Intention
Topic: temptation and karma - Sundar Naga Started 11 years, 5 months ago
 |
Posted 11 years ago
|
Hi Sundar, I will attempt to answer your question with my limited understanding. I am aware that this question is extremely complicated and likely has different layers to it. To keep it as simple as possible lets start with the concept that energy can neither be created or destroyed it is only transformed. Hence every thought-if you consider it to be energy which I do will have to have an effect. So do all thoughts have the same effect? Do all actions have the same effect? Do all intentions have the same effect? What influences an effect-which I call karma (consequence to an action in the past) For example I cook dinner. Will it be the same if I cook dinner with peaceful loving intentions versus stressful angry emotions. I have done this in the past when my awareness was identified with emotions completely it doesnt work out exactly the same. Hence for this action-the possible results vary depending on my awareness at the moment, my thoughts, my emotions and my consequent actions. I am convinced that all thoughts have consequences. The consequences will vary depending on how identified your awareness is with thought/emotion/action. For example in the above example with my colleague if I have negative thoughts but I am aware of them and I dont act on them the effect has not spilled into others lives. Let say I am not identified with these thoughts even though they exist (lets say residual energy from the past- I had thought these thoughts in the past)I respond to him not react. For example he says something judgemental-instead of reacting and saying something inappropriate I maintain my peace and say what would be appropriate at that time. I have completely changed this interaction. The energy of the interaction is completely different and consequence is completely different. There are also other layers to the same interaction. What if my colleague is unusually good mood and he is not judgemental. Or what if another colleague walks in at that moment. Now you have different energy in that mix. What if something bad has happened that day in the world-it would change every bodys mood. With the Connecticut tragedy I saw people at work including myself sad/depressed for an entire week. What if me or my colleague was physically sick that day. So many permutations and combinations with different results. Let say I dont want to create any consequences. I stay home and do nothing-there is a certain vibration and still a consequence. Similiarly I sit and meditate with peaceful loving intentions at home. I am still creating. What if I am unconcious- i think I am still creating-my physcial condition has effected the people around me. If you exist you create. There is no getting out of it. We can take this concept a little furthur plants, animals, babies,kids and even inanimate surroundings are creating. We get a different feeling and vibration when we look at the ocean versus desert. If you exist you create. If you are aware as Gary said you create conciously and can choose the consequences. Does that mean overnight i am creating out of love? No absolutely not. The universe is more compplicated than that. Have I applied these concepts in daily life? Can I feel this as I go? As I go deeper i believe i can create more lovingly. More and more layers to it. Am I creating at the same level as someone who has applied these concepts for the last 10 years. Most likely not. Regardless of where we are in this journey-we are responsible for the consequences big and small. We are creating conciously or unconciously with karmic effects. Yes this is the book -The Untethered Soul: The Journey Beyond Yourself by Michael A Singer. Peace and love Radhika |
 |
Posted 11 years ago
|
Hi Radhika, Again, thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it. It appears to me that there are two important things that we need to consider here, as I have numbered them below. Please note that in the first one I have two subdivisions. (1) (a) You mentioned: “Energy can be neither created nor destroyed, it is only transformed. Hence every thought – if you consider it to be energy, which I do – will have to have an effect.” Agreed. And, Gary seems to consider this effect to be the physical sensations on the person entertaining the thought. If it is a positive thought based in love, the effect is a joyful sensation. If it is a negative thought based in fear, the effect is a painful sensation. (b) Next, a given person might or might not choose to act on a given thought. In case he or she chooses to act on the thought, then a positive thought results in positive (loving) words or action, and a negative thought results in negative (hurtful) words or action. These words/action in turn also have an effect. The positive words / action have a positive effect. The negative words/action have a negative effect. The nature of the effect here, as opposed to the one in (1)(a), is a “lesson-learning” effect [due to ignorance of any other technical term that might be already in use, I have coined this term for purposes of our discussion, in order to distinguish this effect from the one indicated in (1)(a)]. Although (1)(a) and (1)(b) refer to two different kinds of effect, there is no dispute so far, I think, with respect to the fact that there is indeed an effect. Let me now refer to the second important thing that points to the prevalent differences of opinion. (2) You also mentioned that you call an effect as karma (“an effect – which I call karma”). The question now is: Do you call both of the above two kinds of effects as karma? In other words, do you call the physical-sensation effect accompanying thoughts, which I refer to in (1)(a) above, as well as the lesson-learning effect accompanying words/actions, which I refer to in (1)(b) above, as karma? What Gary says in response to a question raised by a participant in the current Authentic Power course is: “But the thing to remember is that thinking a negative thought does not create karma. Acting on a negative thought does.” In other words, according to Gary, the physical-sensation effect referred to in (1)(a) is not karma, but the lesson-learning effect referred to in (1)(b) is karma. So, the simple, ultimate question is: Do you agree or disagree with Gary in this particular case? Hope the above is helpful. Eager to hear your response to that last question. With loving intentions, PS |
|
|
Posted 11 years ago
|
Hi Sundar, I think the answer to this question in the end is a matter of semantics. It depends how each of us define karma. For me karma is a consequence-hence everything has a consequence small or big,visible or invisible. I am pretty sure each of us will have our own interpretation of this including Gary. Peace and Love Radhika |
|
|
Posted 11 years ago
|
Hi Radhika, Really wonderful indeed. I do appreciate your direct answer. I understand your stand on this. This brings about a natural closure to this discussion between you and me. I totally agree with you that it is purely a matter of semantics. As you say, it simply depends on how one defines karma. That is why in an earlier post in this thread, I quoted Gary’s definition of karma from his chapter on Karma in the Seat of the Soul. On p. 40, after discussing Newton’s third law of motion, Gary writes: “The Golden Rule is a behavioral guide that is based upon the dynamic of karma. A personalized statement of karma would be, ‘You receive from the world what you give to the world’.” Thus, Gary’s definition of karma is: ‘You receive from the world what you give to the world.’ In other words, I think, according to Gary, if a person does not allow a negative thought inside oneself to be spilled out on others in the world in the form of words/actions, then there is no karma involved for that person. That is why, in my opinion, Gary says: “But the thing to remember is that thinking a negative thought does not create karma. Acting on a negative thought does.” I feel that it might be a very useful exercise to discuss Gary’s definition of karma of the East or the Golden Rule of the West itself: ‘You receive from the world what you give to the world.’ Therefore, I like to invite the spiritual partners active on this forum to express their thoughts regarding this definition and the corresponding implications. To this end, I like to start a new thread, ‘definition of karma’. I hope many spiritual partners will freely contribute their thoughts and make it a lively discussion that will make every one of us think further and benefit each one of us. With loving intentions, |
 |
Posted 11 years ago
|
Hi Sundar, As I understand it, thoughts comne and go. I cannot stop my thinking mind from doing what it does. But if I indulge a negative thought/fp, thats when I create negartive consequences for myself. By scanning my body and noticing what I’m feeling in my energy centers, I know whether I have an active fp or lp depending on what my body is telling me, beyond my rational mind. My mind is not always the best detector of fp’s, as my fp can use it to make me feel justified or righteous. My feelings in my energy centers are not manipulated, they accompany my thoughts. And by checking in with what sensations are occuring, I know if it’s a fp or lp. I look at the intention of what’s happening, and then consciously make the choice to act/indulge or not. That’s when I put into the world what will be given back to me…karma. Namaste, Pam |
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.