Sharon Stone: Was China quake `bad karma?'

[Potoooooooo]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080528/ap_on_en_mo/people_sharon_stone_quake
The 50-year-old actress suggested last week that the devastating May 12 earthquake in China could have been the result of bad karma over the government's treatment of Tibet. I'm not happy about the way the Chinese are treating the Tibetans because I don't think anyone should be unkind to anyone else," Stone said Thursday during a Cannes Film Festival red-carpet interview with Hong Kong's Cable Entertainment News. "And then this earthquake and all this stuff happened, and then I thought, is that karma? When you're not nice that the bad things happen to you?"

[Trout]

What a f*cking idiot. Why the hell anyone listens to airhead, glittery actors who's idea of "a problem" is when the personal trainer is late with their shipment of organic kiwis I will never bloody know.

Insulting b*tch.

[figuer]

Such a banal opinion from such a banal person doesn't deserve attention...but: How is it relevant that she is 50? Is it to emphasize she looks like 35? If it was Clooney would anyone mention his age? Journalistic sexism...

[Lógos Sokratikós]

Yes, the China quake is bad karma. Planet Earth should watch out for the implications of its foul deeds against the Chinese. Thousands of Chinese dead but G.W. Bush, who dumped Kyoto Convention, is untouched? How rude, this Earth. If it keeps going this way it will reincarnate right on the border of an event horizon, where it will be ripped apart and sucked. You reap what you sow. :D

[premjan]

This is the standard Hindu mode of thought. I thought it was Madonna who leaned Eastwards though. A Muslim would say that it was Allah's punishment to the godless communists.

[Civil1z@tion]

So the Chinese people get punished for the actions of their non-democratic government? What B.S.! You could maybe blame the Chinese people for what happens in Tibet if they had a democratic government, but they are essentially an oligarchy where elections mean basically nothing. If that's how karma works then karma is fucked up.

[J.F. Gaul]

Sharon Stone is just another dumb and racist actress, jumping on the latest trendy cause. Not only that, but she doesn't understand how karma works.

How is it relevant that she is 50? Is it to emphasize she looks like 35? If it was Clooney would anyone mention his age? Journalistic sexism...

I don't see why it's sexist to mention her age, as I've seen the ages of actors mentioned in the same kinds of articles. It's more of a celebrity-reporting thing, I guess.

[premjan]

Hindu Karma is actually supposed to affect the status of your reincarnated body in your next life. So this kind of bad karma is not what is normally advertised.

[nogods4me]

You left the "d" off the end of her name.

[Lógos Sokratikós]

This is the standard Hindu mode of thought. I thought it was Madonna who leaned Eastwards though. A Muslim would say that it was Allah's punishment to the godless communists.

The hindu philosophers ontologized the concept of "you reap what you sow". For them the effects process was part of the very structure of existence, a sort of lofty version of "every action causes a reaction". Although I subscribe to it (well, my understanding of it anyway), it doesn't correspond to the ruminating of idle anybodys dishing out consequences out of the blue.

[elevator]

To suggest that innocent Chinese citizens, ranging from the very old to the newborn, somehow deserved to die in a horrible earthquake because of bad national Karma is of course absolutely ridiculous - even if you believe in the doctrine of individual Karma. I wonder if the majority of the people who died in the quake was in any way involved in the Chinese government's treatment of Tibetans - or if they even knew about it? I wonder what she would say about Darfur...

[premjan]

Never mind the karma - perhaps it will incite China to be more open / liberal with regards to government.

[GenesisNemesis]

I think someone's ignorant of China being one of the most tectonically active areas on Earth. Correct?

[xunzian]

*shrugs*

Every reasonable person has known that the PRC lost its mandate after Mao died. The Earthquakes and all that.

Nawww, this has more to do with the Free Tibet movement. That's right, I said it. Guess who has suffered the most because of this quake? Yup. Uppity ethnic minorities in Sichuan province. See what happens when you go too far? Wanna keep on steppin' Tibet? Because 88 is one hell of a lucky number for the CCP, so I'd be real cautious with that one.

[premjan]

Tibet is obviously even more prone to tectonics than the rest of China, the only difference is that there are so few Tibetans in Tibet, and smaller population density overall. And for some reason, the roll of the die has spared them from tremors for the time being.

[SidewalkCynic]

I always thought Karma was a human communications/interaction effect, and not a supernatural intervention phenomena.

[credoconsolans]

It's alright. She's right up there (or down there) with the Islamic dingbats who said the Tsunami of 2005 was a punishment of Allah and every televangelist who has said hurricanes, tornados and floods are also gods' punishment.

[orac]

It's lucky that we've got so many experts on hand to prove that their karma is real but this one isn't a true karma. It would be a true tragedy if only the abrahamic religions had to deal with the no-true-scotsman fallacy.

Oh, wait, the people who believe in karma aren't here defending her by telling us that karma is real, or at least explaining how to tell true karma from superstitious delusion.

Does this mean that karma has been struck off the list of things that are actually real?

[xunzian]

I think the majority here don't believe in Karma and were being facetious when they referenced it. We're joking about this comment the same way anyone else on this site would joke about the latest fundy preacher's crazy comment.

Only it's both funnier and more tragic, since a vapid nobody is representing the tradition as opposed to someone who knows what they are talking about!

[whichphilosophy]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080528/ap_on_en_mo/people_sharon_stone_quake
The 50-year-old actress suggested last week that the devastating May 12 earthquake in China could have been the result of bad karma over the government's treatment of Tibet. I'm not happy about the way the Chinese are treating the Tibetans because I don't think anyone should be unkind to anyone else," Stone said Thursday during a Cannes Film Festival red-carpet interview with Hong Kong's Cable Entertainment News. "And then this earthquake and all this stuff happened, and then I thought, is that karma? When you're not nice that the bad things happen to you?"


Certainly an non sequiteur asinine statement.

[Converse02]

When you're not nice that the bad things happen to you?

Yeah, those 5 year olds who became crippled and lost their parents got exactly what they deserved, Stone.

Stupid brainwashed bitch.

[Trout]

What drives me equally nutty about this dumb beeache making a statement like that is that even assuming for a split irrational second that "karma" exists at all let alone on some national scale like this (which in itself is completely idiotic for soooo many reasons) she is simply too empty headed to even make a reasonable assessment of it.

She quotes Tibet like a trendy western puppet as if it is some sort of overwhelming force or karmic event in the universe that has caused the deaths of 80,000 people under this government's rule but remains totally ignorant of various very real and very well received things the government has done that are positive. I'm hardly saying they're the bestest guys in the world but they have been building roads, employing people, feeding people, bringing wanted infrastructure to places, and so on and generally improving the lives of millions for decades now. Ask your typical Chinese if life is better today or during the 1970's and you won't find many who say it's worse. And contrary to popular belief, many other minorities in China are left to their own cultural practices and not dragged off to the gallows as well.

But, forget all that because a single, narrow issue played out in the western media and trumpeted by empty headed glitteratti is all that could possibly be in play in a case of "karma" on the other side of the planet in a place understood by almost no westerners at all. These people need to read the whole book and not just the jacket.

Anyway, again, China certainly has significant problems but I am getting so goddam sick of watching 1/4 of the world's population painted with the evil brush because of a small group of ignorant, rich white people who like to meditate and think themselves special. Gad it's the height of superficiality.

[JPD]

I have nothing particularly insightful to add so

Freaky flapjacks, she's a moron!

[JPD]

Anyway, again, China certainly has significant problems but I am getting so goddam sick of watching 1/4 of the world's population painted with the evil brush because of a small group of ignorant, rich white people who like to meditate and think themselves special. Gad it's the height of superficiality.

Hearin' that! It's normally associated with the "We know what's best for everyone else" school of thought, AKA "If only they were a bit brighter"

[Trout]

Hearin' that! It's normally associated with the "We know what's best for everyone else" school of thought, AKA "If only they were a bit brighter"

Agreed. Very much a "let them eat cake" approach to international relations.

And man, who the hell are the champions of crapping on the Chinese these days but a bunch of twit hollywood actors who's idea of hardship is not buying a fourth Gucci bag fer chrissake! They have no idea of what life is like for the average American let alone for anyone else in the world.

[orac]

I think the majority here don't believe in Karma and were being facetious when they referenced it. We're joking about this comment the same way anyone else on this site would joke about the latest fundy preacher's crazy comment.
Yes, everyone is laughing and joking about "karma". That's wonderful, isn't it?

So, what exactly does this forum exist for if there's noone who actually believes in the superstitious crap? We ought to be posting down in the humor forum, because its all a joke.

(The fact, of course, is that the people who do seriously believe in karma are feeling really embarassed, which is why the only people posting here are taking the piss out of them. But thanks for agreeing with me.)

[whichphilosophy]

I think the majority here don't believe in Karma and were being facetious when they referenced it. We're joking about this comment the same way anyone else on this site would joke about the latest fundy preacher's crazy comment.
Yes, everyone is laughing and joking about "karma". That's wonderful, isn't it?

So, what exactly does this forum exist for if there's noone who actually believes in the superstitious crap? We ought to be posting down in the humor forum, because its all a joke.

(The fact, of course, is that the people who do seriously believe in karma are feeling really embarassed, which is why the only people posting here are taking the piss out of them. But thanks for agreeing with me.)\

Sharon Stone's comments were 'bad Karma' and extremly bad taste.

(Bad emanations generated by here, not necessarily meaning 'Karma' in the strict sense. Found in the dictionary).

[SteveP]

Stone is reputed to have a very high IQ.

If that's the case it just goes to show you can have a high IQ and still be an idiot.

[whichphilosophy]

Stone is reputed to have a very high IQ.

If that's the case it just goes to show you can have a high IQ and still be an idiot.

High IQ does not correlate with high rationality.

[premjan]

Well, even politicians make these kinds of gaffes frequently.

[orac]

Sharon Stone's comments were 'bad Karma' and extremly bad taste.

(Bad emanations generated by here, not necessarily meaning 'Karma' in the strict sense. Found in the dictionary).
Damn, it's probably a minor miracle that she isn't scottish.

But hey, if she's going to be famous and shoot her mouth off, she may as well prove that the new age nuts are actually full of shit after all and magical "karma" doesn't really exist. And you may have noticed that not one single person who has ever posted on this particular forum has been able to explain how to tell "false karma" from "true karma". Funny, isn't it?

[Acetylhexene]

Chinese people believe in Karma.

China has been shitty to Tibet.

I thought Sharon's comments were deliciously ironic.

The real reason they banned her was because she struck a nerve.

It's like the same type of phenomenon seen as when you go onto a fundie forum and tell the homophobes that Jesus said "Love thy neighbour" and they ban you.

[whichphilosophy]

Chinese people believe in Karma.

China has been shitty to Tibet.

I thought Sharon's comments were deliciously ironic.

The real reason they banned her was because she struck a nerve.

It's like the same type of phenomenon seen as when you go onto a fundie forum and tell the homophobes that Jesus said "Love thy neighbour" and they ban you.

Are you suggesting that Tibet returns to the harsh feudal system where the average life expectancy was half as much as it is today?

Education is compulsory and free in Tibet. 50 years ago, only a small percentage learned to read and write. Incomes are higher.

There is a Tibetan word, which means talking live stock. .These were the slaves, who were the lowest end of society (below serfs)which the barons could purchase just as they did with livestock.

Most of the wealth was controlled by a small elite where the majority lived in varying degrees of squalor.

Certainly, Tibet ma be imperfect but that is not the issue.

Over 65,000 people died in an earthquake and where most people sent condolences and even aid and she issued a non-sequiteur statement which was insensitive to the prevalent issues.

Tibet as depicted on the silver screen never existed.

[sylvan]

Premjan said that karma doesn't catch us until we're in our next life. So that would show that Karma is still just cleaning up after WWII.

[premjan]

I doubt Chinese people believe in Karma as they are officially atheists (maybe Falun Gong has some belief in Karma of a Buddhist variety which is anyway different than the version Sharon Stone is talking about). Also I don't see why this always has to come down to talk about independence for Tibet. Better for China to become a democracy with respect for individual human rights.

[elevator]

I agree with premjan completely, but I think it is important to specify that it is the Chinese government that is officially atheist not its people. Several recent surveys (including one done in 2005) says that (very uncertainly) less than 20% (8-14%) of the Chinese population categorize themselves as atheists or irreligious.

Another question, however, is if the majority of Chinese identify with a religion that believes in the doctrine of Karma. Like premjan, I doubt that they do. But even if they don't; you don't have to believe in Karma to take it personally when someone tells you that the death of tens of thousands of innocent people was somehow deserved.

[Tom Sawyer]

What I don't get is why would karma go and kill off tens of thousands of innocent civilians to punish a government that said civilians have no say in or control over?

How exactly does that balance out the universe, or whatever it is that karma is supposed to do? I fail to see how the concept of karma would even be relevant here.

[premjan]

Maybe Karma is myopic like George Bush.

[Tom Sawyer]

Maybe Karma is myopic like George Bush.

It would explain why it fails so utterly to do any of the things it's claimed to do - sort of like George Bush.

[Bullmoose Too]

So the Chinese people get punished for the actions of their non-democratic government? What B.S.! You could maybe blame the Chinese people for what happens in Tibet if they had a democratic government, but they are essentially an oligarchy where elections mean basically nothing. If that's how karma works then karma is fucked up.

But the question is who is punishing them? God? Buddha? FSP? It was merely and act of nature which can be explained by science. There was no punishment involved.

[thentian]

Maybe the quake happened because of bad Sheng Fui?

[abaddon]

China has been shitty to Tibet....
Are you suggesting that Tibet returns to the harsh feudal system where the average life expectancy was half as much as it is today?
... Tibet as depicted on the silver screen never existed.
Why is it that when China’s occupation is discussed, inevitably someone argues that because Tibet was feudal that justifies what China did, and does, to Tibetans? Listing the supposed horrors of Tibet’s past is a cheeseball argument when defending the Chinese overtaking Tibet, subjugating its people, colonizing its land and shooting at the people who try to flee. The choice isn’t between the occupancy or feudalism, when today there’d be different options if the totalitarian imperialists had any interest in justice for Tibet (like, for example, let them choose for themselves).

--------------------

Of course the earthquake isn’t justice. Or injustice. Earthquakes happen, people die...

Karma is cause and effect but not in a merely “objective” or “scientific” sense of atoms bouncing but it also accounts for subjectivity. Personal choices (conscious or not), based on one’s likes and dislikes, make life what it is for an individual, and that’s his/her karma. It's not just the "bad" but includes what that person might perceive as “good” as well. It’s got nothing to do with moralistic judgments of that person. There’s no superhuman entity or force to make such judgments. That’s theism, not karma.

It's just humans and their karma that lead to those kinds of unnecessary (or "optional") judgments about people and events.

[Waning Moon Conrad]

Are you suggesting that Tibet returns to the harsh feudal system where the average life expectancy was half as much as it is today?
... Tibet as depicted on the silver screen never existed.
Why is it that when China’s occupation is discussed, inevitably someone argues that because Tibet was feudal that justifies what China did, and does, to Tibetans? Listing the supposed horrors of Tibet’s past is a cheeseball argument when defending the Chinese overtaking Tibet, subjugating its people, colonizing its land and shooting at the people who try to flee. The choice isn’t between the occupancy or feudalism, when today there’d be different options if the totalitarian imperialists had any interest in justice for Tibet (like, for example, let them choose for themselves).

You could use the same logic to justify the holocaust by barking on about Meggido.

[Waning Moon Conrad]

(The fact, of course, is that the people who do seriously believe in karma are feeling really embarassed,

How do you know it's a fact?

[whichphilosophy]

Why is it that when China’s occupation is discussed, inevitably someone argues that because Tibet was feudal that justifies what China did, and does, to Tibetans? Listing the supposed horrors of Tibet’s past is a cheeseball argument when defending the Chinese overtaking Tibet, subjugating its people, colonizing its land and shooting at the people who try to flee. The choice isn’t between the occupancy or feudalism, when today there’d be different options if the totalitarian imperialists had any interest in justice for Tibet (like, for example, let them choose for themselves).

You could use the same logic to justify the holocaust by barking on about Meggido.

The holcaust existed, no matter how depicted. I am sure there have been executions, brutal treatment and killlings, but this was no different than before.

I never said it was ideal but certainly I can't see how the previous system was better. My point earlier mentioned was if the Tibetans became independant I don't think they will return to the status quo.

The Chinese government are not idiots however, and realise that free education and a higher standard of living iwll herd the masses in their favour. This alone is not killing hundreds of thousands a year, where before a person over 35 was an old man.

[whichphilosophy]

I doubt Chinese people believe in Karma as they are officially atheists (maybe Falun Gong has some belief in Karma of a Buddhist variety which is anyway different than the version Sharon Stone is talking about). Also I don't see why this always has to come down to talk about independence for Tibet. Better for China to become a democracy with respect for individual human rights.

A Democracy does not automatically mean respect for human rights.

[Waning Moon Conrad]

You could use the same logic to justify the holocaust by barking on about Meggido.

The holcaust existed, no matter how depicted. I am sure there have been executions, brutal treatment and killlings, but this was no different than before.

I never said it was ideal but certainly I can't see how the previous system was better. My point earlier mentioned was if the Tibetans became independant I don't think they will return to the status quo.

The Chinese government are not idiots however, and realise that free education and a higher standard of living iwll herd the masses in their favour. This alone is not killing hundreds of thousands a year, where before a person over 35 was an old man.

Many Westerners, including fellow Buddhists have this idealised notion about Tibet and no doubt, many of us spout our own types of propaganda and ignore what were hideously barbaric punishments for crime, manorialism and other such ugly, primitive things.

There were even instances, due to sectarian politics of war between sects.

People might however, consider the possibility that just as Tibet wasn't the buddhistic pure realm that many Westerners try to make it, it wasn't the brutal, vicious horror that Communist propaganda makes it out to be either. There is no shortage of lies, distortions and blatant crap coming from the anti-Tibet camp and it would be nice to see people acknowledge that.

Buddhists might consider that if Sharon Twatbrain is right and the earthquake was China's karma, the invasion of Tibet was karma as well.

I'm not aware of any Lamas who don't believe that the invasion of Tibet was karma, nor do I know of any who want Tibet to go back to the way it was. They definitely do not wish to see the reinstatement of manorialism. They want Tibet to be a democracy.

[whichphilosophy]

The holcaust existed, no matter how depicted. I am sure there have been executions, brutal treatment and killlings, but this was no different than before.

I never said it was ideal but certainly I can't see how the previous system was better. My point earlier mentioned was if the Tibetans became independant I don't think they will return to the status quo.

The Chinese government are not idiots however, and realise that free education and a higher standard of living iwll herd the masses in their favour. This alone is not killing hundreds of thousands a year, where before a person over 35 was an old man.

Many Westerners, including fellow Buddhists have this idealised notion about Tibet and no doubt, many of us spout our own types of propaganda and ignore what were hideously barbaric punishments for crime, manorialism and other such ugly, primitive things.

There were even instances, due to sectarian politics of war between sects.

People might however, consider the possibility that just as Tibet wasn't the buddhistic pure realm that many Westerners try to make it, it wasn't the brutal, vicious horror that Communist propaganda makes it out to be either. There is no shortage of lies, distortions and blatant crap coming from the anti-Tibet camp and it would be nice to see people acknowledge that.

Buddhists might consider that if Sharon Twatbrain is right and the earthquake was China's karma, the invasion of Tibet was karma as well.

I'm not aware of any Lamas who don't believe that the invasion of Tibet was karma, nor do I know of any who want Tibet to go back to the way it was. They definitely do not wish to see the reinstatement of manorialism. They want Tibet to be a democracy.

If they want something better than it was that's a start. If they offer democracy and squalor then more people will die than are killed in wars. Of course, if we believe everything we read in the media no matter who they support we will not be informed anyway.

Many investigative reporters already have their story's written for them which is just as well as they generally couldn't find a hooker in a whorehouse.:wave:

In the West we're just lucky.

[Waning Moon Conrad]

If they want something better than it was that's a start. If they offer democracy and squalor then more people will die than are killed in wars.:eek: If you can produce three lamas who want squalor for the Tibetans as well as democracy, I'll either give them a good hard kick in the nadgers, or I'll become an atheist.

Of course, if we believe everything we read in the media no matter who they support we will not be informed anyway.

Many investigative reporters already have their story's written for them which is just as well as they generally couldn't find a hooker in a whorehouse.:wave:

In the West we're just lucky.

It's a pity, but you're right about the media and investigative reporters too, I think.

BTW I love the line about hookers in a whorehouse. :notworthy:

[aupmanyav]

Just like in Iraq, it was not a heaven, but Bush's going there is not justified. Similary, in Tibet, according to what I have read in this forum, it was not heaven, but China's domination is not justified. Nepal also was not a heaven, but they got democracy by themselves.

[Waning Moon Conrad]

Just like in Iraq, it was not a heaven, but Bush's going there is not justified. Similary, in Tibet, according to what I have read in this forum, it was not heaven, but China's domination is not justified. Nepal also was not a heaven, but they got democracy by themselves.

I think you're right on both counts and I hope that the Nepalese use their democracy wisely and empathically.

[premjan]

A Democracy does not automatically mean respect for human rights.
Well, a democratic republic with a charter of human rights then.

[Elohim]

orac,

I do not feel embarrassed at all; if anything, I feel embarrassed for all the people who are espousing such a half-witted and non-canonical understanding of the Buddha's doctrine of kamma. There are many misconception in regard to kamma and the ways in which kamma is said to work. To begin with, the Buddha said, "Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, and intellect" (AN 6.63 (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.063.than.html)). The word itself simply means "action." Thus, kamma is commonly defined as intentional actions of body, speech, and mind. Intention (cetana) is a product of the aggregate of mental formations (sankharakhandha). The cause by which kamma comes into play is contact (phassa). Furthermore, according to Nyanatiloka's Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines (http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_v.htm), vipaka is "any ... mental phenomenon (e.g. bodily agreeable or painful feeling, sense-consciousness, etc.), which is the result of wholesome or unwholesome volitional action (karma, q.v.) through body, speech or mind, done either in this or some previous life."

Essentially, volitional actions of body, speech, and mind produce fruits or results that are said to have the potential to ripen during this life-time, in the next birth or in later births. In the words of S. Dhammika (http://sdhammika.blogspot.com/2008/06/kamma-and-natural-disasters-iii.html), "... every intentional action modifies our consciousness, thus building our character and thereby influencing our behaviour, our experience and consequently our destiny. Positive intentional actions (motivated by generosity, love and wisdom) tend towards consequences that are experienced as positive while intentional negative actions (motivated by greed, hatred and delusion) tend towards consequences that are experienced as negative." Additionally, the commentarial tradition of Theravada denies that everything is the result of kamma. According to them, there are five natural laws (panca-niyamas) which operate in the physical and mental worlds. The five laws are seasonal laws (utu-niyama), biological laws (bija-niyama), psychological laws (citta-niyama), kammic laws (kamma-niyama), and natural laws (dhamma-niyama) * (http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_n.htm).

Therefore, I believe that in certain contexts, it would be appropriate to think of kamma as "habit energy" in that the potential effect of an action can be to strengthen certain physical and psychological reactions. This is especially true in regard to psychological reactions considering that vipaka is limited specifically to "mental phenomena." Corporeal things are never called kamma-vipaka; instead, they are termed kammaja or kamma-samutthana (http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_s.htm) (kamma-produced). This category would include internal bodily phenomena such as the sense organs and these phenomena are said to be conditioned through wholesome or unwholesome volitional actions in a previous existence. To summerize, kamma is intentional actions of body, speech and mind that are performed in the present moment; the present moment is conditioned by the results of past actions combined with the results of present actions; the psychological results are termed kamma-vipaka; the corporeal results are termed kamma-samutthana; and earthquakes are not kamma-produced.

Jason

[aupmanyav]

To begin with, the Buddha said, "Intention, I tell you, is 'kamma'. Intending, one does 'kamma' by way of body, speech, and intellect".That is more like my Buddha. How could he have said anything about floating 'karma' attaching to wherever it could?

[Waning Moon Conrad]

And you may have noticed that not one single person who has ever posted on this particular forum has been able to explain how to tell "false karma" from "true karma". Funny, isn't it?

If you know of anyone who actually believes that there is such a thing as "false karma" that can be differentiated from "true karma" then you could always pump them for information on how to tell the difference between the two.

[Elohim]

WMC,

If you know of anyone who actually believes that there is such a thing as "false karma" that can be differentiated from "true karma" then you could always pump them for information on how to tell the difference between the two.

I would say through careful observation of conditionality, i.e., noticing, "When this is, that is. From the arising of this comes the arising of that. When this is not, that is not. From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that" (AN 10.92 (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.092.than.html)).

Jason

[aupmanyav]

And you may have noticed that not one single person who has ever posted on this particular forum has been able to explain how to tell "false karma" from "true karma". Funny, isn't it?

If you know of anyone who actually believes that there is such a thing as "false karma" that can be differentiated from "true karma" then you could always pump them for information on how to tell the difference between the two.What supports the society is 'dharma', what harms it is 'adharma'. 'Dharayet iti dharma' (What is worthy of following is dharma).

[whichphilosophy]

A Democracy does not automatically mean respect for human rights.
Well, a democratic republic with a charter of human rights then.


We do have freedoms of speech and publication which we take for granted but the Tibetans never had a charter. The Communist propaganda is the only freedom they had was the freedom to toil. Literally that was true to the majority.

Also profound poverty exists unabated. A charter giving an individual freedom of speech (in theory) may not look so glamorous if they have nothing to eat.

Both are ideal of course.

[Will.L]

I'm assuming that the right to a reasonably decent standard of living would be included in what most people see as the broad umbrella of "human rights." While "reasonably decent" may be interpreted very differently from nation to nation, culture to culture, etc., I think everyone would agree that not having enough to eat is unreasonable and is certainly not a decent way to live.

[premjan]

I agree that freedom of speech is meaningless where there is abundance of poverty.

[aupmanyav]

I agree that freedom of speech is meaningless where there is abundance of poverty.Were you in India in 1975 (Emergency), Premjan? Freedom of speech is equally important as two meals a day and clothes to cover the body are.