Kamma for mentally illed people
-
u are a mental patient? u sure don't write like one.Originally posted by assfer:As i am a mental patient who have interact with mentally illed people a lot and who have been to imh before,i found mentally illed people are poorer than other people.They are more likely to talk about religions than other people.
-
There are many facets of mental illnesses, like obsessive compulsive disorder, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and many others.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:u are a mental patient? u sure don't write like one.
even though they are afflicted by the illness, they still need to live, work and support the family, some even are married and have children.
But the question I am asking are still unresolved or unanswered.
Because according to the dhamma, nothing ever happened by chance if go by the law of kamma, you reaped what you have sowed.
One must have done something bad in one's past lives to be afflicted by these mental illnesses, but what about if one is delusional and does not know what he/she did was wrong, will it contribute to any kamma?
I understand that if non intensional, ie only neutral kamma will result. walking, sleeping and exercising are neutral kamma as these activities does not result in any good or bad effects.
in the case of pyromania, the person enjoy setting fires intentionally for fun or curiosity. any bad kamma for pyromaniac patients? -
In response, to whether one who is delusion and not knowing what one is doing, what karmic consequence will there be by marc.. this is just my 0.1 cents....
Being ignorant can lead to nurturing/implanting/reaping the karmic seed of anger, greed and delusion, the primary causes of bad karma.
/\ -
Sorry I misunderstood your original questions.
The short answer is yes, because most mentally ill karma people will still know that what they are doing, but they continue to act it out due to their delusions.
Unless perhaps the person's mental capacities is so diminished that they cannot even know what they are doing... maybe it will be somewhat different. -
Question is whether it is a willing delusion or unwilling delusion.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Sorry I misunderstood your original questions.
The short answer is yes, because most mentally ill karma people will still know that what they are doing, but they continue to act it out due to their delusions.
Unless perhaps the person's mental capacities is so diminished that they cannot even know what they are doing... maybe it will be somewhat different. -
As long as there is intention and will to do it, it creates karma.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Question is whether it is a willing delusion or unwilling delusion. -
As you had posted before, unwilling participation also creates karma.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:As long as there is intention and will to do it, it creates karma. -
I'm not sure what you meant by that.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:As you had posted before, unwilling participation also creates karma.
If there is intention then there will be karma. -
AEN - karma arise as long as the six "roots" face six "dusts" doesnt matter what condition a person is in, correct?
-
hi people,just a personal opinion
If a mad man who does not have the intention to kill or does not even know what is "kill".and he happens to swing a chopper and killed a passer by.in this case he does not has any intention at all...
I am not sure if that mad man accumulated karma..but for that "innocent" passerby,its most likely karma.He was to be there at the wrong time and wrong place. -
Hi.. this is my understanding, if I am wrong pls correct me.
If a person suffering from mental illness, but gives rise to deluded intention to cause harm, he will still create karma.
Like for example due to a mental illness that person suffers paranoia, or anything, and he becomes very angry with someone and kills him as a result.
He is conscious of his behavior, and given rise to conscious intentions... as a result of this volitional act, he has created unwholesome karma, and also intensified his negative mental karma.
However if it is as the case spoken by 'Yautja', in which 'If a mad man who does not have the intention to kill or does not even know what is "kill".and he happens to swing a chopper and killed a passer by.'
I think the person may have less or no karma... this is more similar to the case of the blind monk who stepped on some insects, and the other monks reported to the Buddha, however the Buddha said that it was neutral or ineffective karma as it was unintentional.
Similar goes to babies who are still not conscious of their own behavior.. -
Unwillingly participation also means having no intention to commit such an act.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Hi.. this is my understanding, if I am wrong pls correct me.
If a person suffering from mental illness, but gives rise to deluded intention to cause harm, he will still create karma.
Like for example due to a mental illness that person suffers paranoia, or anything, and he becomes very angry with someone and kills him as a result.
He is conscious of his behavior, and given rise to conscious intentions... as a result of this volitional act, he has created unwholesome karma, and also intensified his negative mental karma.
However if it is as the case spoken by 'Yautja', in which 'If a mad man who does not have the intention to kill or does not even know what is "kill".and he happens to swing a chopper and killed a passer by.'
I think the person may have less or no karma... this is more similar to the case of the blind monk who stepped on some insects, and the other monks reported to the Buddha, however the Buddha said that it was neutral or ineffective karma as it was unintentional.
Similar goes to babies who are still not conscious of their own behavior.. -
mispost....
-
If it is similar to the case of the blind mind stepping on ants, then it is a neutral/ineffective karma.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Unwillingly participation also means having no intention to commit such an act. -
Nevertheless, there is still karma as you had posted before.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:If it is similar to the case of the blind mind stepping on ants, then it is a neutral/ineffective karma. -
???Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Nevertheless, there is still karma as you had posted before.
I can't remember what I posted and you probably misunderstood me.
In the case of the ants, it is neutral/ineffective karma, which means there will not be karmic consequences, because there is no conscious intentions. -
There is still the consequence of unconcious actions.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:???
I can't remember what I posted and you probably misunderstood me.
In the case of the ants, it is neutral/ineffective karma, which means there will not be karmic consequences, because there is no conscious intentions. -
Yes... but if it is similar situations as the ants, then that is not the result of direct karmic cause, but perhaps a karmic cause from the past or other reasons.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:There is still the consequence of unconcious actions.
Unconscious, unintentional actions, will not result in an effective karmic consequence.
Of course you cannot say I kill a person, but I never used my brain to kill so it is unintentional. That is by all means a conscious and intentional act, no matter how you try to suppress your thoughts during the killing. -
I wasn't talking about your last paragraph.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Yes... but if it is similar situations as the ants, then that is not the result of direct karmic cause, but perhaps a karmic cause from the past or other reasons.
Unconscious, unintentional actions, will not result in an effective karmic consequence.
Of course you cannot say I kill a person, but I never used my brain to kill so it is unintentional. That is by all means a conscious and intentional act, no matter how you try to suppress your thoughts during the killing.
I was talking about unintentional actions generating karma.
You replied negliable or no karma which in a way is still a form of karma.
Got through to your gateless gate yet? -
I have no idea what you are talking about.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:I wasn't talking about your last paragraph.
I was talking about unintentional actions generating karma.
You replied negliable or no karma which in a way is still a form of karma.
Got through to your gateless gate yet?
http://www.buddhanet.net/fundbud9.htm
Besides the two varieties of karma, wholesome and unwholesome karma, we should mention neutral or ineffective karma. Neutral karma is karma that has no moral consequence either because the very nature of the action is such as to have no moral consequence or because it is done involuntarily and unintentionally. For example, sleeping, walking, breathing, eating, handicraft and so forth in themselves have no moral consequence. Similarly, unintentional action is ineffective karma. In other words, if one accidentally steps on an insect, being unconscious of its existence, this also constitutes neutral karma because there is no intention - the intentional element is not there. -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
As I said earlier neutral karma still exist but it has no moral consequence. For example, the breathing of an arhant may cause a typhoon that killed millions but yet it is still neutral karma.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
http://www.buddhanet.net/fundbud9.htm
Besides the two varieties of karma, wholesome and unwholesome karma, we should mention neutral or ineffective karma. [b]Neutral karma is karma that has no moral consequence either because the very nature of the action is such as to have no moral consequence or because it is done involuntarily and unintentionally. For example, sleeping, walking, breathing, eating, handicraft and so forth in themselves have no moral consequence. Similarly, unintentional action is ineffective karma. In other words, if one accidentally steps on an insect, being unconscious of its existence, this also constitutes neutral karma because there is no intention - the intentional element is not there.[/b]