Reasoning behind Karma

[ban3rg]

Yeah, yeah, this is not a Philosophy forum. But to hell with labels.

Alright, so what do you guys think about the idea of correcting one's karma. If you do a bad deed, what is the proper way to rectify that unjust action? What is an ample reparation?

Our government thinks that if you do a bad deed, spending some time in jail, paying a fine, or doing some community work is a proportionate punishment and reparation of your action. But this isn't always sensible. If you steal a lot of money, and then go to jail for 60 years, that person is not really compensated. His money is still gone. Even if you pay him back, you haven't fully reversed the effects of your actions because you caused him frustration/panic/problems for that time during which his money was gone and in your pocket instead.

Or if you kill animals (microbial animals, mammals for their meat or leather, etc.) what is the proper punishment/deed that will rectify your wrongdoing? You cannot bring the animal back to life and turn back time. Should you "be nice" to a random animal (if you kill 1 cow you can raise and nurture another to make up for it), should you "be nice" to an offspring of that animal, or should you do something abstract "meditate, pray, ask for forgiveness, fast, etc."

Which is really helping to undo your evil deed? Which is really reversing your karma, as an example?

How do we balance an equation and have good karma? Are evil deeds/thoughts counterbalanced by good thoughts alone?(prayers, introspection, etc.) or are they counterbalanced by deeds (seva, donations to charity, etc.) Do actions really speak louder than words?

When you guys answer you can provide info on what a certain doctrine would say (quote a line from a relig. text or something) or just what your own opinion is.

Besides I don't expect anyone other than Summy to answer anyway...haha

 

[Jeeti]

Actions do speak louder than words...thats hardly a debate..the recitation of religious text means absolutely nothing unless you are able to understand the text and guide the life that you choose to lead according to that text. Religious scriptures offer spiritual guidance...It is my personal opinion that a bit too much emphasis in society today has been placd on the actual recitation of the scriptures rather than the understanding and following of their message.

On the notion of karma, inherently...as humans we are selfish. The idea of karma is wholly introspective...to ask someone to give their opinion on the correct way of settling a bad deed...you are going to get a completely unique set of answers. The example of someone stealing moneyy...the thief could just as easily have self-justification as to why the robbery was committed...therefore it does not matter what the government considers is a crime and its subsequent punishment because when it comes down to it...when has punishment ever truly been a way to fix one's moral compass?

I guess what I am trying to get across...is that regardless of the reparation dealt to those that are labeled as having committed a "bad deed"...no reparation can be labeled as sufficient unless and until theres a change in the "evildoers" introspection.

 

[ban3rg]

that's true. so then what in your opinion is an adequate reparation for stealing? if your karma is neutral, then you steal something and your karma takes on some negative value, what can you do to restore it back to 0? what is the proper reparation? repenting for your deed mentally?

obv. karma is not something to be scaled numerically, i'm just using the analogy of a number line to clarify my question.

 

[Summy]

Interesting question ARjun, and I hope discussions like this can continue in BTF. Discussion that shape you, and may influence you for decades.

How do we correct karma? Lets understand karma. Karma is much beyond our life today as we know it. We as soul's, as atma's, have karma for thousands of life's. The cycle of life in whatever religion, ends with salvation, with realization, which most easily obtainable in human life. So Arjun's question is how do we rid ourselves of our bad karam that we gain in our human lives. How do we correct our wrongs?

I think what Jeeti paaji hinted at, is something we as sikhs, or hindus, or buddists or jains feel, that realization is the first step. It is stated in the Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj Jee, that realization is the first step of salvation. The realization of what is right and what is wrong, and we use the gita, the guru granth sahib ji, the pali cannon, whatever have you, to assist our minds to realize what is wrong and right. If you have one who kills for meat, for the taste, and continue to kill and eat an innocent soul, equal to us, but if he/she doesn't realize when one is wrong, there is no desire to correct the bad karma. So the first step to reconcilation with that atma, or with your karma, is to realize the wrongfulness. This is something Jeeti said as well, you must understand our text, and thus understand when you have commited a wrongful act.


As far as how to repay a society for a bad deed, I think it is different than from your karma. As a member of a society, you steal from a person of the society, you should be taken away, as a harm to that society. You karmic duty is different. In dharmic philosophy, we believe that, lets say you kill a bread winner in a family, or you take away from a family, to pay back your karmic duty, you must repay that person in the way you have taken away. I remember this story back home of a man who mistakenly killed another farmer in a car accident. He took car of his stock, and his animals and donated all his money he made from that back to the family he took away from. Thats your karmic duty to whom you have taken away from.

Your karmic duty to your atma is different. I'll give you what I heard in lecture of a great lecturer in India. If you believe that each atma is the same, and there is a superior creator, meaning, there is one who over sees it all, how do you repair the damage? If I ate some meat, if took the life of an innocent animal, how do I repay myself to that animal (is what you posed Arjun). Well, the answer in our school of thought, is that your repay yourself to the creator. The creator of that animal, of that soul. So you do dhaan or repairment to that stole atma, and now that comes down to religious practice.

In sikhism is different that other religions. In sikhi, Guru Nanak Dev Ji says something that is similar to all dharmic religions, that God is the creator, the destroyer of Karma. But we must understand that this doesnt mean we dont have free will. It is the duality of Karma and free will that makes us have the ability to correct our bad karma. It is the actions of a man, that shapes his karma from now, and in lifetimes beyond. Guru Nanak Dev Ji says, "The record of my deeds cannot be effaced because God has recorded them."

You must appease yourself with the creator, the power you have taken away from. In all dharmic religions, there is a duality between your karmic, socitetal duty, and your duty to your atma. Your duty to the thing, or the person, or the object you have taken away from, is to do the best you can, to releave the hurt you have caused (in the example of the farmer I gave you). WHen thats not possible, you must appease the creator, the person who's child, who's creation has been taken away.

Each religion, each sect, each thought has a different way to repent for you bad karmic actions. But what is important to realize is that karma, doesnt end with death. It doesnt begin with birth. Karma is one cycle and one process. But it all starts will realization, then after realization, your karmic/societal duty to the entity that you have harmed, and your karmic duty to your atma, which is through the supreme. IT ALL starts with realization, as it is said by Guru nanak dev ji: A man doing wicked deeds continuously will turn into a bad character. This produces states of mind, like anxiety, fear and guilt, all of which will cause pain and suffering to the individual.

The first step to salvation, and correcting your karma is to realize what has gone wrong, and we have our own religious texts/ philosophies to help with that.


Good convo.

 

[ban3rg]

alrite very good!

 

[pluthra]

I don't see karma as anything religious, I seriously think however the idea did come about its great. I definetly think karma goes way beyond religion. It's like the golden rule- no it is the golden rule at work. The golden rule just lays out what to expect of people and karma executes it well.

Or if you kill animals (microbial animals, mammals for their meat or leather, etc.) what is the proper punishment/deed that will rectify your wrongdoing? You cannot bring the animal back to life and turn back time. Should you "be nice" to a random animal (if you kill 1 cow you can raise and nurture another to make up for it), should you "be nice" to an offspring of that animal, or should you do something abstract "meditate, pray, ask for forgiveness, fast, etc."

Which is really helping to undo your evil deed? Which is really reversing your karma, as an example?

How do we balance an equation and have good karma? Are evil deeds/thoughts counterbalanced by good thoughts alone?(prayers, introspection, etc.) or are they counterbalanced by deeds (seva, donations to charity, etc.) Do actions really speak louder than words?

hmmm, I dont think you can just expect your bad-doing to be easily corrected. One if you do something bad you have done it with a full purpose behind it. And if you do feel bad after you've done it-well good and I think that suffering it in your head and feeling like your a piece of shit is good enough. But, then there's people who never actually feel bad. That's when karma actually begins its game. But, seriously do you think bad deeds can just be easily cleaned off the slate by praying, doing seva, donating-----this is the fool's route and I'm sure no matter how much one does to get rid of a bad sin or w/e they still have that feeling w/in them that they've done something wrong.

Overall, I'd like to say I LOVE KARMA

 

[Jeeti]

The notion of karma is not religious? reallly?

The doing of good vs bad is a classically religious/spiritual experience...to call this notion of karma anything higher than that...is to say that the principles of the way one chooses to guide their life (religion)...is inferior to karma?..

Sorry Parul, I don't see it.

 

[Summy]

Yeah Parul, Karma is very religious, it is the essentiality of spiritual life. I think what you may be saying is that Karma can extend beyond religion? It is a good golden rule of every person?

But karma is defined in religion, introduced through religion, and is really only practical if there is a religious backing.

 

[ban3rg]

maybe she means karma embodies morality, and morality is not necessarily a religious thing. Atheists can have morals and can know what morality means, and they could/should? follow karma as well.

For example, karma is like, "You stole from that man. why are you paying him back?" "Oh, because I am Hindu and my religion mandates penance for my sins, and stealing was a sin, and payback will help to cleanse my soul."

vs. "Oh, I'm paying him back cuz it seemed like the right thing to do. Tit for tat..what goes around comes around. BTW I'm atheist. Later"

 

[pluthra]

i just meant that karma sure its often expressed in religions, but there its almost as if its another ideology in itself...like one can understand karma without learning of any religion...and also how many people have actually learned a religion before they claim to accept that religion (or hold on let me put it in this scenario)

1) do u learn a bunch of values first, like the golden rule, sharing, respect, etc and then say your parents begin taking you to a church, temple, gurdwara, mosque, etc do you associate yourself with that religion because you see that those around you (who you are mostly influenced by-parents/family) are of that religion...so thus it makes sense that yes i connect with this religion because it holds the values I've had my whole life

or

2) do you learn of the religion than learn the values, ideas, etc that religion respects and thus claim to be a part of that religion

 

[kinnell]

Three religious principles I hold close to my heart: Dharma, Karma and Kismet.

While Karma is a great principle, I hold Dharma to a higher standard as does the Mahabharata. Killing and doing harm isn't good but if it's your dharma, it is acceptable. There is a story about a butcher who is asked why he kills so many animals and sins so much (by killing animals) and he answers saying that it is his duty to do so and by doing so, he can feed his family.

What do you guys think? Is carrying out actions for your dharma justified? Will it give you "bad" karma or none at all? Or must you uphold dharma regardless of the bad karma it will give you.

 

[ban3rg]

Short answer: I don't know yet, I ponder it all the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative

Immanuel Kant has his categorical imperative which says (oversimplification, as usual haha) that there are certain maxims which must be followed in all possible cicrumstances. I guess this would be dharma, or duty above all else. For example Kant argues that it is ALWAYS moral to tell the truth, no matter the situation, or that theft is ALWAYS wrong, no matter the circumstances.

So he would even argue that if a murderer comes to your door and asks "Where is Bob, I want to kill him" then lying and saying "I don't know" is immoral because it is ALWAYS immoral to tell a lie.

Kant therefore argues that the ends do not justify the means. It doesn't matter if your lie saved Bob's life, you still lied and that's always immoral.

Dharma is not the same as categorical imperative but I think it would follow the same reasoning (duty to X (family or whatnot) trumps all other factors or something like that). I think sometimes the ends DO justify the means, like if asked, "Is it moral to kill one innocent person in order to save the lives of 100 innocent people" I would probably answer yes, though I would feel guilty for it forever and so would those 100 lucky people, probably.

 

[ban3rg]

The wiki on Dharma seems to suggest that in Hinduism,Buddhism, and Sikhism Dharma simply means "truth" or "teachings of the Buddha" or "the way" or "the righteous path."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma

For the paragraph under Sikhism>Scriptures and Dharma, I found it interesting to see a reference to Chitr and Gupt.

"Deeds are recorded: The persons thoughts and deeds are said to be recorded and the faithful is warned that these will be read out in the presence of the "Lord of Dharma". Two scribes called "Chitr and Gupt", the angels of the conscious and the subconscious mind are busy writing ones thought and deeds. On death the soul of the person he brought before "Lord of Dharma" are these account are read out as recoded in this quote: "Day and night are the two nurses, in whose lap all the world is at play. Good deeds and bad deeds - the record is read out in the Presence of the Lord of Dharma. According to their own actions, some are drawn closer, and some are driven farther away." (Guru Granth Sahib Japji page 8, Salok.)"

In Hinduism I have heard of a similar figure known as Chitragupta who (is one person) keeps an account of all your bad deeds and thoughts and, sort of formulaically calculates your karma at the end. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chitragupta