do u believe in theory of karma? - Page 4

Should a person who's lost his memory be accounted for a deed he has done before the memory loss? Even though the "new person" emerging out of the person after the memory loss is, by all definition, innocent, and unaware of his past deeds (that got removed out due to his memory loss)? (Though, in this case, the person has the same body - even if he has forgotten his past deeds). So I think the Karmic philosophy goes like that - whatever action you commit, you face its consequences no matter what, and regardless of your body. Though, personally, the thought of a person getting the rewards and punishments for his actions in his "past life" makes very little sense to me. But then, I don't necessarily believe in a past life and a soul re-birthing in different bodies. When you get a new body, you have a new consciousness, new conscience, new thoughts, new memories, new sets of beliefs (and that's not taking into account the other hundreds and thousands of factors present), new actions and new way of leading the life - aren't you being a separate individual (even if you have the same soul - which sounds more like a metaphysical theory?)?

^i agree with the latter part of your post, but i think your analogy fails, although it presents an interesting moral dilemma.

Let's say a person raped someone, then had an accident, and the memory of this event got wiped off, but that still doesn't negate what he did, he still comitted the rape, how should he be punished is a different story.

however, a baby hasn't committed anything, this person is an entirely different personality altogether, and a new body.. why should he suffer the bad karma of another person?

Originally posted by: CunningLinguist

^i agree with the latter part of your post, but i think your analogy fails, although it presents an interesting moral dilemma.

Let's say a person raped someone, then had an accident, and the memory of this event got wiped off, but that still doesn't negate what he did, he still comitted the rape, how should he be punished is a different story.

however, a baby hasn't committed anything, this person is an entirely different personality altogether, and a new body.. why should he suffer the bad karma of another person?

This brings a lot more questions to my mind

So according to the 'theory of karma' what is karma tied to.

- the action (personally, I think cause effect ties to actions best)

or

- the doer of the action

If it is the doer then what is it tied to
- conscious mind
- subconscious mind
- whole mind
- soul (however it is defined)

What sort of awareness is necessarily for karma?

In the case of a rapist

If his memory is wiped clean and he becomes John Good Guy Doe, he still is a rapist BUT
If he dies without punishment and is reborn, his slate should be wiped clean (assuming rebirth exists)

So what is our rationale for wiping the slate clean - he has no conscious memory of his past life (but that is the case with John Doe as well), or something like rebirth wipes clean conscious and subconscious but even an amnesiac has subconscious memory? But do we know for sure that we have no subconscious recollection of previous lives (again assuming that rebirth exists)?

While the human justice system may have more tangible rules, the cosmic justice system still seems moot in this case. If karma does bad to either situation of the rapist, the person still has no conscious awareness of crime and is W*F am I being punished for - and what is the point of any justice system if the justice ends up appearing arbitrary and people have no clue what they are getting punished rewarded for.

PS: Your signature is incorrect.

well let's say the guy gets charged, he obviously has no recollection and claims innocence, but if the investigations produced evidence that he indeed raped, then what happens?.. if he is punished then at least he knows why he's being punished.. but when it comes to karma, we have no idea why we are being punished.

LOL, you're the only one to realised that so far.

Originally posted by: CunningLinguist

however, a baby hasn't committed anything, this person is an entirely different personality altogether, and a new body.. why should he suffer the bad karma of another person?

You will never be able to reconcile the"first" cause in this fashion (as in what might have caused the baby to be born with the birth defects), if you randomly pick a time frame and start viewing things selectively.

Though pretty much what I say falls on deaf ears around here, I will give it a try.

If you think about it, so far, we don't fully understand the cause preceding life either. Neither the cause preceding space-time for that matter.

The "first what" is where you would get stumped any direction you turn to and any issue that you pick up. Was the first one a chicken or an egg? Was the first one a plant or a seed? Was the first one a Nucleic acid or protein? Was the first one a thought or language? Was the first one was a particle or an anti-particle? During your investigation, you would find out that there is no "right" point to pause on the time scale.

Why can't we resolve the "first what"? Because, we look at time as being linear and no matter what Einstein says or what quantum physics says, it's in our psyche to look at time as past, present and future. So, the first second will always have a preceding second for us and the beginning will always have another beginning and thus we will get stuck in an infinite regress.

Your baby-with-the-birth-defects conundrum will be answered if you look at time as a non-linear entity or better yet, if you dispense away with time completely. But if you successfully unravel time, I suppose you would unravel space too and then "kahe ka baby, kahe ka defects!"

In the Gita it is mentioned that by dedicating our actions to the Lord and surrendering the fruits of karma to the Lord we remain free from karma and rebirth ( once the old karma is exhausted).
There is no karma incurred for innocent actions and also that of babies.
It makes me wonder how many Accountants are employed by God to keep track. 😆
The laws of karma are such that it applies to all based on their mindset and thoughts.
If we do harm with good intentions surely there should be no punishment and infact a reward; or it could a mix of both good n bad karma because some may benefit and some may suffer.

Originally posted by: CunningLinguist

well let's say the guy gets charged, he obviously has no recollection and claims innocence, but if the investigations produced evidence that he indeed raped, then what happens?.. if he is punished then at least he knows why he's being punished.. but when it comes to karma, we have no idea why we are being punished.

Thats a good point. In these circumstances a person at least has "proof" of action. In karma it appears arbitrary.

I think the question of karma and any other cosmic justice beliefs stem from the following conundrum. A person is a rapist. Lets make him pure evil, he is a serial rapist. But he is never caught. Lives a nice comfortable life. Dies peacefully in sleep. Is mourned by family and friends. Is that fair or right? Doesn't he deserve punishment? Should a heinous criminal go free and unpunished like this?

One solution to this is karma. A person always accumulates karma and will be punished rewarded in the next life if not this. But the question arises - does that mean that a baby is no longer innocent and carries baggage, deserving of its deformities whatever? What is the purpose of a justice system where there is no consciousness of justice?

Another solution is heaven and hell. Virtuous people prosper in heaven, a sinner will burn in hell. The problem is that this system is dichotomous. It has no room for anything in between (most people). Also what is the purpose of eternal reward or punishment into infinity? Is the victim suffering for infinity? My personal problem with this system is forgiveness of sin based on prayer or acceptance of a God or something and punishment of virtue for refusal to pray or accept a God. Actions appear stripped of true accountability.

For many people karma, heaven and hell and results of theistic perceptions. That presents an interesting cycle - Justice (rape is wrong and punished) exists because God (source of morality) exists . God (executioner of morality) exists because injustice (rapist who goes free) exists. Although there are non theistic views of karma as well.

Or else we could say that our perception of everything is a construct. We are conditioned to believe in right, wrong, good, bad, rewards and punishment. When you strip it down the essence is nothing. Whether the rapist is punished or rewarded, it all boils down to nothing at all.

That seems to say that morality does not exist and is a construct. Now that might be true in total Nihilism. However, even the atheist will state that ethics and morals do exist, and humans are still beings with a conscious mind and understanding of right and wrong. So what is the justice for a rapist who was never caught or punished in an atheistic perception of the universe? I don't know.

Personally, I don't know much either. I believe in a mish mash of many things really. I'm not an atheist, but I'm not theist either. I believe in the non theist perception of the force or the infinite. And I believe in karma merely as a cosmic cause effect system. But then I also often hope that in the cause effect scheme of things no wrong deed goes unpunished.

Originally posted by: CunningLinguist

LOL, you're the only one to realised that so far.

Surprising!! Clearly thats the symbol of the master debater. The symbol for Cunning Linguists is this. ({})

Assumption #1: There are 7 billion people living today. There were 300 million people back in 1 AD.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/01/seven-billion/kunzig-text
http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange2/current/lectures/human_pop/human_pop.html

Assumption #2: Each human has a soul. 1 soul maps to 1 human and 1 human alone

Assumption #3: A soul doesn't die. A human dies.

Fact #1: Human population increased over time. (Based on evidence presented in links in assumption #1)

Based on above, it is clear that between 1 AD and 2011 AD, souls always outnumbered people.

Also based on above, it is clear that souls will ALWAYS outnumber people, moving forward in time.

Amongst these, some souls need to be punished as soon as (or once they enter) human bodies. They are waiting in the wings to enter human bodies.

Scenario #1: Universe ends one day. Time ends. A failure for Karmic system as souls were left hanging till end of time.

Scenario #2: Universe doesn't end. Time never ends. There will always be souls more than people and there will always be a surplus of souls that need to be punished eternally speaking (unless no person ever sins for a number of generations, in a deterministic manner, which is an impossible scenario).

So it looks like Karmic system is doomed from the get go.

Modified assumption #2: A soul is pure and untouched by karma; but there are subtle energy fields called astral body and causal body that survives death of a physical body & carry impressions, grievances, attachments, memories ... developed during its several life times and are responsible for the unfolding of karma, which could be simply a dissipation of these energy field . Once these energy fields are worked off karma is balanced and we have only the pristine soul.

The assumption of 1:1 relationship between soul and human may not be required. The term soul has been used by some to describe individual entities and by others as a common soul or even the Source or life force.

Question arises: Can memory survive physical death and thereby affect future events?

Without memory surviving in some form subconscious or otherwise the whole concept of karma, re incarnation or even a final judgement day makes no sense whatsoever.

The soul is supposed to be the consciousness or the seer . How does one proove its existence? Can the seer be seen? Let us see what Mooji has to say has to say to this: