Some oriental people who work in the world of the energy belive-and makes sense to me-that karma, destiny and reincarnation are not individualistic concepts.
According to this point our energy (more than one body of energy) join the energy of other beings that have our same tone of vibration; so we dont reincarnate as individuals (John with all his personal history reincarnate in Tom). It would better be that the energy of John, plus the energy of other beings that have the same vibration than John, somehow join and created Tom.
This makes sense to me because as we know the energy is constantly in movement, the universe is always moving, so how could our energy stick together by itself without being mixed? Wouldnt it be like extending the concept of private property to other dimensions?
Some oriental people who work in the world of the energy belive-and makes sense to me-that karma, destiny and reincarnation are not individualistic concepts.
According to this point our energy (more than one body of energy) join the energy of other beings that have our same tone of vibration; so we dont reincarnate as individuals (John with all his personal history reincarnate in Tom). It would better be that the energy of John, plus the energy of other beings that have the same vibration than John, somehow join and created Tom.
This makes sense to me because as we know the energy is constantly in movement, the universe is always moving, so how could our energy stick together by itself without being mixed? Wouldnt it be like extending the concept of private property to other dimensions?
Some oriental people who work in the world of the energy belive-and makes sense to me-that karma, destiny and reincarnation are not individualistic concepts.
According to this point our energy (more than one body of energy) join the energy of other beings that have our same tone of vibration; so we dont reincarnate as individuals (John with all his personal history reincarnate in Tom). It would better be that the energy of John, plus the energy of other beings that have the same vibration than John, somehow join and created Tom.
This makes sense to me because as we know the energy is constantly in movement, the universe is always moving, so how could our energy stick together by itself without being mixed? Wouldnt it be like extending the concept of private property to other dimensions?
Some oriental people who work in the world of the energy belive-and makes sense to me-that karma, destiny and reincarnation are not individualistic concepts.
According to this point our energy (more than one body of energy) join the energy of other beings that have our same tone of vibration; so we dont reincarnate as individuals (John with all his personal history reincarnate in Tom). It would better be that the energy of John, plus the energy of other beings that have the same vibration than John, somehow join and created Tom.
This makes sense to me because as we know the energy is constantly in movement, the universe is always moving, so how could our energy stick together by itself without being mixed? Wouldnt it be like extending the concept of private property to other dimensions?
Yes! Exactly!. I have been told ( By Geshe Michael Roach - Tibetan Buddhist monk) That we don't own individual karma ...It's our energy field that we manifest in positive or negative ways that is actually labeled as karma .
Yes! Exactly!. I have been told ( By Geshe Michael Roach - Tibetan Buddhist monk) That we don't own individual karma ...It's our energy field that we manifest in positive or negative ways that is actually labeled as karma .
I'm commenting on the first concept, while pointing to the interrelatedness of all three.
The following is a comment I wrote to the "Word of the Day" site, from YourDictionary.com. If you want to take it all in, you can click on "discuss today's word," and scroll down to the 9/16/08 posting for "karma."
* * *
I'd like to add a perspective about karma from the Nichiren sect of Buddhism.
As I understand it, karma is best understood as resulting from not only this life, but from uncountable lives. Nichiren buddhism teaches that our existence had no beginning, as well as having no end. All we enjoy and all we suffer is a perfect reflection of the causes we've made right up to this moment, since the infinite past.
Karma has shaped our bodies and minds and directed us to the families we have and the communities we live in. Karma is responsible for every circumstances that surround us. Karma is all inclusive. Nothing we are or have or experience comes from any other source than karma.
The inviolable Law of Cause and Effect, Nichiren Buddhism says, rules over us with absolute justice. The ultimate Universal force is pure and completely impartial. There are no "decisions" or "judgments." The analogy of "action and reaction" may be weak, but it is accurate.
The "Word of the Day" definition uses the word "action" and Vikki used the word "deeds" in her discussion. I'd like to point out that that means not only what is done, but also what is said and what is thought. Every aspect of the dynamic process of living creates a cause, creates karma.
The "Word of the Day" said that it is extreme simplification to say that "...the consequences of good acts is happiness while the consequences of bad acts is misfortune and suffering." Extreme simplification notwithstanding, I believe that Nichiren would say "right on."
Another extreme simplification might be to say that to support the dignity of life is a cause for happiness and to go against the dignity of life...well, you can figure out the simple conclusion!
I want to offer these thoughts because I think a broad understanding of what this mystic word "karma" might "mean" can play an important part in realizing the reality in which we are enveloped. Indeed, if this concept of karma is true and people embraced it, it could make a revolutionary difference in our decisions about how we conduct our lives, and add an invaluable tool to forming that elusive condition of peace - individually and in the world.
Thank you for any consideration you give to this.
I'm commenting on the first concept, while pointing to the interrelatedness of all three.
The following is a comment I wrote to the "Word of the Day" site, from YourDictionary.com. If you want to take it all in, you can click on "discuss today's word," and scroll down to the 9/16/08 posting for "karma."
* * *
I'd like to add a perspective about karma from the Nichiren sect of Buddhism.
As I understand it, karma is best understood as resulting from not only this life, but from uncountable lives. Nichiren buddhism teaches that our existence had no beginning, as well as having no end. All we enjoy and all we suffer is a perfect reflection of the causes we've made right up to this moment, since the infinite past.
Karma has shaped our bodies and minds and directed us to the families we have and the communities we live in. Karma is responsible for every circumstances that surround us. Karma is all inclusive. Nothing we are or have or experience comes from any other source than karma.
The inviolable Law of Cause and Effect, Nichiren Buddhism says, rules over us with absolute justice. The ultimate Universal force is pure and completely impartial. There are no "decisions" or "judgments." The analogy of "action and reaction" may be weak, but it is accurate.
The "Word of the Day" definition uses the word "action" and Vikki used the word "deeds" in her discussion. I'd like to point out that that means not only what is done, but also what is said and what is thought. Every aspect of the dynamic process of living creates a cause, creates karma.
The "Word of the Day" said that it is extreme simplification to say that "...the consequences of good acts is happiness while the consequences of bad acts is misfortune and suffering." Extreme simplification notwithstanding, I believe that Nichiren would say "right on."
Another extreme simplification might be to say that to support the dignity of life is a cause for happiness and to go against the dignity of life...well, you can figure out the simple conclusion!
I want to offer these thoughts because I think a broad understanding of what this mystic word "karma" might "mean" can play an important part in realizing the reality in which we are enveloped. Indeed, if this concept of karma is true and people embraced it, it could make a revolutionary difference in our decisions about how we conduct our lives, and add an invaluable tool to forming that elusive condition of peace - individually and in the world.
Thank you for any consideration you give to this.
This sounds pretty much like how I understand it. I emphasize your phrase, "...separate from our understanding of good and evil."
I don't have much question about the existence of "good and evil," but I have a lot of questions about what we see to be "good" or "evil."
I think I would tweak your last sentence. As I understand it, the state of enlightenment is not an end point.
Even those whose life condition is mountain-high are not finished. There is always progress to be made. Our existence is eternal and so is the need for our further development.
I wonder if a being can have "no karma," as you say. That would seem to require exclusion from the Law of Cause and Effect. I wonder if a being can do that. I should think that there would be a harmony with the Law of Cause and Effect for one advanced far enough to be "enlightened," so that every thing that comes around after it goes around is all for the good.
Maybe?
This sounds pretty much like how I understand it. I emphasize your phrase, "...separate from our understanding of good and evil."
I don't have much question about the existence of "good and evil," but I have a lot of questions about what we see to be "good" or "evil."
I think I would tweak your last sentence. As I understand it, the state of enlightenment is not an end point.
Even those whose life condition is mountain-high are not finished. There is always progress to be made. Our existence is eternal and so is the need for our further development.
I wonder if a being can have "no karma," as you say. That would seem to require exclusion from the Law of Cause and Effect. I wonder if a being can do that. I should think that there would be a harmony with the Law of Cause and Effect for one advanced far enough to be "enlightened," so that every thing that comes around after it goes around is all for the good.
Maybe?
I wonder if "freedom from the ongoing cycles of cause and effect" might be understood as being free from the suffering effects because one has become hip enough to continually make good causes.
I wonder if "freedom from the ongoing cycles of cause and effect" might be understood as being free from the suffering effects because one has become hip enough to continually make good causes.
Posted: Oct 20, 08 11:15am
Hi Krysteenah, great food for thought, I think karma can be considered an action and a result together!
Posted: Oct 20, 08 12:30pm
Some oriental people who work in the world of the energy belive-and makes sense to me-that karma, destiny and reincarnation are not individualistic concepts.
According to this point our energy (more than one body of energy) join the energy of other beings that have our same tone of vibration; so we dont reincarnate as individuals (John with all his personal history reincarnate in Tom). It would better be that the energy of John, plus the energy of other beings that have the same vibration than John, somehow join and created Tom.
This makes sense to me because as we know the energy is constantly in movement, the universe is always moving, so how could our energy stick together by itself without being mixed? Wouldnt it be like extending the concept of private property to other dimensions?
Posted: Oct 23, 08 11:33pm
Some oriental people who work in the world of the energy belive-and makes sense to me-that karma, destiny and reincarnation are not individualistic concepts.
According to this point our energy (more than one body of energy) join the energy of other beings that have our same tone of vibration; so we dont reincarnate as individuals (John with all his personal history reincarnate in Tom). It would better be that the energy of John, plus the energy of other beings that have the same vibration than John, somehow join and created Tom.
This makes sense to me because as we know the energy is constantly in movement, the universe is always moving, so how could our energy stick together by itself without being mixed? Wouldnt it be like extending the concept of private property to other dimensions?
Yes! Exactly!. I have been told ( By Geshe Michael Roach - Tibetan Buddhist monk) That we don't own individual karma ...It's our energy field that we manifest in positive or negative ways that is actually labeled as karma .
Posted: Nov 20, 08 9:22am
I'm commenting on the first concept, while pointing to the interrelatedness of all three.
The following is a comment I wrote to the "Word of the Day" site, from YourDictionary.com. If you want to take it all in, you can click on "discuss today's word," and scroll down to the 9/16/08 posting for "karma."
* * *
I'd like to add a perspective about karma from the Nichiren sect of Buddhism.
As I understand it, karma is best understood as resulting from not only this life, but from uncountable lives. Nichiren buddhism teaches that our existence had no beginning, as well as having no end. All we enjoy and all we suffer is a perfect reflection of the causes we've made right up to this moment, since the infinite past.
Karma has shaped our bodies and minds and directed us to the families we have and the communities we live in. Karma is responsible for every circumstances that surround us. Karma is all inclusive. Nothing we are or have or experience comes from any other source than karma.
The inviolable Law of Cause and Effect, Nichiren Buddhism says, rules over us with absolute justice. The ultimate Universal force is pure and completely impartial. There are no "decisions" or "judgments." The analogy of "action and reaction" may be weak, but it is accurate.
The "Word of the Day" definition uses the word "action" and Vikki used the word "deeds" in her discussion. I'd like to point out that that means not only what is done, but also what is said and what is thought. Every aspect of the dynamic process of living creates a cause, creates karma.
The "Word of the Day" said that it is extreme simplification to say that "...the consequences of good acts is happiness while the consequences of bad acts is misfortune and suffering." Extreme simplification notwithstanding, I believe that Nichiren would say "right on."
Another extreme simplification might be to say that to support the dignity of life is a cause for happiness and to go against the dignity of life...well, you can figure out the simple conclusion!
I want to offer these thoughts because I think a broad understanding of what this mystic word "karma" might "mean" can play an important part in realizing the reality in which we are enveloped. Indeed, if this concept of karma is true and people embraced it, it could make a revolutionary difference in our decisions about how we conduct our lives, and add an invaluable tool to forming that elusive condition of peace - individually and in the world.
Thank you for any consideration you give to this.
Posted: Nov 20, 08 9:42am
This sounds pretty much like how I understand it. I emphasize your phrase, "...separate from our understanding of good and evil."
I don't have much question about the existence of "good and evil," but I have a lot of questions about what we see to be "good" or "evil."
I think I would tweak your last sentence. As I understand it, the state of enlightenment is not an end point.
Even those whose life condition is mountain-high are not finished. There is always progress to be made. Our existence is eternal and so is the need for our further development.
I wonder if a being can have "no karma," as you say. That would seem to require exclusion from the Law of Cause and Effect. I wonder if a being can do that. I should think that there would be a harmony with the Law of Cause and Effect for one advanced far enough to be "enlightened," so that every thing that comes around after it goes around is all for the good.
Maybe?
Posted: Nov 20, 08 9:47am
I wonder if "freedom from the ongoing cycles of cause and effect" might be understood as being free from the suffering effects because one has become hip enough to continually make good causes.