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.

 

My Understanding of Karma So Far.

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax


In Jewish thought, its caled 'Middah Knegged Middah' (measure facing measure).

Pardon me for contradicting you, but I don't think karma is what you are describing. Karma isn't open to manipulation by gods or anyone else; nor is there any divine Operator who makes karmic consequences happen: they are automatic.

One can only affect one's karma through action, and even then the consequences are largely unforseeable. This applies (see above) to gods and other nonmaterial beings just as it does to humans--indeed, it applies to all living things.

edit on 9/12/10 by Astyanax because: (no reason given)


How can that not be what im describing? G-d, the creator, created a universe in which a particular principle - Elohim, governs the moral universe through a law of causation. In other words, it teaches us that good is what we should seek. And when dont, were punished for it. Conversely, when we do good, were rewarded. If one cant infer a power which created such a system, than theres no reason to believe such a system exists to begin with; since that too requires inference.

Im not sure how you misunderstood me as speaking of 'gods'. gods, as pagans imagine them, are archetypal principals. Only the creator of the universe is G-d, and these lesser forces are his 'host'.




posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by dontreally
How can that not be what im describing? G-d, the creator, created a universe in which a particular principle - Elohim, governs the moral universe through a law of causation. In other words, it teaches us that good is what we should seek. And when dont, were punished for it. Conversely, when we do good, were rewarded.

That is not karma. All this palaver of creators, punishments, rewards, good and evil is irrelevant to the concept of karma.

Karma is simply a matter of actions and their consequences. It is taken for granted that every action will have good as well as bad consequences. In Buddhist terms, at least, 'bad' means 'causing pain or suffering to living beings, or causing their attachment to increase', while 'good' means 'causing as little pain and suffering as possible to living beings, and minimizing their increase of attachment.' Hindu, Jain and Sikh concepts of karma are slightly different--in some schools, it is thought possible to perform actions that are wholly virtuous. However, there is no reward stored up for the virtuous and no God to bestow it.

In Buddhism, to act is intrinsically to become a party to the pain, suffering and attachment of the world. The less one acts and interacts in the world, the better. Inaction is best.


If one cant infer a power which created such a system, than theres no reason to believe such a system exists to begin with; since that too requires inference.

I believe the universe could have come into existence without a creator. Causality is one of the intrinsic operating principles of the universe. Why do I need to imagine a creator to conjure up karma for me?


Im not sure how you misunderstood me as speaking of 'gods'. gods, as pagans imagine them, are archetypal principals. Only the creator of the universe is G-d, and these lesser forces are his 'host'.

You must forgive me. I don't believe in these fairy tales any more.



edit on 10/12/10 by Astyanax because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 01:04 AM
link   
I believe the reason karma works is cause the saying "you get what you give to others" is quite literal, the theory behind the wonderful insightful story "the egg" states that all human life is only 1 conscious soul reincarnating over and over even overlapping in time and space. hence everyone on this planet is "you" as a different incarnation.

what ever you do to others you do to yourself.. this too me is how i believe karma works



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax

According to Buddhist ideas, even the gods are subject to karma. Just as the ancient Greeks believed the gods, like men, were subject to necessity. Necessity is a pretty good word for karma.


Truly. Everything is subject to causality out of necessity. Even a rock on the ground is there because of a reason and from necessity.

We have seen gods born and die throughout history, so they are dependent on human beings, although the creeds try to convince one otherwise.

-v



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
That is not karma. All this palaver of creators, punishments, rewards, good and evil is irrelevant to the concept of karma.


The idea of a reward, is the consquence of the good action; which is good. The reward for doing good, is good itself. Its a learning process.

I really fail to see how one can infer Karma, or consquences of actions, but not an intelligence which has ordained such a system. Its very counter intuitive, especially seeing it deals with matters of great meaning; morality.




I believe the universe could have come into existence without a creator. Causality is one of the intrinsic operating principles of the universe. Why do I need to imagine a creator to conjure up karma for me?


Well i guess that where people like you and i differ. How did the universe come into being? Does Buddhism speak of a point of creation? As far i know, they along with other pagan cultures subscribed to the 'steady state' theory. Only Judaism, and the bible spoke of a creation of something from nothing. The big bang theory has validated this tradition.

Thus, causually, did the big bang come about from nothing, without something CAUSING it to happen? like some will? When we act, do we do so without reason?




You must forgive me. I don't believe in these fairy tales any more.


Well theyre not quite fairy tales. Jung spoke of how the archetypes were worshipped by the ancients. Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury, Saturn, Sun and Moon all have archetypal meaning (they correspond to the 7 lower sefirot)...

In addition to these ideas, the kabbalah speaks of a 72 name of G-d, called the Shemhamphoresh. Its often used in occult traditions to manipulate the governing principles in creation.

So...its not fairy tales. How weve been taught to understand it though, is.



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by mouldy crumpet
I believe the reason karma works is cause the saying "you get what you give to others" is quite literal, the theory behind the wonderful insightful story "the egg" states that all human life is only 1 conscious soul reincarnating over and over even overlapping in time and space. hence everyone on this planet is "you" as a different incarnation.

what ever you do to others you do to yourself.. this too me is how i believe karma works


That is the underlying idea.

In Jewish thought, this 'soul' is called the shekinah. You and me. we are different externally. we have are own dislikes and likes. We look different, and we think different. But beneath this surface level of expression, there lies a unity and sameness between all human beings. This is why theres a consquence when treats someone badly, because in truth, you have attacked your root; your very self.



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   
All this speak of Karma reminds me of a good movie. Babel. It's like what the one of the posters said about Karma being an infinity loop. It all comes back to one point, one action.



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


I really fail to see how one can infer Karma, or consquences of actions, but not an intelligence which has ordained such a system.

I'm sorry to hear that.


Its very counter intuitive, especially seeing it deals with matters of great meaning; morality.

I prefer to test my intuitions against my reason before I act upon them.


Does Buddhism speak of a point of creation?

I don't believe the Buddha himself is ever reported as having done so. His view was that such matters were not meaningful to contemplate, and that it is best not to worry about them.

Anyway, I am not a Buddhist.


As far i know, they along with other pagan cultures subscribed to the 'steady state' theory. Only Judaism, and the bible spoke of a creation of something from nothing. The big bang theory has validated this tradition.

I think it is all a bit more complicated and uncertain than you make out.


Thus, causually, did the big bang come about from nothing, without something CAUSING it to happen? like some will?

Why should it not have? No law of nature forbids it.


(Gods are) not quite fairy tales. Jung spoke of how the archetypes were worshipped by the ancients. Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury, Saturn, Sun and Moon all have archetypal meaning (they correspond to the 7 lower sefirot)...

Could you explain what Jung meant by an archetype?



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


Why does is seem like you come into every Buddhist related thread and propagate Judaism? I'm sorry, but its getting kind of old. And didn't we already go over this belief in God 'thing' in another thread? And you continuously relate Buddhism to Paganism, why is that?

Here's something you might find interesting: Albert Einstein, a Jewish man, said of Buddhism, that it is the most applicable and relative 'religion' to science out of all the religions known to man.

Here is the quote:


The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism.

edit on 10-12-2010 by LifeIsEnergy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
I don't postulate a creator either, although I don't exclude it's possibility.

I tend to think that the universe is the creator in itself and not omniscient, but intelligent nonetheless as it learns about itself constantly. We all part of it, yet our actions weight little - even if our solar system would be wiped off the map, it wouldn't be even comparable to the death of one cell in human organism.

In here, as explained, we experience law of causality which some call karma and even myself sometimes use that word, but when I do, I don't use it in the sense of asian metaphysics.

But perhaps it would be wise for me to retract from this conversation at least for now, as it seems that the issue here is so complicated, that no satisfactory answer can be given. We all tend to think such ways as our experience about the world has mold our thinking..

If someone wants to postulate omniscient creator, that's fine. For me it just seems unnecessary and even illogical (well with my logics that is).

-v
edit on 10-12-2010 by v01i0 because: 2345



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by LifeIsEnergy
reply to post by dontreally
 


Why does is seem like you come into every Buddhist related thread and propagate Judaism? I'm sorry, but its getting kind of old. And didn't we already go over this belief in God 'thing' in another thread? And you continuously relate Buddhism to Paganism, why is that?

Here's something you might find interesting: Albert Einstein, a Jewish man, said of Buddhism, that it is the most applicable and relative 'religion' to science out of all the religions known to man.

Here is the quote:


The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism.

edit on 10-12-2010 by LifeIsEnergy because: (no reason given)


Einstein didnt know much of his own tradition, thats why.

He cohorted with other academics, who had the same aversion to the biblical and Jewish theology because of its patriarchial outlook.

He also studied Achemy, Jakob Boehme, and other christian mystics. Einstein was a hellenized Jew, and he like all human beings is capable of being wrong... Despite the fact that he was a genius.

And again. I have a Jewish spiritual system. I can bring it whereever i like, and share it with whomever i like.
edit on 10-12-2010 by dontreally because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax

Could you explain what Jung meant by an archetype?


Well the word archetype implies enough, does it not?

Definition: An archetype is an original model of a person, ideal example, or a prototype upon which others are copied, patterned, or emulated; a symbol universally recognized by all. In psychology, an archetype is a model of a person, personality, or behavior.

There are certain preconscious functions which elicit certain actions. These are called archetypes. A principle, is also an archetype, in that its the cause of certain patterns we percieve in various phenomena. The 10 sefirot are seen by the kabbalah as the 10 building blocks of reality; both spiritual (psychic) and physical (which is seen as a reflection or representation of the spiritual)

Archetypes also have numinosity - psychic energy. This is why they compel people to act. Jung outlined certain archetypes that accord more to a 'natural' psychology.

These archetypes can be 'contacted' by symbolic means; through ritual, chant etc.

The 72 name of G-d are essentially the 72 primordial forces or conduits from which this reality becomes manifest. Anyone who wishes to use this, obviously can, and verify it for himself. The 72 names are derived from the verse in Exodus where moses 'parts the sea' (the sea can be understood as a symbol for the spiritual worlds. Hence his ability to even part a physical sea; because he first influenced the higher realities which caused the parting of the physical sea)

This website Kosher Torahgoes into great depth about these things (the Rav is also a Jungian psychologist and has studied many years in the orient in Taoism/buddhism. Hes a far left wing orthodox rabbi)



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 

Your post confirms what I suspected: you have no idea what the word 'archetype' means, and are simply using it as code for 'supernatural entity.'

Since we have now established that

  • you neither know nor care about karma but are simply here to peddle God, creationism and some bizarre Kabbalistic hobby-horse of yours

  • will not stick to the topic, and

  • are pretending to knowledge you don't actually have

there is no need to prolong this exchange any further.



posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by dontreally
 

Your post confirms what I suspected: you have no idea what the word 'archetype' means, and are simply using it as code for 'supernatural entity.'

Since we have now established that

  • you neither know nor care about karma but are simply here to peddle God, creationism and some bizarre Kabbalistic hobby-horse of yours

  • will not stick to the topic, and

  • are pretending to knowledge you don't actually have

there is no need to prolong this exchange any further.

You do realize that Jung himself acknowledged that what the ancients termed 'gods' he calls archetypes.

I know how conventional psychology understands the word archetype. Im speaking of it in a strictly metaphysical sense, which of course mainstream psycholgy does not acknwoledge.

Maybe you should read

  • Psychology and Alchemy
  • Psychology and Religion: West and East
  • The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche
    edit on 10-12-2010 by dontreally because: (no reason given)



  • posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 11:37 PM
    link   
    A cool way to escape the consequences of karma is to end all life on Earth. That way there is no reincarnation and karma fails.



    posted on Dec, 10 2010 @ 11:49 PM
    link   
    reply to post by 547000
     

    Doesn't work.
    There would still be plenty of other planets to live out your karma on.

    You just might be condemning yourself to experiencing the pain and death you caused of every person and animal you killed.



    edit on 10/12/10 by Kailassa because: (no reason given)



    posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 03:19 AM
    link   
    reply to post by SolarE-Souljah
     

    I love the "so far" in the title of your thread

    My Understanding of Karma So Far

    That's fantastic!

    S&F



    posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 03:35 AM
    link   
    reply to post by Astyanax
     


    The law of karma presupposes that we, and the world, operate and function, within a holistic interdependant and interpenetrating reality, or what Amit Goswami calls a Monistic Idealism, wherein consciosness, instead of matter, is primary. It states that the underlying foundation of reality and existence, is one thing only. The end of karma then, or the beginning of the end of it, is when we come to recognize, that the locus of action born of awareness of the action, and reaction, of cause and effect, is entirely free, and therefore free to love. The law of karma presupposes a type of samadhi or God realization, which holds the promise of liberating us from the subjective prison cells of our own narrow point of view. As soon as we lose our minds, or allow them to turn inside out, as a dissolving point in a pointlessness, do we get the point that life and karma is making, as a teacher.

    What a beautiful thing, an incredible set up. Karma is absolutely magnificent, imho..



    posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 09:32 AM
    link   
    There is no good or bad karma, just karma. This is a common misconception which i also used to think at one time. The concept of karma is energy transmission overall.

    For example, you are having really negative thoughts and just having a bad day, because of your thoughts you are not paying attention and end up stubbing your toe. That is a form of karma, it is the fruits of your thoughts and actions.

    Think of karma as a tree. As your thoughts and actions go on the tree grows and seperates into different branches. The kind of actions and thoughts you have shape the tree and determine wether the fruits are ripe or rotten. But the tree (or karma) Itself isnt good or bad. Its just energy.

    Good post OP. Bob marley is the best.


    edit on 11-12-2010 by littlecloud because: typo



    posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 09:40 AM
    link   
    reply to post by NewAgeMan
     


    its my understanding that there is no end to karma.

    cause = experience = reaction = cause ad infinitum even if or reaction is neutral it is still a reaction and will seed a cause.



    new topics

    top topics



     
    7
    << 1    3 >>

    log in

    join