Quote:
Originally Posted by Scion
first, I feel that anyone quoting sciptures and talking about god is befooled by fake organized religion, so id advise thinking with your own brain. I wont even get into the dirty origins of organized religion, basically theyre organs of the state (kingdoms empires etc) and closely akin to military, and awash with the lowest ilk of humanity. Just the fact.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scion
Having good karmic intention means taking the time to learn understand develop and evolve the ways of good karma and find the truly enlightened spiritual practices. This is the territory of the true seeker of wisdom and the spiritual scholar, not someone attached to any religious dogma or without a broad range of knowledge and experience with those of the highest spiritual cultures.
|
broad range of knowledge. . . this is sounding a lot like an organizing principle behind your beliefs. all the highest spiritual cultures are dogmatic, in fact you might say dogma has been hardwired into human social systems since the beginning. and how do you determine the "highest" spiritual culture, anyhow? every culture throughout the whole world has thought it's the "highest." sorry man i don't follow this reasoning. it's too particular and exclusive for my tastes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scion
Good karma means not causing offense harm or suffering to any living entities, as much as possible. if you can get to where scratching your arm-as someone said before--is the worst karma you do, thats pretty good. Good karma is the way of kindness, restraint, austerity, cessation, consideration, and carefulness. Cars are quite bad karma, a lot of what is norm in the modern world is bad karma. One must be aware of all ones actions in the sensitive living universe...and life is everywhere all around os. It is a way of walking, moving, and behaving with gentleness.
|
what constitutes harm? i shy away from the concept because it opens up a can of worms. it could be said that the very basis of every being's biology is to cause "harm" to another being in order to continue its own metabolic processes. even those beings which photosynthesize or otherwise produce their own sustenance internally still must harm other beings in the fight to survive. with "harm" being such a mainstay of existence in this realm, i don't see the value in using it to determine behavior.
this is why i keep saying karma misses the mark. it yields a perception which is misaligned -- irreconcilably imo -- with experiential reality. your karma stacks the deck against you. like catholics who say homosexuality is "ok" but homosexual acts are not, a sense of karma tells you that you're alright with your body fighting off a cold before you even have to sneeze but fumigating your house to get rid of nasty bugs is an atrocity. and if it's not saying that i smell a shallow attempt to have one's cake and eat it too.
instead, i think we could do well to recognize how very deeply intertwined all elements of our lives are with the lives and work of other beings. this includes where we get our food from, plant or animal, for we take as much from wheat as we do from a sheep. i therefor judge not the act of taking, which is necessary, but rather how we treat or execute that taking: whether it is with appreciation or neglect. and that's the crux of the issue to me. the more we live in a state of appreciation, the less we allow ourselves to be affected karmically. i think we can enter that state so absolutely that our karma is rendered null and void. and in a way, you might even say that's the purpose of karma. . . teaching/reminding us to appreciate
