Help
Sign In
bad
July 2009 
What do you believe about karma?
Posted on Dec 3rd, 2008
by 
boogie
boogie
This is in Response to the Questions and Reflections for December 03, 2008:
i do not believe in good versus evil.
i do not believe that good exists, other than as a
subjective judgment i make about certain things.
when i perceive something as hurtful to me or anyone else,
i may call it bad. but that doesn't mean that bad (or good)
is an objective quality in any of those things.
"Do you believe in karma? Does goodness beget more goodness? Or do terrible things sometimes befall innocent people?"
i do believe that every decision we make
has the potential to change our lives, our world,
and everything in it.
i do believe that it is our choice,
not fate, not destiny,
that determines what happens next.
it has been my personal experience
that when others decide for me
is when i have perceived myself as being hurt.
or rather, i perceive myself to be suffering.
yes, i make mistakes. we all do.
but to not decide when the choice is mine to make
is the worst of all mistakes i have ever made.
i do not believe that good exists, other than as a
subjective judgment i make about certain things.
when i perceive something as hurtful to me or anyone else,
i may call it bad. but that doesn't mean that bad (or good)
is an objective quality in any of those things.
"Do you believe in karma? Does goodness beget more goodness? Or do terrible things sometimes befall innocent people?"
i do believe that every decision we make
has the potential to change our lives, our world,
and everything in it.
i do believe that it is our choice,
not fate, not destiny,
that determines what happens next.
it has been my personal experience
that when others decide for me
is when i have perceived myself as being hurt.
or rather, i perceive myself to be suffering.
yes, i make mistakes. we all do.
but to not decide when the choice is mine to make
is the worst of all mistakes i have ever made.
Access: Public
the notion of universal truth negates free will. this i have big problems with. the new-age hive mind, where everyone agrees and shares the same ultimite Truth with a capital T, means there are no more decisions to be made, if we were to evolve into this “higher consciousness” [sic] … well, that would mean we would have Absolutely no freedom at all.
the hive, the herd, the groupthink as it were, would have us believe that the only way to acheive peace is to assimilate everyone into One Group, one hive, one herd, all praying to the same One God. would have us believe that “equality” means we are all the same.
it won't work that way. it won't work because it is based entirely upon control. the Plan is inherently flawed. if we beleived that we are all equal, that would mean it's okay to be different. if it were okay to be different, there would be no more belief in the lie that there is strength in numbers and that we must join together in groups to be heard. if there were no more groups, there would be nothing to support the heirarchy that our entire society is based upon. without the pyramid of power, control deteriorates and everyone is set free. or would be, if we weren't so afraid to question the program.
Well said, good and evil are subjective points of view. The spider is not evil for killing and eating the fly, it is simply following its nature. People kill other people for many reasons. Sometimes their intent is “pure”, one of necessity, like saving your family from being raped and pillaged by a barbarian horde. Sometimes their intent is monstrous, and they're like Hannibal Lecter. Both the protector and Hannibal Lecter are following their nature. There is not some cookie cutter way of defining what the proper nature of a human being is. If Hannibal comes to kill me, then I'll kill him if I can and not feel very much about it one way or another. If Hannibal kills me, he'll probably mess his mental shorts from excitement and eat my liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti. To each his own…
Objectivity is a mutual agreement that things are such and so, and is the necessary background for collective activity, but it is really an organizational tool of society. Objectivity is not absolute universal truth, absolutely not…lol… Individuality is subjective, and forcing it to be subordinate to the collective hive mind is an attack on people's freedom to be sovereign individuals. It is like the Borg from Star Trek, everyone must be assimilated into the collective, the hive, the State, the religion, the ideal, the grand destiny, the promised land, utopia, whatever… Of course, I don't promote individuality at the cost of the life and liberty of other individuals, the total anarchy of might is right and whoever has the biggest stick rules. No. What I'm saying is that an intelligent society is one that organizes itself in a way that achieves a voluntary cooperation and understanding of individuals without centralizing the entire system and forcing everyone to act and think in a way that is dictated to the collective by those who among the “equal” are a bit more equal than all the others, the ones that determine what will become of your life and light.
This way is intelligent because voluntary cooperation is almost always fruitful and productive, and leads to freedom and prosperity for the individuals who invest their time/energy into such a system. On the other hand, forcing and manipulating people to organize around some centralized ideal and confiscate their time/energy (slavery) always leads to the decay of individuals, and of humanity in general as it is made up of individuals. The small minority thhat might benefit from the exploitation of their fellow beings is building a house on mud, since we all interdependent on one another and our environment. In fact, we are an organism/environment, each individual is actually the entire universe channeled through his/her being.
The “evil” of an unbalanced perception, of leaning too heavily on the objective side of the scale, is that it attempts to control individual subjectivity and force a static and deterministic pattern of thought onto individuals in order to undermine their choice, their free will which grows from the eternal now and is free from the manipulation of history or the idealistic projections of utopia… To be balanced between subjectivity and objectivity and live in the eternal now is to follow the example of the universe and be intelligent…
i love what you have written here, Lucid!
ooooh, you edited!! coool… i'll edit this here comment too
grin
…lol… Sorry… I do that a lot, I type away like crazy and then right after I finish and click on Add Comment I realize that I forgot to say something important ; )
yeah, me too! :-)
Great thread! It appears at the bottom of right vs. wrong is the fact that as individuals we are always right. No one has or ever will do anything wrong. The concept of right and wrong is societal breeding, amplified by body societies where it is really important to be right. After all, being wrong can mean you are dead!
I was trying to weave a similar response in my post but it didn't work. Essentially my view is that energy begets energy. Actions are energy; thoughts, words, deeds, they are all forms of energy that travel through the web of wyrd and return to us.
The vibration of the energy determines how and what comes back to us. IMO.
Soul sister, you are (yoda speak)
Ahh Boogie, always leading with what you don't believe, you crack me up! I could not agree more about the notion of good and evil being subjective. I personaly believe in both ultimate free will and predetermined destany. I can see where the two concepts appear to negate one another in a linear thought process, but that is the problem with linear thinking. The concept of universal truth does not negate free will. The understanding of universal truth is a group mentality in which each individual chooses to playing their own unique part. Each individual must choose to follow their own path, only then can the group be of one mind. Finding universal truth is not like a herd going in the same direction, it is more like a herd going in all directions at once and at the same time staying togather. To say that we are completely independent of each other is just as flawed as saying we are completely dependent on each other. As always the truth is some where inbetween and depends on you point of view.
Much Love Boggie, I always enjoy reading your writing!
Tad
well, we'll just have to agree to disagree
giggle
Wouldn't have it any other way!
TeeHee
Sometimes people do things they are deluding themselves about:
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/110495
Interesting website you posted about Tavistock - “the degradation of the churches into forums for revolution, the
subversion of the universities into CIA cesspools of drug addiction” – I can tell you, I definitely saw how the CIA was turning the University of California into a cesspool of drug addiction. I lost several friends to it, who were brilliant, subversive, and who questioned the junk that we’re being fed. They got drawn into drug addiction as what they perceived as a rebellion, when in fact they were actually feeding right into the system as ultimate consumers – their whole lives revolved around obtaining drugs – and lost their minds, and often their lives, to it. I always knew, instinctively, that heroin, cocaine, etc. were brought in by the CIA and targeted the more radical students. I don’t know why more didn’t see this, it seemed so obvious to me.