ways of being aware of something); (2) forms of physical phenomena (gzugs) – and energy would be one of them; and (3) things that are in the category of neither (ldan-min ‘du-byed, noncongruent affecting variables). However, from a tantra point of view, we can look at mental states either from the point of view of their being a way of knowing something, which would be the experiential way of describing them, or from the point of view of the subtle energy that supports them, which is a form of physical phenomenon. 

Karmic potentials and karmic tendencies, for example, are in the “neither” category – neither a way of knowing nor a form of physical phenomenon. But when we use this word “potential” from a Western point of view, we think of potential energy.

Now, we have to ask Mr. Science over here, our scientist student: Is potential energy actually energy?

Participant: Yes.

Dr. Berzin: In what sense? You can measure what the potential is, but is it an actual, physical thing? 

Participant: It’s a potential to produce something.

Dr. Berzin: But a potential is more abstract. However, it can be measured.

Participant: It is, but potential energy is convertible to other kinds of energy.

Dr. Berzin: Well, exactly. That’s what we are talking about here with tendencies and so on. 

So, in our Western way of thinking and of categorizing things, we can think of a potential as a potential energy. According to the Buddhist analytical framework, however, it wouldn’t be considered a form of physical phenomenon. But that’s perfectly fine, because it is a form of potential energy, and that potential energy can obviously be molded and affected. 

Participant: It leads away from this really static view.

Dr. Berzin: Yes, definitely. 

We have, in the West, different conceptual categories, different conceptual frameworks for thinking about and analyzing things. Although we are always encouraged to use just the Buddhist conceptual framework and not to mix them up with other conceptual frameworks, using our Western conceptual categories can sometimes be helpful, as in the case here, where the category “energy” includes both active and potential energy. It’s not called “active” energy. What is it called? 

Participant: Kinetic energy. As a bolder rolls down a hill, its potential energy turns into kinetic energy.

Dr. Berzin: So, it has potential energy to roll down the hill, and as it is rolls down the hill, that potential energy is converted into the kinetic energy of motion.

It’s the same thing here. We have a karmic potential to experience a certain type of result. If we use a Western conceptual framework, we can conceive of that potential as a type of potential energy. Conceptualizing it in that way, we can say that when a karmic potential brings about a physical action, the process is one whereby the potential energy is converted into the kinetic energy of the motion of the action.  

Let’s end then with the dedication. We think, “Whatever positive force, whatever positive potential…” 

Sometimes I use the term “positive force,” sometimes “positive potential.” I use both. When I use the term “positive force,” I’m thinking more in terms of the cause – that from the cause, a positive force is left over. With “positive potential,” I’m looking more toward the result that the potential could give rise to. But I use those terms interchangeably to refer to what is usually translated as “merit” – “whatever merit I’ve built up.” However, I don’t think that “merit” conveys very accurately what we are talking about here; so, I use “positive force” – “whatever positive force has been built up.” That positive force is what then acts as a positive potential for a ripening. Dedicating it by saying, “May it act as a cause,” helps to direct the way in which it will ripen as well as adds strength to it.