Karma, Merit & Rebith

[Michel]

Boddhidharma was rejected everywhere he went, which is typical treatment of a mystic.  He also rejected the concept of merit accumulation, something no genuine mystic would ever buy into.

That is a very interesting statement to say the least. It goes against the Pali Canon in the Theravadan translations that we read today. Throughout the Nikayas we come across hundreds of of suttas saying that if you perform certain acts, you will either be reborn in the higher realms, or reborn in the lower realms, depending on one's karma and meritorious deeds, and one's evil deeds of many past lives.

It maybe quite possible that the monastics - needing the support of the lay community - instilled in lay people the notion that if they gave alms, medicines, robes, built monastaries and supplied all the other necessities, that this would be meritorious. And thus they may have altered the Canon to reflect this. This seems to imply that there is no consequence for one's actions - no karma?

Do you think the teachings on karma in the Canon are what the Buddha taught?

[Jhanananda]

That is a very interesting statement to say the least. It goes against the Pali Canon in the Theravadan translations that we read today. Throughout the Nikayas we come across hundreds of of suttas saying that if you perform certain acts, you will either be reborn in the higher realms, or reborn in the lower realms, depending on one's karma and meritorious deeds, and one's evil deeds of many past lives.

I guess it depends upon your focus, because when I read the Pali Cannon I do not recall much, if anything recommending meritorious deeds.  After all, where in the Noble Eightfold Path do meritorious deeds fit?

It maybe quite possible that the monastics - needing the support of the lay community - instilled in lay people the notion that if they gave alms, medicines, robes, built monastaries and supplied all the other necessities, that this would be meritorious. And thus they may have altered the Canon to reflect this.

That is a distinct possibility.

This seems to imply that there is no consequence for one's actions - no karma?

If your karma is not too overwhelming, then you take up a contemplative life.

Do you think the teachings on karma in the Canon are what the Buddha taught?

See above.

[Michel]

I guess it depends upon your focus, because when I read the Pali Cannon I do not recall much, if anything recommending meritorious deeds.  After all, where in the Noble Eightfold Path do meritorious deeds fit?

Yes, you've got a point. But here is one of the many suttas  on the karmic benefits of meritorious deeds:

On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park. Then Princess Sumanā, accompanied by five hundred chariots and five hundred court girls, approached the Blessed One, paid homage to him, and sat down to one side. Princess Sumanā then said to the Blessed One:

“Here, Bhante, there might be two disciples of the Blessed One equal in faith, virtuous behavior, and wisdom, but one is generous while the other is not. With the breakup of the body,  after death, they would both be reborn in a good destination, in a heavenly world. When they have become devas, would there be any distinction or difference between them?”

“There would be, Sumanā,” the Blessed One said. “The generous one, having become a deva, would surpass the other in five ways: in celestial life span, celestial beauty, celestial happiness, celestial glory, and celestial authority. The generous one, having become a deva, would surpass the other in these five ways.”

“But, Bhante, if these two pass away from there and again become human beings, would there still be some distinction or difference between them?”

“There would be, Sumanā,” the Blessed One said. “When they again become human beings, the generous one would surpass the other in five ways: in human life span, human beauty, human happiness, human fame, and human authority. When they again become human beings, the generous one would surpass the other in these five ways.”

“But, Bhante, if these two should go forth from the household life into homelessness, would there still be some distinction or difference between them?”

“There would be, Sumanā,” the Blessed One said. “The generous one, having gone forth, would surpass the other in five ways. (1) He would usually use a robe that has been specifically offered to him, seldom one that had not been specifically offered to him. (2) He would usually eat almsfood that has been specifically offered to him, seldom almsfood that had not been specifically offered to him. (3) He would usually use a lodging that had been specifically offered to him, seldom one that had not been specifically offered to him. (4) He would usually use medicines and provisions for the sick that had been specifically offered to him, seldom those that had not been specifically offered to him. (5) His fellow monastics, those with whom he dwells, would usually behave toward him in agreeable ways by bodily, verbal, and mental action, seldom in disagreeable ways. They would usually present him what is agreeable, seldom  what is disagreeable. The generous one, having gone forth, would surpass the other in these five ways.”

“But, Bhante, if both attain arahantship, would there still be some distinction or difference between them after they have attained arahantship?”

“In this case, Sumanā, I declare, there would be no difference between the liberation of one and the liberation of the other.”

“It’s astounding and amazing, Bhante! Truly, one has good reason to give alms and do meritorious deeds, since they will be helpful if one becomes a deva, again becomes a human being, or goes forth.”

“So it is, Sumanā! So it is, Sumanā! Truly, one has good reason to give alms and do meritorious deeds, since they will be helpful if one becomes a deva, again becomes a human being, or goes forth.”

This is what the Blessed One said. Having said this, the Fortunate One, the Teacher, further said this:

“As the stainless moon
 moving through the sphere of space
 outshines with its radiance
 all the stars in the world,
 so one accomplished in virtuous behavior,
 a person endowed with faith,
 outshines by generosity
 all the misers in the world.


“As the hundred-peaked rain cloud,
 thundering, wreathed in lightning,
 pours down rain upon the earth,
 inundating the plains and lowlands,
 so the Perfectly Enlightened One’s disciple,
 the wise one accomplished in vision,
 surpasses the miserly person
 in five specific respects:
 life span and glory,
 beauty and happiness.
 Possessed of wealth, after death
 he rejoices in heaven.”

[Michel]

A couple of more suttas on the merits of giving:

"Bhikkhus, there are these three bases of meritorious activity.
What three? The basis of meritorious activity consisting
in giving; the basis of meritorious activity consisting in virtuous
behavior; and the basis of meritorious activity consisting in
meditative development. AN 8.36

When things to be given are available,
for one needing and wanting merit
an offering becomes vast
if first given to the holy ones. AN 5.175

[Michel]

This is a particularily interesting sutta [See the last paragraph for a summation. But it's worth reading the whole thing.] It ranks giving (dana) as the least important of meritorious deeds. The most fruitful of meritorious deeds in this list is developing the perception of impermanence.

On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Savatthi in
Jeta 's Grove, Anathapindika's Park. Then the householder
Anathapindika approached the Blessed One, paid homage to
him, and sat down to one side. The Blessed One asked him:
"A re alms given in your family, householder?"
"A lms are given in my family, Bhante, but they consist of
broken rice accompanied by rice g ru e l."1876

"If, householder, one gives alms, coarse or excellent, and one
gives disrespectfully, gives inconsiderately, does not give with
one's own hand, gives what would be discarded, gives without
a view of future consequences/877 then wherever the result of
that gift is produced for one, one's mind does not incline toward
the enjoyment of superb food, nor toward the enjoyment of
superb clothing, nor toward the enjoyment of superb vehicles,
nor toward the enjoyment of whatever is superb among the
five objects of isensual pleasure. Also, one's [393] children and
wives, and one's slaves, servants, and workers, do not want to
listen to one, do not lend an ear, and do not apply their minds
to understand. For what reason? Just this is the result of actions
that are done disrespectfully.

"If, householder, one gives alms, whether coarse o r excellent,
and one gives respectfully, gives considerately, gives with one's
own hand, gives what would not be discarded, gives.with a
view of future consequences, then wherever the result of that
gift is produced for one, one's mind inclines toward the enjoy-,
ment of. superb food, toward the enjoyment of superb clothing,
toward the enjoyment of superb vehicles, toward the enjoyment
of whatever is superb among the five objects of sensual pleasure.
Also, one's children and wives, and one's slaves, servants,
and workers, want to listen to one, lend an ear, and apply their
minds to understand. For what reason? Just this is the result of
actions that are done respectfully.

"In the past, householder, there was a brahmin named
Velama. He gave such a great alms offering as this:1878 (1) eightyfour
thousand golden bowls filled with silver; (2) eighty-four
thousand silver bowls filled with gold; (3) eighty-four thousand
bronze bowls filled with bullion; (4) eighty-four thousand
elephants with golden ornaments, golden banners, covered
with nets of gold thread; (5) eighty-four thousand chariots
with upholstery of lion skins, tiger skins, leopard skins, and
saffron-dyed blankets, with golden ornaments, golden banners,
covered with nets of gold thread; (6) eighty-four thousand milk
cows with jute tethers1*79 and bronze palls;1880 (7) eighty-four
thousand maidens adorned with jeweled earrings; [8] eightyfour
thousand couches [394] spread with rugs, blankets, and
covers, with excellent coverings of antelope hide, with canopies
and red bolsters at both ends; (9) eighty-four thousand kotismi
of cloths made of fine linen, fine silk, fine wTool, and fine cotton.

How much more of food and drink, snacks, meals, refreshments,
and beverages?1882 It seemed to be flowing like rivers.
"You might think, householder: 'He was someone else, the
brahmin Velama who on that occasion gave that great alms
offering.' But you should not look at it in such a way. I myself
was the brahmin Velama who on that occasion gave that great
alms offering.

"Now, householder, at that alms offering there was no one
worthy of offerings, no one who purified the offering. Even
more fruitful than the great alms offering that the brahmin
Velama gave would it be to feed; one person accomplished in
view. Even more fruitful than the great alms offering that the
brahmin Velama gave, and feeding a hundred persons accomplished
in view, would it be to feed one once-returner. Even
more fruitful than the great alms, offering that the brahmin
Velama gave, and feeding a hundred once-retu.rners, w ould it
be to feed one non-returner. Even more fruitful th a n . . . feeding
a hundred non-returners, would it be to feed one a ra hant.
Even m o re fruitful th an . . . feeding a hundred arahants,
would it be to feed one paccekabuddha. [395] Even more fruit-
- ful th a n . , . feeding a hundred paccekabuddhas, would it be
to feed the Tathagata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Enlightened
One . . . would it be to feed the Sangha of bhikkhus headed by
the Buddha . . . would it be to build a dwelling d edicated to the
Sangha of the four q u a r te r s . . . would it be for one with a mind
of confidence to go for refuge to the Buddha, the Dhamma,
and the Sangha . . . would it be for one with a mind of confi-
dence to undertake the five training rules: to abstain from the
destruction of life, to abstain from taking what is not given, to
abstain from sexual misconduct, to abstain from false speech,
to abstain from liquor, wine, and intoxicants, th e basis for
heedlessness. Even more fruitful. . . would it be to develop a
mind of loving-kindness even for the time it takes to pull a
cow's udder.

Even more fruitful, householder, than the great alms offering [etc.]
that the brahmin Velama gave, and feeding one person
accomplished in view, and feeding a hundred persons a ccomplished
in view; and feeding one once-returner, and feeding
a hundred once-returners; and feeding one non-returner, and
feeding a hundred non-returners; and feeding one arahant, and
feeding a hundred arahants; and feeding one paccekabuddha,
and feeding a hundred paccekabuddhas; and feeding the
Tathagata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Enlightened One; and
feeding the Sangha of bhikkhus headed by the Buddha; and
building a dwelling dedicated to the Sangha of the four quarters;
and for one with a mind of confidence to go for refuge to
the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha; and for one with
a mind of confidence to undertake the five training rules: to
abstain from the destruction of l i f e ... to abstain from liquor,
wine, and intoxicants, the basis for heedlessness; and for one to
develop a mind of loving-kindness even for the time it takes to
pull a cow's udder, [396] would it be to develop the perception
of impermanence just for the time of a finger snap."

[/b]

[Jhanananda]

Hello Michel, thank-you for providing some sutta quotes in support of your premise.  Did you happen to notice that all of those sutta quotes come from the Anguttara Nikaya?

I spent much of the day reflecting upon meritorious deeds.  Here are my conclusions:

1) If one donates great amounts of time, effort and/or money to frauds masquerading as priests, who persecute mystics, then one's acts defile one and bring one down.
2) If one donates great amounts of time, effort and/or money to genuine mystics, then one furthers one's advancement to enlightenment.
3) If one gives up everything, retreats into the wilderness, and spends every waking moment upon one's enlightenment, then one is sure to attain liberation and enlightenment in that very lifetime.

[Michel]

Did you happen to notice that all of those sutta quotes come from the Anguttara Nikaya?

Yes, I did notice that, but there are suttas on the merits of giving from the other Nikiyas as well.

Thanissaro has provided these:

...So Prince Payasi established a donation for brahmans, contemplatives, indigents, hoboes, paupers, & beggars. And in that donation he gave food of this sort: unhusked rice porridge together with pickle brine. And he gave rough cloth with knotted fringe. Now a brahman youth named Uttara was the superintendent of that donation. As he was giving the donation he dedicated it in this way:"Through this donation may I be associated with Prince Payasi in this life, but not in the next." Prince Payasi heard that Uttara, when giving the donation, dedicated it in this way: "Through this donation may I be associated with Prince Payasi in this life, but not in the next." So, having summoned him, he said to him, "Is it true, dear boy, that when giving the donation you dedicated in this way: 'Through this donation may I be associated with Prince Payasi in this life, but not in the next'?"
"Yes, sir."
"But why do you dedicate it in this way...? Don't we who wish to gain merit hope for the fruit of our donation?"
"But, sir, the food in the donation is like this: unhusked rice porridge together with pickle brine. You wouldn't want to touch it with your foot, much less eat it. And the rough cloth with knotted fringe: You wouldn't want to touch it with your foot, much less wear it. You are dear & charming to us, so how can we connect what is dear & charming with what is not charming?"
"Then in that case, my dear boy, establish [a donation with] the sort of food that I eat and the sort of cloth that I wear."
Responding, "Yes, sir," Uttara the brahman youth established [a donation with] the sort of food that Prince Payasi ate and the sort of cloth that Prince Payasi wore. Then Prince Payasi — having given the donation inattentively, having given the donation not with his own hand, having given the donation thoughtlessly, having given the donation as if he were throwing it away — on the break-up of the body, after death, reappeared in the company of the devas of the Four Great Kings in the empty Serisaka palace. But Uttara, the brahman youth who was the superintendent of the donation — having given the donation attentively, having given the donation with his own hand, having given the donation thoughtfully, having given the donation not as if he were throwing it away — on the break-up of the body, after death, reappeared in the good destination, the heavenly world, in the company of the [higher] devas of the Thirty-three.
— DN 23

...Then another deva exclaimed in the Blessed One's presence:

Giving is good, dear sir!
Even when there's next to nothing,
   giving is good.
Giving with conviction is good!
The giving of what's righteously gained
   is good!
And further:
Giving with discretion is good!
It's praised by the One Well-gone:
giving with discretion,
to those worthy of offerings
here in the world of the living.
What's given to them bears great fruit
like seeds sown in a good field.
— SN 1.33


"If beings knew, as I know, the results of giving and sharing, they would not eat without have given, nor would the stain of miserliness overcome their minds. Even if it were their last bite, their last mouthful, they would not eat without having shared, if there were someone to receive their gift. But because beings do not know, as I know, the results of giving and sharing, they eat without have given. The stain of miserliness overcomes their minds."
— Iti 26

Asibandhakaputta the headman said to the Blessed One, "Venerable sir, doesn't the Blessed One in many ways praise kindness, protection, & sympathy for families?"
"Yes, headman, the Tathagata in many ways praises kindness, protection, & sympathy for families."
"Then how, venerable sir, is the Blessed One, together with a large community of monks, wandering on tour around Nalanda in the midst of famine, a time of scarcity, when the crops are white with blight and turned to straw? The Blessed One is practicing for the ruin of families. The Blessed One is practicing for the demise of families. The Blessed One is practicing for the downfall of families."
"Headman, recollecting back over 91 aeons, I do not know any family to have been brought to downfall through the giving of cooked alms. On the contrary: Whatever families are rich, with much wealth, with many possessions, with a great deal of money, a great many accoutrements of wealth, a great many commodities, all have become so from giving, from truth, from restraint."
— SN 42.9

What the miser fears,
that keeps him from giving,
is the very danger that comes
when he doesn't give.
— SN 1.32

Then a certain devata, in the far extreme of the night, her extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta's Grove, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, stood to one side. As she was standing there, she recited these verses in the Blessed One's presence:

When a house is on fire,
the vessel salvaged
is the one that will be of use,
   not the one left there to burn.

So when the world is on fire
with aging & death,
you should salvage [your wealth] by giving:
   what's given is well salvaged.

What's given bears fruit as pleasure.
What isn't given does not:
   Thieves take it away, or kings;
   it gets burnt by fire or lost.

Then in the end
you leave the body
together with your possessions.
Knowing this, the intelligent man
enjoys possessions & gives.
Having enjoyed & given
in line with your means,
   uncensured you go
   to the heavenly state.
— SN 1.41

A person stashes a fund away,
deep underground, at the water line:
"When a need or duty arises,
this will provide for my needs,
for my release if I'm denounced by the king,
molested by thieves,
in case of debt, famine, or accidents."
With aims like this
   in the world
a reserve fund is stashed away.

But no matter how well it's stored,
deep underground, at the water line,
it won't all always serve one's need.
The fund gets shifted from its place,
or one's memory gets confused;
   or — unseen —
   water serpents make off with it,
   spirits steal it,
   or hateful heirs run off with it.
When one's merit's ended,
it's totally destroyed.

But when a man or woman
has laid aside a well-stored fund
of generosity, virtue,
restraint, & self-control,
   with regard to a shrine,
   the Sangha,
   a fine individual,
   guests,
   mother, father,
   or elder sibling:
That's a well-stored fund.
   It can't be wrested away.
   It follows you along.
When, having left this world,
   for wherever you must go,
   you take it with you.
This fund is not held in common with others,
& cannot be stolen by thieves.

So, enlightened, you should make merit,
the fund that will follow you along.
This is the fund
that gives all they want
to beings human, divine.
— Khp 8

[Jhanananda]

Generosity is a good thing, but if it leads to a corrupt priesthood, then it does not lead to higher births.

[Michel]

This sutta below is interesting. It's on "why a person gives a gift of a certain sort and it does not bear great fruit or great benefit, whereas another person gives a gift of the same sort and it bears great fruit and great benefit."

The highest merit is generated when one gives a gift because it is an "ornament of the mind, a support of the mind." What do you suppose is meant by this?  "Ornament of the mind" is  perhaps one of those quirky Pali expressions that is hard to translate into English? [See the embolden selection of the sutta.]  Bhikkhu Bodhi  says that "ornamenting the mind" means that “It is an ornament, an accessory, of the mind pertaining to serenity and insight” (samathavipassanācittassa). Interesting Pali term, samathavipassanācittassa. It appears to be three Pali words all rolled into one: samatha-vipassana-cittassa. Samatha means serenity. Vipassana means insight. And cittassa has to do with mind, I believe. It provides us with a clue.

Then Ven. Sariputta, together with the lay followers from Campa, went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "Might there be the case where a person gives a gift of a certain sort and it does not bear great fruit or great benefit, whereas another person gives a gift of the same sort and it bears great fruit and great benefit?"

"Yes, Sariputta, there would..."

"Why, lord...?"

"Sariputta, there is the case where a person gives a gift seeking his own profit, with a mind attached [to the reward], seeking to store up for himself [with the thought], 'I'll enjoy this after death.' He gives his gift — food, drink, clothing, a vehicle; a garland, perfume, & ointment; bedding, shelter, & a lamp — to a brahman or a contemplative. What do you think, Sariputta? Might a person give such a gift as this?"

"Yes, lord."

"Having given this gift seeking his own profit — with a mind attached [to the reward], seeking to store up for himself, [with the thought], 'I'll enjoy this after death' — on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the Four Great Kings. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.

"Then there is the case of a person who gives a gift not seeking his own profit, not with a mind attached [to the reward], not seeking to store up for himself, nor [with the thought], 'I'll enjoy this after death.' Instead, he gives a gift with the thought, 'Giving is good.' He gives his gift — food, drink, clothing, a vehicle; a garland, perfume, & ointment; bedding, shelter, & a lamp — to a brahman or a contemplative. What do you think, Sariputta? Might a person give such a gift as this?"

"Yes, lord."

"Having given this gift with the thought, 'Giving is good,' on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the devas of the Thirty-three. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.

"Or, instead of thinking, 'Giving is good,' he gives a gift with the thought, 'This was given in the past, done in the past, by my father & grandfather. It would not be right for me to let this old family custom be discontinued'... on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the devas of the Hours. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.

"Or, instead... he gives a gift with the thought, 'I am well-off. These are not well-off. It would not be right for me, being well-off, not to give a gift to those who are not well-off'... on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the Contented devas. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.

"Or, instead... he gives a gift with the thought, 'Just as there were the great sacrifices of the sages of the past — Atthaka, Vamaka, Vamadeva, Vessamitta, Yamataggi, Angirasa, Bharadvaja, Vasettha, Kassapa, & Bhagu — in the same way will this be my distribution of gifts'... on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the devas who delight in creation. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.

"Or, instead... he gives a gift with the thought, 'When this gift of mine is given, it makes the mind serene. Gratification & joy arise'... on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of the devas who have power over the creations of others. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a returner, coming back to this world.

"Or, instead of thinking, 'When this gift of mine is given, it makes the mind serene. Gratification & joy arise,' he gives a gift with the thought, 'This is an ornament for the mind, a support for the mind.' He gives his gift — food, drink, clothing, a vehicle; a garland, perfume, & ointment; bedding, shelter, & a lamp — to a brahman or a contemplative. What do you think, Sariputta? Might a person give such a gift as this?"

"Yes, lord."

"Having given this, not seeking his own profit, not with a mind attached [to the reward], not seeking to store up for himself, nor [with the thought], 'I'll enjoy this after death,'

— nor with the thought, 'Giving is good,'

— nor with the thought, 'This was given in the past, done in the past, by my father & grandfather. It would not be right for me to let this old family custom be discontinued,'

— nor with the thought, 'I am well-off. These are not well-off. It would not be right for me, being well-off, not to give a gift to those who are not well-off,' nor with the thought, 'Just as there were the great sacrifices of the sages of the past — Atthaka, Vamaka, Vamadeva, Vessamitta, Yamadaggi, Angirasa, Bharadvaja, Vasettha, Kassapa, & Bhagu — in the same way this will be my distribution of gifts,'

— nor with the thought, 'When this gift of mine is given, it makes the mind serene. Gratification & joy arise,'

— but with the thought, 'This is an ornament for the mind, a support for the mind' — on the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of Brahma's Retinue. Then, having exhausted that action, that power, that status, that sovereignty, he is a non-returner. He does not come back to this world.

"This, Sariputta, is the cause, this is the reason, why a person gives a gift of a certain sort and it does not bear great fruit or great benefit, whereas another person gives a gift of the same sort and it bears great fruit and great benefit."

— AN 7.49

[Jhanananda]

I am not sure what "Ornament of the mind" is a translation of, because I do not recall running into it before. It is not 'samathavipassanācittassa', which is a commentarial term, not a canonical term.  It is an attempt to rescue the lie that Siddhartha Gautama taught a meditation technique called 'vipassana,' and/or presented vipassana as an alternate path, which is simply not in the Pali Canon.

Otherwise, this is a good sutta quote, where it points out the inherent greed in seeking merit.

[bodhimind]

So correct me if I got it wrong, from Jhanananda's view, it is more about exercising one's own mundane wisdom and critical thinking to judge if one's deeds are truly meritorious? And of course, leading a contemplative life to achieve enlightenment is one of the highest merits. It does make sense.

I've seen some circles talk about how it is more of the intention behind the deed rather than what the deed does, but to me, it only makes partial sense because every physical act has an effect on top of the psychology. Sure, it has a psychological effect, but like what Jhanananda said, if you support the wrong causes, you are in a way promoting bad deeds even though the intention was for merit. Did I get this right?

But what if you had a kind heart, but did not have the wisdom to discern if it was indeed a good cause? For example, supporting a charity but later realizing that this charity put up a good facade and used the money for their own selfish purposes?

I did remember reading somewhere in the suttas about how it is more meritorious to give to virtuous men rather than unvirtuous ones, I don't exactly remember where I've read it. This discussion is quite interesting, it got me thinking and reflecting.

I think that one of the hardest things to do is to understand the effect of one's deed, which is already about grasping karma, supposedly unfathomable until enlightenment, although one can learn of its effects and supposed patterns from the suttas.

[Jhanananda]

It sounds to me like you got the understanding correct, bodhimind.  The Noble Eightfold Path is all about self-awareness, or otherwise one cannot even execute the first fold properly.  Therefore, if out of a good, generous heart, one gives to frauds, then one gains karma, not merit.  Thus, one must investigate thoroughly the consequences of one's actions to gain merit, and move toward liberation.

[Michel]

I won't even pretend to understand the law of karma. The Buddha himself said that it was impossible and totally futile to arrive at any intellectual understanding of it. The suttas say that karma ripens or comes to a fruition (vipaka) when conditions are right, either in one's current life, or the next, or thereafter. But it is my understanding that when one is able to meditate to the depth of the 4th Jhana, one is able to arrive at insight into the of nature Karma - and acquire "Right View," the first fold of the Noble Eightfold Path.

This sutta teaches that practicing the Noble Eightfold Path leads to the end and the destruction of karma. Maybe this means the destruction of 'old' kamma. So, strive on bhikkus!

... "And what is kamma that is neither dark nor bright with
neither-dark-nor-bright result, kamma that leads to the destruction
of kamma? Right view, right intention, right speech, right
action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and
right concentration: this is called kamma that is neither dark nor
bright with neither-dark-nor-bright result, kamma that leads to
the destruction of kamma.

How do we know karma is real? It is the experience of mystics and those who experience near death who report that while they are out-of-body there are different realms of existence. Why are there animals, humans, devas, ghosts, & hell-beings? If there is rebirth, then why not karma? Well, nobody has ever proved that karma or rebirth are real by scientific means. But mystics apparently know from direct experience. Should we believe them? I think that is not the right question. One should become a mystic and find out through one's own direct experience.

[Michel]

I am not sure what "Ornament of the mind" is a translation of, because I do not recall running into it before. It is not 'samathavipassanācittassa', which is a commentarial term, not a canonical term.  It is an attempt to rescue the lie that Siddhartha Gautama taught a meditation technique called 'vipassana,' and/or presented vipassana as an alternate path, which is simply not in the Pali Canon.

I looked at the sutta in its original Pali. I could not find the term 'samathavipassanācittassa.' So your right, Jhananda. But Bodhi's note is misleading.

[munirah]

One of the more disturbing trends I observed in the Sangha in Sri Lanka was the insistence that just about the best thing anyone could do was feed, donate money to or otherwise provide services to the monks to support their lifestyle...

I remember a lovely mural depicting the meritorious deeds for the benefit of those who could not read...feeding monks , handing over rupees, serving monks etc etc..then depictions of the various tortures in hell that awaited those who neglected this duty....

It was actually quite sickening. Yes of course this has crept in to sustain the monks in their luxury and position at the top of the tree. Like any clergy they have their own self interest at heart.