Karma

[Lester Tryon]

Karma is how the mind creates the world, it is intention. All worlds exist dependently upon the karma of beings.

It is very different from the golden rule (i think that rule is bs). The golden rule is in error because others dont necessarily want to be treated the way I do. [/The golden rule is centered around oneself being the highest reference point on how to treat others. Its flawed in terms of what its trying to achieve.]

Does it work if you refuse to believe in it? Yes. However, if you see through it, it doesnt work anymore.

This, of course, is my basic understanding.

I'm not trying to be dense, or argumentative for its own sake here, but, what other reference point do we have?

 

[Rinchen]

I'm not trying to be dense, or argumentative for its own sake here, but, what other reference point do we have?

How about you just talk to the person you're trying to benefit and see for yourself what they need. No need to superimpose our own wants on someone.

I can honestly say there are people out there who want to be treated in a way I DON'T want to be treated.

 

[Lester Tryon]

How about you just talk to the person you're trying to benefit and see for yourself what they need. No need to superimpose our own wants on someone.

I can honestly say there are people out there who want to be treated in a way I DON'T want to be treated.

Alright, thank you. I appreciate the clarification. At least then you know how your actions will affect them.

 

[Ponder This]

Well then, I guess as a random, intellectual exercise in futility, one that doesn't make sense If there is no start, no end, (i.e., no boundaries) then how could there be a whole? The entirety of the concept relies on one being willing to suspend belief in all tangible evidence of the world.
I would be willing to accept the concept that no one is necessarily more important/has more meaning intrinsically than anyone else, at least as a whole. In some given circumstances, someone's importance could outweigh some other's (e.g. the surgeon in the operating room).
However, it comes back to perspective. If there is no beginning, no end, no consequence or importance to anything, then there is also no reason to do anything other than fulfill biological imperatives. It also suggests no reason not to act on impulse, to simply go after whatever one desires, regardless of how it may affect others. Since there is no end game, no goal, no actual purpose, it could not be else-wise.
You said, "Karma is about the future: the results of deeds." This statement implies cause and effect. Yet if it is both,(cause and effect) then it is neither as well. If it is all, and it is nothing, then the point, is pointless. (I'm truly not meaning to come across as glib here.)
I'm not saying that how you are expressing what the idea of Karma represents is wrong (as in definition of the word, I'm sure you are far more informed than I am), what I'm saying is that, if it is how you are stating it (we have no importance, we have no beginning or end which implies infinity/eternity to alter choices, which would be hard to do as we take "nothing" (broad meaning word) including experience, learning, etc.) with us into some possible next life, then individual lives have no value, the "current reality", the one as experienced by the body and brain we inhabit while we have this conversation, is pointless. And since, even the "God" referenced in an earlier post in the thread, other than having "created" everything on a whim, has no interest in it either, why bother?
The basic idea, which as a westerner, and I know is not a correct or at least complete analogy, is that Karma is like, "what goes around, comes around". I think that people having heard that, is what prompted the comparison to the "Golden Rule". Those two ideas, at least have some bearing on the "here and now". If Karma, does not, what does it have to do with?
This has been incredibly long winded and I apologize to everyone for my inane prattling while trying to come to grips with this.

That about sums it up, yes. The real consideration is that the ego believes that something can be gained or lost and Karma is the universe's way of saying, "no, that isn't so." What belongs to you, belongs to the universe. Everything you do exists in constant relationship to everything else. A grain of rice does not go missing.

 

[Geoff-Allen]

That about sums it up, yes. The real consideration is that the ego believes that something can be gained or lost and Karma is the universe's way of saying, "no, that isn't so." What belongs to you, belongs to the universe. Everything you do exists in constant relationship to everything else. A grain of rice does not go missing.

Thanks for sharing!

 

[pearl]

If you do, how would you explain it in simple terms?

You reap what you sow.

 

[sun rise]

You reap what you sow.

All the major world religions teach that. The details are the subject of endless theological debates.

 

[Valjean]

All the major world religions teach that. The details are the subject of endless theological debates.

The Calvinist denominations don't believe this. Your actions in this world have no affect on your ultimate fate.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

Geoff-Allen,

Namaste,

I will give my perspective on these

Do you believe in karma?

This is like asking "do you believe in breathing", as breathing is also "Karma", do you believe in winking your eye lids?

If you do, how would you explain it in simple terms?

"Karm", means action, that as as simple as i can get.

Is it different from the Golden Rule?

Yes, "Karm" is not about a specific action, but actions in general. Is the Karm of breathing the same as the Golden rule?

Does it work even if you refuse to belive in it?

Sorry question makes no sense to me, does one have to believe in breathing for it to work?, do i have to believe in my eyes to see? The "Karm" of breathing, eating, seeing, smelling, touching does not require belief.

One ether performs an action or does not perform an action, both are still Karma (see Gita).

I have limited my answer to "Karm", as so not to confuse it with Karma-Phalla, Papam/Punyam Karma, Nish Kama karma, and other forms of Karma.

Dhanyavad

 

[VioletVortex]

I don't know that I believe in Karma or Hamingja in the traditional sense, but every action has its equal and opposite reaction in the mechanical, psychological, and social senses. Let's say I saw down a tree with the intent of destroying someone's car, but this backfires, leaving me dead, crushed under the tree. This would be perceived as Karma, but my death would really be the result of its own likelihood, or just user error. There wouldn't be any spiritual intervention.

Another instance would be intentional retribution. If I punch someone, and then they punch me back knocking me unconscious, then that too could be construed as Karma, but again, spirituality was not a factor, rather the person consciously chose vindication.

Finally, I believe in ESPs at least on some level, and I think that similar energy fields emitted by one's mind could result in a form of subconscious vengeance, similar to a curse that could be created through a ritual.