Karma is real. Actions DO have consequences. Do good and you will be happy. Offer flowers to the buddha. Generate a loving attitude towards people and their suffering. Generate good thoughts. Engage in charity. Calm people when they experience fear. Change your life.
Doing good only works like this over trying to make a habit out of it. Any new habit takes a bit to acquire before it really sinks in (unless decadent ones like drugs or sweets), so doing good will feel more difficult until falling into the swing of it.
Good deeds though does not mean good karma, the ones who do it to look good have a very different intent, but I suppose someone heinous doing a good deed is better than no deeds at all.
A good man doesn't know he's good
Ehhhh I don't know about that, there is something to say about intense magnanimity, and something to say about the self-doubter who does no good for anyone.
Are good deeds really good deeds if you're doing it just for the merit
Is goodness an inherent property of the deeds themselves or derived from the intentions of the doer?
There is likely a grey area.
If given a strictly binary choice I lean towards goodness, if there is such a thing, being inherent to deeds themselves.
If the path to hell is paved in good intentions, perhaps the path to heaven is paved in bad intentions.
Are good deeds really good deeds if you're doing it just for the merit
this argument always leads to an excuse to not do good things, and then an excuse to do bad things.
Speaking from experience?
Adelaide said:Is goodness an inherent property of the deeds themselves or derived from the intentions of the doer?
It is probably subjective. It seems to me that actions that support life and work with nature are usually "good"
while actions that go against nature are usually bad, regardless of intention in the moment
.
but it depends on what system of ethics you are using