Karmic
residue
The
Sanskrit word karma
stands for the notion of action. Karmic residue is taken to mean the output
or effect, in ancient India taken to mean ‘the remainder’, of action. Ancient
Indians1 suggested, then claimed and then believed fanatically (to
this day) that the karmic residue of a life,2
i.e. of a biological unit, as balance of good and bad actions, carries
(itself) forward as start-up ‘setting’ of a new life/bio-unit rather than merely
as a ‘setting’ change for an already existing life.3 Verifiable evidence for their claim has not been produced. That
karmic residue includes some part or all of its creator, i.e. the creator’s
self (or soul as ‘driver’), i.e. his or her essence or substance, has not
been observed. Basically
karmic residue happens/activates as observer (or receiver) effect.4
That’s because ‘the meaning of a message (i.e. of an output of action) is the
response it produces.’ Which means that karmic residue becomes active only if
and when it strikes as a random (meaning differential) input. Whether or not
a unit or quantum of karmic residue strikes and the (good or bad) effect it
produces depends on the state of the receiving unit. In simpler
terms, a biological unit (the sum total of all inputs of karmic residues,
acting as conditions, so the Buddha) serves, in theory at least, as (a
self-driving/perpetuating, self-regulating and self-adapting) karmic residue
transforming machine.5 It inputs6 (karmic) residue
(recently called ‘garbage’) in order to stay alive, in the process generating
new (karmic) residue7 (i.e. garbage) as output. According
to archaic paddle-your-own-canoe, i.e. Hinayana, Buddhists,8
such a self-regulating conditions (i.e. karmic residue) transformation
machine has no apparent (abiding or permanent) self ≈ driver (i.e. as
self, spirit or soul). Elimination
of karmic residue results in moksha. |
1.
Although the
word Karma appears in the ancient Veda, it
is there taken to mean a religious act. The notion of karma as now understood appears first in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (approx. 800BC) as an out
of the blue generalization of the vague notion of ‘You get what you deserve’
or ‘As you sow, so shall you reap!’ Later generations of Brahmin priests, seeing the
value of Karma as a political red herring,
set about working out the details of the new karma
notion without however providing compelling evidence for its existence, not
so much within a life but between lives. 2.
What karmic residue is and how, indeed if it
transmits from life to life is still a complete mystery. In this regard see
the collection of learned academic essays entitled: ‘Karma & Rebirth’,
Edited by Wendy O’Flaherty 1983 3.
Such
transmission would not be permitted under the rules proposed by Darwin’s evolution
theory but would hark back to Lamarck’s evolution proposition. 4.
That karmic
residue acts as recipient response is obviously a huge problem not
anticipated by ancient karma theorists. 5.
The term machine should here be understood in
the sense of a Turing Machine, namely as
a set of abstract (transformation) rules (or conditions), to wit, an
algorithm or fractal. 6.
… i.e. feeds on 7.
… i.e. fodder 8.
In this regard
see: The
Buddha’s bluff |