Theos-Talk Archives (December 1998 Message tt00159)

Dec 12th 1998

Regarding Karma-its return to us.

<< Karma is the adjustment of effects flowing from causes, during
 which the being upon whom and through whom that adjustment is
 effected experiences pain or pleasure.


I do not think one can call it a closed loop.  It is open ended.
In other words when we find ourselves in a condition or
circumstance our response to it either extinguishes, mitigates,
or adds to the Karma that we will encounter in the future.
As I see it, we are always involved in Karma and it is not
compartmentalized except for purposes of understanding or
analysis.  And such limits are always arbitrary and artificial.

Karma is a continuous flow, one set of causes involving another
set, and so on and on until we learn how to perform "necessary
actions" which leave no trace of selfishness attached to them.  I
think that it is the trace of self-interest that causes Karma to
act to try to educate us into seeing that we have to be selfless
and altruistic in all we do as we live.

I think that is why we are invited to consider the universal
ethics involved in all causative actions (feelings, thoughts,
deeds) - they either are harmonious with Nature's laws or they
are disharmonious and chaotic.  After all, we are a living and
active part of Nature, and we cannot escape it easily.

This is easy to say but hard to illustrate.  Also it sounds like
we are de-humanizing ourselves.  It sounds like we are giving up
our freedom of will, the freedom to decide (and take the
consequences).  [  Just exactly what it is that "humanizes" us
? ]

The question can well arise here:  are we the slaves of our
environment, or are we kings and independent ?  Do we pilot our
own ships or are we merely drops of water in an ever-moving
stream that has objectives of its own in which we, as
individuals, do not figure as more than occasional and very minor
nuisances ?  WE are very important to ourselves - how important
are we to others, and all the rest ?  If Nature is of the opinion
that we are essential - hence, we exist -- then why are we given
the independence to make errors ?  What are "errors ?"  Why are
we supposed to be aware of "Nature's Laws (Karma) ?"

The Universe is composed of far more beings with varying degrees
of intelligence than we can presently enumerate.  Broadly there
are those who have advanced further than we have, there are our
contemporaries, and there are those who are behind us in the
great program of education that "Evolution" or "Manifestation"
represents (to me).  The "Whole" is composed of the interactions
and interblending of these three broad categories of beings.

All this is done under the Laws of Nature - which we so far have
not been able to fully describe, although those that are used in
the endeavors of Science have become well defined in so far as
our present "matter" and its interactions physical,
elector-magnetic and chemical are concerned.

When we come to human interaction, psychology, sociology, and the
moral laws that we sense govern society, we flounder.  Why should
that be so ?

I wonder if the psychology of antiquity, which Theosophy advanced
over 100 years ago is not meant to be a tool for us to use more
wisely.  For this we have to be able to separate the qualities of
emotion from those of the mind.
HPB in the Key to Theosophy (as also in the S D and elsewhere)
gives the sevenfold nature of man perhaps for this purpose.  I
have found value in its study.

I have found the YOGA-SUTRAS OF PATANJALI to be very helpful, a
also the APHORISMS ON KARMA which Mr. Judge recorded, a portion
of which I quoted earlier.

Hope this is of some help

Dallas