In daily life however we are often not very concerned with good or evil. We just want to have some fun, make a living, fall in love, have a happy relationship etc. When a relationship fails that's not evil, it's just sad. The doctrine of karma is therefore usually not explained using words like that. Instead it's more logical on focussing on simple cause and effect. If you break an elastic band: it's logical to get hurt by the snap of it breaking. The band isn't evil, breaking it isn't morally wrong - but the result is still pain.
Similarly: being kind, patient, hard working and learning leads to good results. That is: it's good karma.
Being unkind, agressive and lazy leads to bad results: bad karma.
This may not be visible right away. After all - some selfish people are successful for a while. They may even die successful. But that merely means the bad results are postponed, according to the law of karma, till a next life.
Have a good day..
this is a good topic Sir Malic.....![]()
the energy put forth in thoughts and desires will sooner or later produce definite results. no human being can escape the consequences of his acts, however slight, however thoughtless. sometimes the cause works out in immediate results. in more complex circumstances, a considerable time may intervene. death does not settle the score any more than moving to a new town pays debts incurred at one's former residence.
this law of cause and effect is called Karma.
and when death does not settle the score, that's where reincarnation comes in. so that the debt may be paid in the next lifetime.
OT: herr L., i like your avatar. what is that?
I think it's highly unlikely bro that the Church Fathers taught reincarnation. If they did, the Catholic Church and classical Christianity would also be teaching it today, because the Fathers are considered the first teachers of Christianity.
If you think about it, the doctrine of reincarnation goes against the very fundamental teaching of the Church, which is that we are all saved through Christ's redemptive suffering and death on the cross. Reincarnation does away with a savior because the idea is that one can be saved primarily through one's efforts, right?
But won't a Hindu jeopardize his own karma by helping others?Sir flying fish already gave the belief structure of the two schools. But I wanted to add something. The only way for the Soul born in the lower plane of existence to acquire liberation and reincarnate in the human form is by the mercy of the Saints, Siddhas,and Bodhisattva. Well, thats according to a certain sect, Vaisnava school.
If one understands the law of Karma, he will be more than willing to help anyone in need. I don't think hindus think that way.
it's unlikely but it did happen. some early church fathers did teach the doctrine of reincarnation. but they were branded as heretics.
as for the Hindu, it may jeopardize his own karma. or not.
I think someone in this thread posted a link to this website wherein the author refuted the idea that the Church Fathers believed in reincarnation. But from the face of it, it's really improbable that the Fathers taught reincarnation because they are, after all, the first teachers and theologians of Christianity. They can't believe in Christ and hold to the doctrine of reincarnation.
So isn't that a contradiction? To merit "good karma" one must do good deeds, for example by helping someone who is suffering. But that is interfering with the law of "bad karma" operating on the person who is suffering, for presumably that person is in pain because of the bad deeds he or she has done in a "previous life."
Similar Threads |
|