Karma across lifetimes - victim blaming?

[Bunyip]

I addressed the topic. You failed to comprehend it.




I am too.

Sorry, then in relation to the topic - what were you trying to convey when you said that we can always find fault with anything and everything other than the self?
How does that relate to my comment on karma?

 

[atanu]

.... I also find pretty abhorrent. It is what keeps the untouchables untouchable.
The Hindu interpretation of karma is as atavistic as is the Christian notion of child sacrifice.

First. Present karma is what we have. And present karma is that which helps to change our circumstances for the better or for the worse? It is opposite of the materialistic view.

Second. Karma applies to self. Being judgemental of 'christians' or 'hindus' or 'others' may not constitute good karma.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Hah, I always thought karma was shady, in a way. I mean, it's a very convenient concept for a culture based on a rigid class system. Oh you're a pariah? Well, you must have deserved it - be quiet, don't rebel and maybe in the next life you'll be luckier. And it is easy to see how it could be twisted to victim blame in a myriad of other situations. As always, while the concept itself may be fascinating and inspiring, it's human application that ruins everything.

It is.

Spiritual versions of karma are complete b.s. to the max, set up to control behavior and reinforce class distinction ironically generating it's own karma in one fell swoop.

Karma is just a fancy term for cause and effect that applies to everything, including environmental karma of which it all interacts in countless complex ways.

Definitly not the bucketloads of cosmic spiritual nonsense best left to imaginative folks not really interested in direct reality as it plays out before them anyway.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I mean, it's a very convenient concept for a culture based on a rigid class system. Oh you're a pariah? Well, you must have deserved it - be quiet, don't rebel and maybe in the next life you'll be luckier. And it is easy to see how it could be twisted to victim blame in a myriad of other situations. As always, while the concept itself may be fascinating and inspiring, it's human application that ruins everything.

It also says to the rich, haughty and cruel, 'Do you want to be a pariah in the next life? If you don't then avoid bad deeds and engage in good deeds". Karma is for all, the fortunate and the unfortunate, rich and poor (though as I said before, it was/is a social strategy). It kept and keeps millions of Hindus away from bad deeds, just as I am sure the fear of God and hell keeps millions of Christians away from bad deeds.

 

[atanu]

Hah, I always thought karma was shady, in a way. .........As always, while the concept itself may be fascinating and inspiring, it's human application that ruins everything.

Like (suppose) application of E=mc squared towards development of atom bomb and bombing of Hiroshima, perhaps?

The knowledge that "I and my actions are responsible for my state", should actually help to overcome the mistakes of egoistic human applications. Don't you think so? This is approximately the basis of application of karma understanding in dharmic religions.

 

[Bunyip]

First. Present karma is what we have. And present karma is that which helps to change our circumstances for the better or for the worse? It is opposite of the materialistic view.

I'm sorry, but how do you figure it is the opposite of the materialist view, and why is that relevant?

Second. Karma applies to self. Being judgemental of 'christians' or 'hindus' or 'others' may not constitute good karma.

Sure, being judgemental is bad karma. Not that I believe in karma.
I would however point out that it was an observation, an opinion, not a judgement.

 

[Treks]

Ravidas was a leather worker and a great saint. There were a few untouchables among the twelve Alvar and 64 Nayanar saints of South India. Maharashtra had its own tradition of untouchable saints (Eknath, Namdev, their poems are part of the Sikh Sri Guru Granth Sahib, which has poems from many untouchable Hindu saints, at that time Sikhism was part of Hinduism).

Who is Eknath? I am unfamiliar with that name and have not seen shabads by that author in SGGSJ.

Also, Sikhi was never 'part of Hinduism'. It is unique.

Sikhi places the focus squarely on this life right here and now and doesn't say much about karma. It simply says you will harvest what you plant.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Eknath - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eknath ( last three-quarters of the sixteenth-century CE, too late to be included in Sri Guru Granth Sahib).
Namdev: 60 hymns Bhagat Namdev (1270 to 1350) was a celebrated saint from Maharashtra who travelled extensively across the country. He lived in Punjab for a number of years.
http://www.sikhs.org/granth2.htm
About the distance between Sikhism and Hinduism, in olden times and in present times, opinions may differ. I do not know how unique Sikhism is. I do not think reading Sri Guru Granth Sahib shows that. And, of course, there are many brothers in India even now, one being a sikh and the other being a Hindu. My grocer is one of them.