Audio recorded at Buddha House Adelaide. Transcript auto-generated and AI-corrected; may contain errors.
About this talk. “Why does karma look so chaotic?” drives much of this 38-minute Q&A with Geshe Pema Tsering on mind and mental factors. He lays out three categories by when results ripen — same lifetime, next lifetime, or indefinitely later — and argues that the bewildering variety of our experience simply mirrors the equally varied stream of actions we accumulate moment by moment, a detail only a Buddha can track precisely. Purification is then addressed: recognition, regret, and resolve not to repeat constitute genuine confession. A student’s computer-hard-drive analogy prompts the point that unlike a hard drive, the mind has no storage limit and is fundamentally good — only the overlay of self-grasping is faulty. The session closes on motivation: self-congratulation is not virtue; only genuine bodhichitta transforms an action into merit.
File metadata (for organising)
File: 12 2006 11 06 M and MF.mp3
UUID: b99ddd57-e25c-4a88-8b96-aa410bdf34c4
Teacher: Geshe Pema Tsering
Collection: Mind & Mental Factors (Geshe Pema Tsering)
Date: 2006-11-06
Recorded at: Buddha House Adelaide
Duration: 38.2 minutes
Words: ~2,154
Yes. Please. I have many questions also. You ask. Oh, no.
It’s okay. No. Wanted to ask. You should sometimes. No.
It’s okay. It’s okay. Just I would love love to have more teachers about these topics, but they are really extensive. So then first, Geshe-la was then giving you just a general explanation. So for example, with respect to actions of which the results will have to be experienced in the same lifetime.
So Geshe-la wasn’t giving a general explanation. There are all sorts of actions. There are virtuous actions, non virtuous actions, neutral actions. And then it just means it is such an action of which the result is one can see the results in the same lifetime before death. And then such an example is the result, the fruit of our work, the money that we get result.
You want to know about the other ones? So then there is no way to know exactly, but So then those actions that have been performed in one lifetime, of which the result has not been experienced in the same lifetime, and of which the results are experienced then in the next lifetime, then those are actions of which the result one has experienced in the next lifetime and of those actions which have performed in this lifetime, the results have not been experienced in this lifetime, have not not been experienced in the next lifetime, and have been experienced in any lifetime after the next, then those are the actions of which are the results one will have to experience after an indefinite number of rebirths. There’s no way to tell exactly what I was saying. So then it doesn’t matter what action it is. If, for example, giving an illustration, you have deceived someone else, lied or deceived or misled someone misled someone, then even though that person might not the person to which one has lied or or which one has misled or deceived, even though the person does not know that there is a fault within the person who performed the the the misdeed, and then if one does not experience the results within this lifetime and experiences in the next lifetime after the lifetime or in which one has performed that misdeed, then that result will be called to be the result of such an action which has to be performed experienced in the next lifetime.
And if it has not been experienced in the next lifetime, but in any lifetime any lifetime after the next, then it will be called an action of which a result one has to experience after an indefinite number of lifetimes. It’s just that. It could be any it could be any action. And if and if by by any chance in that that illustration, for example, which is a general illustration, if if one experiences the the result of such a a misdeed, which is then misleading or lying or deceiving someone in this lifetime, then that that will be called an action of which result one has to experience within the same lifetime. And then, for example, if you have lied to someone, that person found out that you were lying, and then that person went to, I don’t know, caused you harm and you experienced suffering because of that, then that will be an illustration of an instance of such an action of which the results one has to experience within the same lifetime.
But it does seem a bit random. Although it appears that way, is it random when you actually experience I mean, some things you can you can obviously experience consequences or results fairly obviously in this lifetime. But then there are other things, know, like, for example, random. Like, why would you experience it not this lifetime if you happen to do it this lifetime? And you’re experiencing karma all the time from your previous lifetimes, and some of those would have been immediate, and some of those would have been ages ago.
So So then first, there’s two answers to your question. Okay? There you are. So then first of all, the first thing is that there is no way we can know in detail the very the very fine workings of karma. We cannot tell, by no means we can tell that this result follows from this action and this action and so forth.
Only the Buddha can do so. More, as for the apparently random kaleidoscope of experiences that we have, of results that we experience, is because we also apparently randomly accumulate so many different actions. We are all the time and every moment accumulating so many different actions, virtuous, non virtuous, and neutral actions all the time, and they are going like this. It’s a virtue, and then there’s no virtue, and then there’s neutral, and then there’s virtual again, and then there’s neutral. It’s all randomly also.
And in this way, we experience this this thing which appears to be random and and and confused and and you know? Like, what’s the word for that? Random and confused was clear. Yeah. It it is not.
It is not random and confused. Chaotic. Chaotic. Chaotic. It is not random and confused because we are we are accumulating actions, so many different actions that are every moment, and there’s all different actions.
And with the same variety, we experience the results, with the same diversity and variety. We have this salad of results. So then, again, Geshe-la was saying, when we talk about karma, we talk very from a very superficial point of view. We we cannot tell this the very specifics of the workings of karma from this action that we have performed right now, this thought that has occurred right now, what what result will fall and so forth. Only the Buddha can know such things.
And the Buddha would be able to tell the specific result of one word that has been said or one thought that has arisen. But only only a Buddha can know such things. It’s very difficult. It’s extremely difficult to to understand or to know the way that we accumulate karma or actions. I guess I was saying, so whatever whatever thought that occurs, that is occurring in our minds at all times, all all those thoughts, there are different actions.
Chaos? You talking about the chaos theory? Chaos? Not the chaos. Chaos theory.
Doesn’t know the word in English. Okay? Is that you have any other question? No. No.
Paul? Yeah. What? Do you have the Okay. Daniel has a question.
No worries. No worries. For example, if whatever action that one has performed and then immediately in the next moment of having performed that action, and one regrets it and practices proper purification or confession, that is such an action of which the result is not definite to be experienced. Yes? That’s regretting and determining not to do it again, that’s that is the verification.
What is called confession. That that that is what is called confession. Recognizing it and Recognizing, regretting, and determining not to practice it again. Yeah. Then practicing a virtuous a virtuous deed instead.
What is called confession? Paul or Judy? Judy. Judy? So then the the good motivation that you have given rise to, that is a virtuous action.
And that anger that you that has a reason, that is a non virtuous action. Okay. Another one? I’m reading somewhere that the mind is like a hard drive on a computer, has a limited capacity. I could never translate that into I tell you.
Right now, I could never, never translate that into Tibetan. Like a computer. I can say like a computer. Yeah. So I just wonder, I I I I couldn’t I couldn’t I couldn’t pass this analogy to Geshe-la.
Geshe-la doesn’t know the computer has memories and hard drives, and they cannot translate that into into Tibetan. How about, like, that vase that’s too full? You can say like a vase. That’s that’s a better one. You know, you can’t fill it anymore.
Yes. Not not like the vase, like the computer. So then there’s the computer has limits, has limitations, and there’s only a certain amount of information you can put in the computer, but the mind, no. No limits. No limitations.
It’s consciousness. You forget stuff also. Is it still there? No. You forget stuff.
The imprints do not stay forever, for example, in the instance of having realized emptiness. The afflictive emotions, all the imprints, they are all gone. So then the mind is in the nature of consciousness. And the Geshe-la wasn’t saying, so then consciousness is is consciousness, or the mind, that in itself is good, in itself is good, the nature is good, the quality is good, but there is an aspect of it or a part of it which is faulty, which is mistaken, which is the self grasping and so forth. And then so then all we have to do is get rid of that fault faulty aspect or faulty part of it.
Oh, just image and image. And then we get rid of all the faults. Yeah. All we have to do is get rid of the computer. And Geshe-la was saying, then we can realize the the the nature nature of consciousness, the limitlessness and so forth of consciousness in itself, and all the goodness with it.
So then we are always working whilst overpowered by those faulty aspects or parts of of consciousness. And so then when we are rarely working out of the good aspects of the good of the consciousness itself, which is good in itself, you know, so unless we get rid of that faulty part, there’s no way around it. Yeah. That’s it. karma.
karma. So whatever there whatever there is the mind, however much there is of the mind, there must there will always be intention with it. Always. Always. Always.
So can one carry an intention into an experience into the perception prior to it that that that as it were purifies the all all the intentions? Is Every intention, every mental factor of intention is karma, is mental karma. And it is either virtue or neutral. So then, yeah. It doesn’t matter if you didn’t know.
Then if if if you are actually doing because we were looking for fame, then that’s out of the eight worldly concerns, and then that’s that’s there was no good. There wasn’t actually beneficial actions or karma. It doesn’t matter if if if you believed or if you thought that you were doing out of the mind of enlightenment or or or whatever motivation you had. And I guess I wasn’t saying just saying that I am a good person or thinking to myself that is I am a I am a good person. That is not enough.
So then, yeah. Yeah. That’s it. That’s what it is. I mean, if if you are able to actually produce the actual motivation of the mind of enlightenment, then that action, whatever activity you are doing, that that action, whatever activity you are doing, that was motivated by that motivation, that will turn into virtue.
But if you were doing, even if you do not know about the idea, the concept of the eight worldly concerns, were just thinking to yourself, I am good or something like that, that is still a worldly concern. That still falls under the idea of worldly concern, and that is still bad motivation. So then again, just telling oneself that oneself is good doesn’t make oneself good. Just telling oneself that oneself is bad doesn’t make oneself bad. Just telling saying to another that another is is good doesn’t make that other person good.
Just saying to another that another is bad doesn’t make that the person bad. There are four there might be many people saying that one particular person or individual is a good person but there will be somewhere else or at another time the same amount of people or more saying that the person is bad and there might be a huge amount of people saying that another particular individual is a good person and there will be the same amount of people at another place or time which says that the person is bad and that doesn’t make the person either good or bad and it depends, it is up to us to see for ourselves alone what is it, what is our motivation to see, to determine for ourselves what is good or bad. What what you I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. But On the other hand, on the other hand, what? The answer is always changeable.
I don’t I’m not sure. The answer to what? The answer to what? It doesn’t matter. Okay.
Yeah. Okay.