RE: What is KARMA -- How to Act Without Producing Karma
Oct 14, 2001 12:27 PM
Sunday, October 14, 2001
Of course I agree with you that Karma is as complex as all of us
put together make it by our choices..
What I am trying to say are the fundamental bases for its
operation as I understand it. No more. CAUSATION is fine.
MOTION may be the visible effect of universal and individual
Karma. -- seems fair.
Who originates causes and what is their power are subjects I try
to learn more about.
I imagine that the Theosophical teachings by analogy may apply
elsewhere in the Kosmos, but I have no way of verifying those
details. [ S D I 142 seems to define our particular mix ].
In regard to the operations of impersonal Karma I fully agree.
it is we who put the human interpretation of good or evil on
events, accidents, catastrophes, or strokes of "luck,"
All those involve the "feeling, passional and desire" aspect of
The logical mind is detached from the emotional content. It
looks for CAUSES.
I would certainly agree to keep "God" out of it. But then if one
has to deal with those who still cherish those ideas, there has
to be some kind of a bridge established to do so.
My logical mind pushes the causation / nidana / links as a
continuum. In any case the duration of a manvantara or a kalpa
are very long periods of time.
I would be surprised in finding that Karma comes to a halt ( as
the Hindus philosophies seem to say) the determination of Karma
at the end of a Manvantara or a Kalpa if there is any "unfinished
Imagine if our going to sleep signaled a total cessation of
memory and forcing on awakening a totally new personality to deal
Thanks for your thoughts, as always,
From: Jerry S [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2001 5:00 PM
To: Theosophy Study List
Subject: RE: What is KARMA -- How to Act Without Producing Karma
This may sound simplistic: But let me repeat the line of my
reasoning -- I would be grateful to see if it is faulty in your
eyes. (Of course these are my own speculations based on what I
have understood Theosophy teaches.)>>>
JERRY: Dallas, all I am trying to do, is to show that karma is
complex than most of us think.
<<<KARMA is the universal and impersonal law of compensation. It
JERRY: This statement is too vague for me to comment. What does
mean to you? What is your definition of "Nature?" I can tell you
two words mean to me, but I cannot guess how you interpret them.
to me refers to our seven-plane solar system, or our solar system
planetary chains with the sun at the center. Blavatsky tooks
to clearly define this as her "universe" in which her Theosophy
applicable. Much of her teachings are not applicable to other
other solar systems. And I view "nature" as the general
principles behind the lower four cosmic planes of our Earth
(a somewhat limited view of nature, perhaps, but one that
With my own definitions, I can tell you that karma, which
action and scientifically is causation (cause and effect over
time), and for
which Blavatsky gives the equation
Thus karma is applicable to "universe" and to "nature" in the
sense of being
applicable throughout our seven-plane planetary solar system.
<<<<It is Vibration in many ways and places, as I understand it.
resolves disturbance by reaction physically, metaphysically, and
on the plane of ethics and morals in human relations -- we would
call it the balance between virtue and vice. As I se it while it
tends to harmonize disturbance, it also encourages cooperation,
generosity, universality and tenderness for others.. If is a
force that ever gently pushes the human Ego onward to perfection
of its Universal qualities, while minimizing and eroding
selfishness. In LIGHT ON THE PATH at the end of the book is a
very fine exposition of Karma and how it works. I found it very
JERRY: Dallas, the "resolving of disturbances" and especially
"virtue and vice" is a purely human interpretation of karma, and
and faulty one at that. Karma couldn't care less about virtue and
(which are human feelings and ideas that simply do NOT exist
in our human brain-minds). Karma, per se, has nothing to do with
What I am saying here is the teaching of Lao-Tze, Buddha, and
other Teachers over the centuries. If Theosophy would like to be
as you keep telling us, then it has to accept this fundamental
<<<It is sometimes expressed as: Effect follows cause in exact
measure. It is action and reaction. Nature seeks to maintain
harmony. The balancing return of effects to the chooser who is
causative, is called by us "good" or "bad" Karma.>>>
JERRY: Karma is causation, yes, but the "over time" part is
scientific law of causation is cause and effect over time in such
can be presented mathematically. It is very precise, and
is causality over time, but enormous time periods can come
between a cause
and its effect, and also the same cause can produce numerous
effects, and so on. I agree with your "called by us" and I am
happy to see
you use this phrase. I can take some of your statements on karma,
"karma" to "God's Will" and show it to good Christians who will
complete agreement. But this is not what karma is about.
<<<This is the way its action has been explained.>>>
JERRY: The teaching of karma as reward and punishment, or as
is a way of making the doctrine suitable for children. This is
not an adult
way of looking at it. Theosophists should be able to see through
<<<<The LAW of the Universe (Nature's Law) covers everything from
past to present, from small to great. We thus share in each
other. This is one of the bases for Universal Brotherhood. Some
would say this is "God" immanent. It also covers the great
problem of TIME. Since in the course of evolution all beings at
the end of a Manvantara find a restful "sleep" overcoming them.
and after that recuperative period is indeed the whole manifested
Universe re-awakes. And every being resumes from where it left
off. I think everyone knows this, but fails to apply it to the
human consciousness and its ever-growing intelligence.>>>
JERRY: Speaking as a Theosophist, I would prefer to keep God out
of it, but
here again you equate karma with God's Will, which gives me
leap from karma to "Universasl Brotherhood" is lost on me, my
you could explain to me what the one has to do with the other?
Expressions used: "As you sow, sow ye shall reap.">>>
JERRY: This is the Mosaic Doctrine which the Master Jesus and the
Gotamah both did away with (unless you are Jewish, I guess). It
comforting nor correct except in a broad general sense.
<<< "The sessamum was sessamum, the corn was corn.">>>
JERRY: This is the doctrine of Svabhava, about which Buddha came
as I have said many times.
<<<"An eye for an eye -- a tooth for a tooth."
JERRY: Again, the Mosaic Doctrine, which has no room in it for
or for "salvation" and no room for liberation or for
enlightenment, and for
which I feel is a terrible distorted doctrine originally meant to
<<< "The pepper plant will not give birth to roses.">>>
JERRY: Another way of saying Svabhava, and little to do with
<<<< KARMA and the MONAD
In The SECRET DOCTRINE H.P.Blavatsky gives us the doctrine of the
immortal and eternal MONAD (Universal), and, the individual and
personal Monads (Individualized, and embodied in material,
JERRY: Again, "eternal" only for this manvantara, Dallas. And
only for this solar system. I really do wish you would start
"relatively" to misleading words like eternal and universal. And
I will say
yet again, the Monad is "individualized" as part and parcel of
illusion, but is never really individualized at all.
<<<They are of the same identical essence, she states, but,
represent different stages of their individual evolution. In
Mankind the stage is that of the "free-willed" development of the
Monads who have reached that stage. The body is endowed with a
unitary consciousness that is moved by desire and passions, but
is also self-regulated to the extent that it desires to "do the
right." It constantly seeks to transform the self-centered
attitude, which is moved by the Lower Mind (Kama-Manas) desire
and passions, but is also self-regulated to the extent that the
Higher Mind (Buddhi-Manas)controls these.>>>
JERRY: I agree with the first part above. But where or how did
you arrive at
the idea of "a unitary consciousness?" The fact that Mltiple
Disorder is alive and well should be enough to tell us that we
unitary at all. As every Buddhist knows, we are a collection of
noted that the ego is a complex, not an entity, and ego is
healthy psyches. Our sense of being a unitary ego or entity is
cause of maya and karmically promotes reincarnation.
Enough for now. I wish you well.
You are currently subscribed to theos-l as:
List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application