It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Karma...can you explain?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps

What about Bruce Wayne?


Well, I guess that would be an exception to the rule.



Originally posted by smallpeeps
Anyway, so if I'm reading you right, you're saying that there are discarnate souls who either (A) fear incarnation and the obvious pain that comes with it. Like the buddha said, "life is pain", and then there's group (B) who aren't afraid of the pain but who do not have enough "ghost juice" or whatever, to incarnate again. Is there any group I missed?


I doubt that there is any sane individual who is completely unafraid of the pain from being in the flesh. But only courageous souls attempt incarnating in the first place.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
So then, when a guy like Criss Angel, for example, decides to present himself as the antichrist, and he takes over the United Nations, for example, he may in fact call upon his group entity, who may or may not grant him the power to actually fly around like superman or perhaps to act as a great speaker al-la Hitler. In so doing, the unseen members of this group entity are 1: Doomed to failure (don't they know this?) and 2: Risking everything on Criss Angel. He gets to be the capacitor for their spiritual energy, which if used in a hateful way toward innocents, will cause all these souls, including Criss Angel, to devolve into not so much as a spiritual lump of crap. Total nothingness from which they will never return. Do I understand correctly so far?


Yes...that's basically it.

The inherent flaw of the group dynamic is the tendency to value the power and telepathic influence of the collective over an objective appraisal of the situation. Power is like a narcotic -- on both sides. It is very hard to let go of once it is achieved. Those who value power for its own sake do whatever they can to get it, keep it, and increase it. Discarnate collective members praise each other and feed each other's egos as they pursue unethical activities which weaken the power and telepathic unity of the Group Entity. As a whole they slowly spiral down into oblivion while causing great pain and suffering to innocents in the process.

To my awareness, Angel and Blaine were not generals or governmental leaders in the past, but fakirs. So they and the Group Entities they channel do not constitute an imperialistic threat. I don't even see David Blaine or Criss Angel pursuing politics, much less taking over the UN.

The people who are already charismatic leaders in government and who are imperialistic -- like the dictator of North Korea and the President of Iran -- are the ones that have the military support, funding, political experience and Group Entity energies to become "imperialistic Hitlers."




posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 09:56 PM
link   


I doubt that there is any sane individual who is completely unafraid of the pain from being in the flesh. But only courageous souls attempt incarnating in the first place.

This seems to suggest that each human on earth is actually very courageous. That each one of us took the leap of faith into incarnation and therefore are to be praised, regardless of our current alignment or circumstance. I suppose courage doesn't equate to nobility, and there would also be those who before incarnation have purposed to perform evil acts as a human, according to your ideas.

Here is my point tho': I love babies. When I see their little faces, I just get all mushy and start to babble baby talk to them. There seems to be a hardwired circuit in the human brain that says, each little infant can be anything it wants to be. I really do feel this is true. Hitler needn't have been what he was. He could have been a dancer and avoided all that war stuff.

You said that spirits in the group entity state praise each other. That must mean group entities are a lot like human cults that we see down here on Earth. Sometimes people choose to leave those cults or heretofore unseen data will change their view of the group, and when they do betray the group, the leader will often encourage group members to shun them. I have observed this first hand on several occasions. The praising and support of the group tends to blind us to our own situation and the true wrongness of our actions. Perhaps, like in human cults, once one gets outside them and can see beyond the limits of the circle, they may have a change of heart. So too, perhaps that evil soul who incarnates, having separated from his GE, may be able to identify the flaws and wrong goals of that GE and thereby choose to live a good and moral life.

My question is this: Does your view of karma allow for a person born on this earth to save their own soul within this lifetime? You seem to have a fairly negative view of the total mass of souls on Earth and I am curious as to the origin of this viewpoint.

My view of karma may be just my own, but it allows for any human to be absolved of their sins if they make quick and fast changes in this life. I would say this because karmic debt can be allieviated by mercy on the part of those wronged. If the persons-wronged are willing to absolve their abuser, I believe it could affect momentous change in the abuser's heart. I have seen this happen with humans, as I'm sure you have also.

Does your worldview disallow my optimism for all these bad people?

[edit on 31-7-2005 by smallpeeps]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
I doubt that there is any sane individual who is completely unafraid of the pain from being in the flesh. But only courageous souls attempt incarnating in the first place.



Originally posted by smallpeeps
This seems to suggest that each human on earth is actually very courageous. That each one of us took the leap of faith into incarnation and therefore are to be praised, regardless of our current alignment or circumstance. I suppose courage doesn't equate to nobility, and there would also be those who before incarnation have purposed to perform evil acts as a human, according to your ideas.


Yes, courage does not always equate to nobility.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
Here is my point tho': I love babies. When I see their little faces, I just get all mushy and start to babble baby talk to them. There seems to be a hardwired circuit in the human brain that says, each little infant can be anything it wants to be. I really do feel this is true. Hitler needn't have been what he was. He could have been a dancer and avoided all that war stuff.


Before his rise in power, Adolf made a living hanging wallpaper.


But his tendencies, strengths, and the energies that worked through him and around him that formed Nazism, were predicted in advance by mystics like Nostradamus. True, he could have changed his path once he incarnated, but the purpose of his life -- as he and millions of Germanic discarnates saw it -- was to become the dictator of an imperialistic Germany.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
You said that spirits in the group entity state praise each other. That must mean group entities are a lot like human cults that we see down here on Earth. Sometimes people choose to leave those cults or heretofore unseen data will change their view of the group, and when they do betray the group, the leader will often encourage group members to shun them. I have observed this first hand on several occasions. The praising and support of the group tends to blind us to our own situation and the true wrongness of our actions. Perhaps, like in human cults, once one gets outside them and can see beyond the limits of the circle, they may have a change of heart. So too, perhaps that evil soul who incarnates, having separated from his GE, may be able to identify the flaws and wrong goals of that GE and thereby choose to live a good and moral life.


That is an excellent analysis.


Group Entities work through and around malevolent cults. It is what empowers them and grants cult leaders their Gift of Charisma.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
My question is this: Does your view of karma allow for a person born on this earth to save their own soul within this lifetime? You seem to have a fairly negative view of the total mass of souls on Earth and I am curious as to the origin of this viewpoint.


Can a soul change for the better in one life and avoid destroying itself after death?

Absolutely.

But it takes a lot of integrity and discipline to do so.

There was once a common soul who was disgusted with her lack of spirituality in former incarnations. She became very determined and set a goal for her next life: to devote it entirely to God (or The Light) and help others. While still only a teenager, she became a nun and served the poor and sickly for decades; pretty much right up until her death as a very old woman. Consequently, she spiritually progressed in life from having a Dominant Aura Color of orange (attributed to common spirits) to a saintly DAC of sky blue. In the process, she became world famous for her ministry in helping the poor.

Her name was Mother Theresa.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
My view of karma may be just my own, but it allows for any human to be absolved of their sins if they make quick and fast changes in this life. I would say this because karmic debt can be alleviated by mercy on the part of those wronged. If the persons-wronged are willing to absolve their abuser, I believe it could affect momentous change in the abuser's heart. I have seen this happen with humans, as I'm sure you have also.


Striving to live by The Golden Rule is key for avoiding the buildup of negative karma. As long as one takes responsibility for one's actions and misgivings that one learns about in the life review, and strives to amend karmic debts, the soul will survive itself and spiritually progress in The Light.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
Does your worldview disallow my optimism for all these bad people?


Only if they are willing to change and strive to do so.

It is entirely up to the individual.



[edit on 1-8-2005 by Paul_Richard]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 06:00 PM
link   
''Hitler, Adolf, 1889–1945
Early Life

The son of Alois Hitler (1837–1903), an Austrian customs official, Adolf Hitler dropped out of high school, and after his mother's death in 1907 moved to Vienna. He twice failed the admission examination for the academy of arts. His vicious anti-Semitism (perhaps influenced by that of Karl Lueger) and political harangues drove many acquaintances away. In 1913 he settled in Munich, and on the outbreak of World War I he joined the Bavarian army. During the war he was gassed and wounded; a corporal, he received the Iron Cross for bravery. The war hardened his extreme nationalism, and he blamed the German defeat on betrayal by Jews and Marxists. Upon his return to Munich he joined a handful of other nationalistic veterans in the German Workers' party.''



[edit on 1-8-2005 by ThePunisher]



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   
The Punisher made me think: what if Hitler had not been wounded in battle or somehow had his life altered? Was it foreordained by his group entity that his life would be just so? If he had just become a painter or chimneysweep, would his group entity have used someone else to foment WW2? How does it work with group entities? Where can I read more about them?

Regarding Mother Theresa, I have a question: Did she really help the poor? I mean she left them as she found them: in squalor. And she certainly had no interest in freeing them else she would have told them about birth control methods. How did her actions increase her karma so much? Is it just about feelings and emotions?

For example, Margaret Sanger, by her years of toil, prevented many children who would have been born into painful unhappiness from even incarnating. It was her demand of birth control for women, that released the female from slavery to childbirth. In my opinion, that makes her more of a saint than Theresa, who at best, healed wounds which her own church caused.

Is karma just based on our moment to moment kindness? So if Theresa feeds 200 suffering kids in the name of a church that keeps them poor, but Sanger prevents those 200 from suffering their horribly poor lives at all (thereby keeping them in heaven), whom creates the better karma?



posted on Aug, 1 2005 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
The Punisher made me think: what if Hitler had not been wounded in battle or somehow had his life altered? Was it foreordained by his group entity that his life would be just so? If he had just become a painter or chimneysweep, would his group entity have used someone else to foment WW2? How does it work with group entities? Where can I read more about them?


Destiny is forged, not given. Everyone has a choice in the matter. If for some reason Hitler decided to stay just a wallpaper hanger and not pursue politics, then yes, the millions of imperialistic spirits that telepathically influenced the formation of the Nazi party would have chosen someone else to be their main figurehead in the flesh.

The whole Group Entity understanding that I espouse is essentially an explanation of discarnate sociology, a breakthrough of illumination that has taken me many years to learn. It explains, among other things, why some people have significant Gifts of the Spirit and why most do not.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
Regarding Mother Theresa, I have a question: Did she really help the poor? I mean she left them as she found them: in squalor. And she certainly had no interest in freeing them else she would have told them about birth control methods. How did her actions increase her karma so much? Is it just about feelings and emotions?


It is true that she did not end poverty or disease. But she did provide comfort and medical attention to the poor, sick and dying. This constitutes service to The Light regardless. Selfless service increases one's ability to love genuinely and deeply or correspondingly in the Spirit: the ability to Radiate Spiritual White Light.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
For example, Margaret Sanger, by her years of toil, prevented many children who would have been born into painful unhappiness from even incarnating. It was her demand of birth control for women, that released the female from slavery to childbirth. In my opinion, that makes her more of a saint than Theresa, who at best, healed wounds which her own church caused.


I am not familiar with all the particulars of Margaret Sanger's case. Mother Theresa had no authority to change Church doctrine in favor of birth control. As a general rule, when selfless service is pursued, one spiritually progresses.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
Is karma just based on our moment to moment kindness? So if Theresa feeds 200 suffering kids in the name of a church that keeps them poor, but Sanger prevents those 200 from suffering their horribly poor lives at all (thereby keeping them in heaven), whom creates the better karma?


What is more important: the number of people served or the quality of the selflessness?

The quality of the selflessness.

The emotional intention of compassion and kindness is of utmost importance.

If a billionaire gives ten million dollars away to charity, he will not spiritually progress as much from that charity as someone who has spent years of selfless service to others.

It is the day to day acts of kindness which appear to have the greatest impact on cultivating good karma and spiritually progressing.



posted on Oct, 8 2005 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Karmic "debt" now theres another interesting topic?.



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   
On of my first books on the subject, "A Study in karma" by Annie Besant (hehe i got a first edition from 1912
)

it is a wonderfull book, Annie worked with many of the best (As if she wasnt one of the best), such as Leadbeater & Blavatsky

i do belive that you can get an online copy, the work is public domain now and you should have no trouble getting it for free.. i get much of my older titles off limewire, it has a wealth of knowlege from such names as Blavatsky (the secret doctrine amung other titles), Crowley, Leadbeater, Manly Hall, Arthur Waite and many many others



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by NinterX
Ignorance is a Bliss


perhaps that's why everyone is smiling?

________________________________

Karma - Divine Justice

Keeps the balance equal.

[edit on 15/10/2005 by AkashicWanderer]



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Though i believe imo that within Ignorance the opportunity for learning is still present, it all depends.

And to "Deny Ignorance" at the end of the day does not Exist, as it would probably deny the opportunity for change and learning within free will.

What would probably be more apt would be to learn or show what Ignorance is or its benefits/faults and thus ultimately a understanding of Ignorance, as there will probably always be Ignorance to varying degrees, regardless.

For example i think this website ATS has a good protocol, it is just false to believe the "Deny Ignorance" aspect, when in truth all they can do is hope or try to Improve upon the flaws in Ignorance, i.e. that which is a Part of Everyone.


So i would conclude in my opinion, Ignorance exists for good reason, this cannot be Denied?.


(add some more to the conclude) Though it can be improved upon?.

[edit on 16-10-2005 by ThePunisher]



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
For example, Margaret Sanger, by her years of toil, prevented many children who would have been born into painful unhappiness from even incarnating. It was her demand of birth control for women, that released the female from slavery to childbirth. In my opinion, that makes her more of a saint than Theresa, who at best, healed wounds which her own church caused.


To deny someone the chance on life, on the basis that its life will not hold up to the standards of a "happy" life, is in fact going against karma. We pay for everything we do, and if we are billionaires, self-centered and non empathic towards our fellow human beings, it is very possible that in our next life we will live with the poorest of the poor...



Is karma just based on our moment to moment kindness? So if Theresa feeds 200 suffering kids in the name of a church that keeps them poor, but Sanger prevents those 200 from suffering their horribly poor lives at all (thereby keeping them in heaven), whom creates the better karma.


Keeping them in "heaven" will not do them any good. They are to come to the physical plane in order to learn.

No real learning can take place in "heaven". People need challenges in order to learn.


[edit on 16/10/2005 by AkashicWanderer]



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 12:50 PM
link   
To continue on a similar note to my previous post I would add that if there is knowledge of Karma or there can be Ultimate Justice for the Soul?, that that would be knowledge not to be Denied or Ignored?

[edit on 16-10-2005 by ThePunisher]



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I discuss Karma in this thread www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I think the meaning of karma lies in oneself.If you`re happy with yourself and surroundings and try to be nice to people and living things,youll get that in return.
As the saying goes-what goes around comes around




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join