To whom does the kamma of immoral deeds belong to when possessed by a deva?

  • This topic has 5 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 6 months ago by Gad.
Viewing 4 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #22011
      upekkha100
      Participant

      Let’s say a human(X):
      Kills someone.
      Steals something.
      Cheats on their partner.
      Deceives others.
      Backbites about others.
      Verbally attacks others.
      Engages in idle talk.
      Has highly greedy thoughts
      Has highly hateful thoughts.

      However, all of the above were done while X was possessed by a deva(Z).

      When yakkhas/asuras/the mischievous devas/Mara possesses a human and makes them do immoral deeds, the kamma belongs to the possessor(the deva: Z) right, and not the possessed(the human: X)?

      And by “makes them do immoral deeds”, I’d like to clarify that I don’t mean simply an influence, nudge, or whispering an idea to a human. I don’t mean an idea which the human ponders over, deliberates what course of action to take, and then goes along with the deva’s idea through their own volition. But rather what I mean is: when devas literally posses a human’s body, take control of it, make them do things like a puppet.

      Because when the human X got possessed, it is like the deva’s vinnana entering into X’s body. Now the actions that human is doing is no longer that human’s actions. I don’t know how, but it seems now that X’s gandabba is not in control of his own body for that time being, it is on standby or something. The human’s body has now been taken over by the deva. The deva is now simply using the human’s body as a vessel or puppet to control and make the body do things. All the sankhara that is now being done by the human belongs to the deva. Reason for that is because: all the akusala cetasika in the akusala citta arose in the deva’s mind, and not in the human’s mind. Thus the kamma would belong to the deva and not the human? Belong to Z rather than X?

      ^ That is what I deduced because the Buddha said:
      “Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect.”

      “Cetanāhaṃ, bhikkhave, kammaṃ vadāmi. Cetayitvā kammaṃ karoti—kāyena vācāya manasā. ”
      AN 6.63 Nibbedhika Sutta

      When someone reads “intention” it seems vague and almost unclear. But with Abhidhamma it is cleared up and understandable, because it is so specific and precise.

      As I understand(correct me if I’m wrong), when the Buddha said “intention”, he specifically meant:
      A) The 14 asobhana cetasika. These are what generate bad kamma.
      B) The 25 sobhana cetasika. These are what generate the good kamma.

      When X did those immoral deeds under the possession of Z, those asobhana cetasika arose in Z’s mind. They did not arise in X’s mind. Hence the kamma belongs to Z.

      It is Z who will have to suffer the consequences of those immoral deeds if these bad kamma seeds ever ripen.

    • #22018
      Lal
      Keymaster

      upekkha100 raises some interesting and complex issues.

      I have revised an old post, that may help answer some of those questions raised. If more questions remain, we can discuss:

      What Does Buddha Dhamma Say about Creator, Satan, Angels, and Demons?

    • #22027
      sybe07
      Spectator

      Yesterday on tv was the case of a mother who killed her two children. She was always very caring. But some day developed a depression and took medicine, a antidepressend. Probably these medicine have triggered agression and her violence against her own children.

      Can she be held responsible? There are circumstances in which also common law respects that one cannot be held responsible for every deed.

      What about children getting brainwashed by IS ideology or sektarian ways of thinking? Those children are loyal to parents, like older kids, called adults, are in the same way loyal to family, country, company, etc. They only want to do good. So they kill do to good, to get a compliment, to proove one is a good child. They even get credit for misdeeds.

      How can people be held responsible for such when there has not even yet developed a personal conscience, or right view? How can one say the blind are responsible? The blind cannot be held responsible.

      What about a teenager, burning with lust hormones. This poor boy or girl can hardly be seen as a human anymore. She/he has become an animal and is not anymore his/herself. It has become a victim of kilesa’s.

      Buddha-dhamma teaches that this is common practise. To think we are so free and wise is a big mistake. Kilesa’s rule our thinking, speaking and acting. There is almost no blamesless thinking, speaking and acting for buddhist and other people.

      Can we say we are responsible for not seeing the truth?

      Siebe

    • #22029
      Lal
      Keymaster

      Siebe’s questions:
      “Yesterday on tv was the case of a mother who killed her two children. She was always very caring. But some day developed a depression and took medicine, a antidepressend. Probably these medicine have triggered agression and her violence against her own children.”

      If someone commits an immoral deed while not been aware of it (say, becoming insane or while sleepwalking), then the Buddha had said that there are no kammic consequences.

      “What about children getting brainwashed by IS ideology or sektarian ways of thinking?”

      Unfortunately, the Buddha did not set these kammic laws. Those are Nature’s laws.
      – It is parents’ responsibility to make sure that children are not influenced by “bad influences” whether it is friends or via the internet. They will suffer their own kammic consequences.

      “How can people be held responsible for such when there has not even yet developed a personal conscience, or right view? How can one say the blind are responsible? The blind cannot be held responsible.”

      Nothing happens without causes. One is born blind, born with “less wisdom”, or even born into conditions where one does not even get an opportunity to learn Dhamma,these are all due to one’s previous kamma (actions).
      – This is not any different from being born an animal or peta. Is it “fair” for one to be born an animal? It is not matter of fairness; it is just cause and effect.
      – Again, these are Nature’s laws. A Buddha only discovers them.

      “To think we are so free and wise is a big mistake…”

      No one said that. Think about what is stated above.
      – Whatever the condition that each of us are at, those have arisen due to our own past actions. We have no idea when we did them, could be many lives back.
      – However, with the development of panna, we can overcome tanha and be free of all suffering, EVEN IF we have done many bad kamma.
      – This is why the life story of Ven. Angulimala is so important. He had killed almost thousand people, but was able to avoid all that bad kamma.
      Account of Angulimāla – Many Insights to Buddha Dhamma
      – Of course, he must have done very strong good kamma too, to be able to comprehend the deep Dhamma so quickly.

      All we can do is to make sure to not accumulate anymore bad kamma and to cultivate good kamma, and make our utmost effort to learn Dhamma to make those tasks easier. That effort will not go to waste.

      1 user thanked author for this post.
      Gad
      • #46214
        Gad
        Participant

        For the Angulimala example, if we read the Jataka, he was a good friend with the Boddhisattas in many past lives. We can also see he had the gati of a killer. The boddhisatta led him to overcome this bad gati. He was also sometimes a yogi who developed jhanas. The capacity of Angulimala to become an Arahant is not by chance.  There are others; I forget their names.

        Jataka #513

         

    • #23038
      Anonymous
      Inactive

      in my opinion the possession by deva is due to some karmic account of that person with that deva .As per cause and effect law, there should be some cause owning to that person and obviously possession by deva is effect.Not centpercent true but may be of little worth of thinking.The responsibility of that kamma is of both.Unless we have some potential gathi of immoralty,the deva or anbody or even ourselves cannot possess.

Viewing 4 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.