All Considering » Karma and Reincarnation

Karma in the Bhagavad Gita

Katinka - Spirituality — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 13:26:51 +0000

Vijay Kumar commented on my post about karma and free will with the remark that the Bhagavad Gita has something to say about the topic. He stresses the freedom of the Soul, or Atma, and it’s joy in finding itself in life, doing something.

He has a point, but how does that relate to freedom of action here and now? Let’s start at the beginning:

The central theme in the Bhagavad Gita’s is Arjuna’s struggle: should he abstain from violence, or should he fight with his brothers for the rightful rule?

The armies are all set up to fight each other, facing each other, but Arjuna lays down his weapons and has his charioteer (Krishna) draw the chariot between the two armies. Arjuna looks at both sides and wonders: why should I kill my nephews (his enemies)? Why should I fight?

This is an eternal question, and probably the reason the Bhagavad Gita has remained so popular throughout history. After all – the question is easily transplanted into our own time. Should the US fight for peace in Afghanistan? Should one interfere in a quarrel? Should one fight for what one believes in, or let it go? Both sides of the question have a point: it’s not clear whether fighting for what’s right always has a good effect. Perhaps the fighting itself does more harm than the original wrong (or what you thought was wrong) might have done.

In ordinary life, it’s often wise to pick your battles. However, as the Bhagavad Gita makes clear, it’s not always best to avoid battle altogether.

Krishna convinces Arjuna to ACT, to FIGHT. Krishna does that by showing Arjuna a few basic Hindu truths:

Krishna, the Divine, is in everything and everyone. Arjuna is overwhelmed by this vision of the Divine.
The souls of the people who will be killed won’t be hurt by being killed.
Arjuna should act according to his nature, and his nature is to fight.
He should fight though as best as he can, but WITHOUT being attached to the result.

So how does that relate to karma? Karma literally means action. It is Arjuna’s nature to fight, so he will fight. But it’s also clear it’s his choice to either go along with his inner nature, or to withdraw from the world altogether. Mascaro translates Karma with ‘work’. Here are some quotes about how to work:

The man who in his work finds silence, and who sees that silence is work, this man in truth sees the Light and in all his works finds peace (p. 24; chapter 4: 18)

Offer all thy works to God, throw off selfish bonds, and do thy work. No sin can then stain thee, even as waters do not stain the leaf of the lotus. (p. 28; chapter 5: 10)

This man of harmony surrenders the rewards of his work and thus attains final peace: the man of disharmony, urged by desire, is attached to his reward and remains in bondage (p. 28; chapter 5: 12)

The Lord of the world is beyond the works of the world and their working, and beyond the results of these works; but the work of Nature rolls on. (p. 28, chapter 5: 14)

This implicit freedom is also present in the attitude towards death and release that the Gita teaches. God Krishna says to Arjuna (Bhagavad Gita 8:5)

And he who at the end of his time leaves his body thinking of me, he in truth comes to my being: he in truth comes unto me.

In the introduction to the Penguin translation of the Bhagavad Gita, Juan Mascaro says the following about karma (or action) in that work:

All life is action, but every little finite action should be a surrender to the Infinite, even as breathing in seems to be receiving of the gift of life, and the breathing out a surrender into the infinite Life. Every little work in life, however humble, can become an act of creation and therefore a means of salvation, because in all true creation we reconcile the finite with the Infinite, hence the joy of creation.

In that light freedom is not such a big deal – duty however is: right action in the right loving attitude of devotion to the Divine. Perhaps free will and lack of it are joined as breathing in and breathing out are: with the one hand we give, with the other we take of life.

And then again, perhaps this question is so difficult only a poetic answer can really catch the paradox of it.

Free will, karma and reincarnation

Katinka - Spirituality — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 13:30:46 +0000

It’s an often asked question: how much free will do we have, if karma rules our lives?

I usually answer: Karma rules our circumstances, our potential, our habits. Karma does not rule what we do with all that today. What we do today: thoughts, emotions, insights, words and deeds creates new karma.

Let’s back up a bit. I said ‘karma rules our circumstances, our potential, our habits‘.

Usually when people talk about karma, they talk about circumstance. It was my karma to be born poor (or rich). It was my karma to have freckles. It was his karma to be beaten as a child. etc.

What is less often focused on is talent and habits. These are called ‘skandhas’ in Buddhism – or at least some of the skandhas rule talent and habits. In other words: what we learned in past lives, what we focused on, what we dreamed of, what we trained at. All that affects what our talents and habits are in this life. Of course a major part of our habits now has to do with what we do in THIS life. Whether we practiced something for hours or gave up after 15 minutes, influences how well we know how to do something.

As I said: Karma does not rule what we do with all that today. What we do today: thoughts, emotions, insights, words and deeds creates new karma.

How we respond to our circumstances now, deal with our talents now, apply our gifts, share of ourselves – that is also karma. Whether we help that kid that gets beaten up by his dad. Whether we use our options to alleviate a bit of the sorrow in this world. That’s our freedom: how we respond to what life throws our way. And more actively: what atmosphere we help create in our day to day lives.

The karma of disease and health

Katinka - Spirituality — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 13:31:27 +0000

The relationship between karma and disease is a controversial one. There is the common sense view that since disease is unwelcome, it ‘must be’ bad karma. On the other hand there is a long tradition of theosophical thought saying that bad karma doesn’t exist. I was reading up on a related topic this summer and found Geoffrey Hodson saying that disease is an expression of inner conflict. In the introduction to the same booklet Oscar Kollerstrom was less nuanced. He went ahead and concluded that illness is an expression of disharmony. Nature does not mean us to be ill and spiritual growth and physical health go hand in hand.

It’s a bit disconcerting to read all that when the first theosophical teacher of note, in fact one whose fame has only been surpassed by Jiddu Krishnamurti, H.P. Blavatsky, was ill most of her productive life. She wrote all of her books while suffering from some disease or other. In fact, she faced death several times in that period in her life. It’s therefore not surprising to find her writing in her Esoteric Instructions that:

Rude physical health is a drawback to seership. (…) It is an excess of prana [life energy] setting up powerful molecular vibrations, and so drowning the atomic. [Atomic is here used for the spiritual in us. In ordinary theosophical terminology it is atma]

While I’m at it, it’s well known that Jiddu Krishnamurti too suffered from life long health problems. The cancer he succumbed to at the age of 90 had been in his system for quite a few years. He only became convinced of his readiness to be a spiritual teacher (though he would never put it in those words) when ‘the proces’ made him ill and gave him spiritual experiences at the same time.

So how does this square with the old idea that physical health is necessary for spiritual growth? It is after all an old idea. People were only allowed to become Buddhist monks when they had an excellent health. I tend to think that this has something to do with changes in life span for people, including sick people. For the last two centuries or so, people with health problems have managed to survive fairly long. Health care has after all improved considerably, even if universal access is still a pipe dream for most of humanity (including US citizens).

But Geoffrey Hodson does have a point, doesn’t he? Inner conflict does bring on ill health. Whether we call it psychosomatic or otherwise, it’s still an experiential fact. Where I disagree is I guess in how this inner conflict relates to real spiritual growth. While everybody would like to have inner peace and lack of conflict, the fact of life is that it exists. Balancing that out may take a life time and the very attempt is an example of spiritual growth in my book.

So, what does karma have to do with all this?

According to theosophy and Buddhism there are really two kinds of people. Ordinary people and people on the path towards enlightenment. Ordinary people will just keep on creating new karma and any good they experience is likely to be temporary because they are likely to spoil it with bad actions in a next life. This keeps the cycle of reincarnation going and the mixed bag of good and bad in both their present and past lives makes for a very complicated karmic story.

People on the path (stream enterers in Buddhist terminology) towards enlightenment however have come to a fundamental realisation about the nature of reality and the uselessness of fighting only for your own good. This realisation has been combined with the Bodhisattva Vow: the vow to benefit all sentient beings and help them realize the same truths. For them, so theosophical tradition has it, there are only seven lives on earth left. In those seven lives all the karma they have gathered in their previous lives has to be worked out.

This makes for rather difficult lives in general. Disease, money problems and inner conflict: all the mistakes made in previous lives have to be faced in their essence and conquered. Inner conflict is rather to be expected in such people, because to become wise one has to face up to all that is not wise in oneself. How else can wisdom be combined with compassion for all that lives?

It would of course be nice and neat if health and good karma went hand in hand. That would mean after all that we could look at the state of a person’s health and determine their spiritual worth. It’s always nice to be able to label people. But nice and wise are two very different things. It’s never by observing a person superficially that the inner truth about their nature can become clear.

Source for Geoffrey Hodson and Oscar Kollerstrom

I found their opinions in an undated Dutch theosophical booklet called ‘Een occulte beschouwing van gezondheid en ziekte’ published in Amsterdam by Gnosis publishing. It is probably a translation into Dutch of some booklet in English.

A question about (Group) karma: below average intellect?

Katinka - Spirituality — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:02:26 +0000

I hope you can throw light on the following matter in connection with the karmic effects.

A relative has been born with a below-average intellect; he takes time to respond to questions or join in on social conversations. He also has a very poor memory, cannot recall events, forgets what he went to another room for, etc.

What could be the possible causes set in previous lives which have brought on these effects in the present incarnation? What is the message the Law is sending, so that he can learn and avoid sowing such causes.

I think this question is very typical of our time: what did he personally do to deserve his fate? But is his fate really all that bad? What about the fate of those around him?

For him personally there is really not that big a deal, is there? Whatever the causes that got him where he is – since he is capable of so little, it is clear that for him the way to prevent this in future is pretty simple: just live as best he can. Not lie, not be aggressive, be giving, be understanding and learning that which he CAN learn.

The Law can never ask more of us than we can give. Just like it is harder to be the best you can be when you are rich (so much temptation to be greedy), it is a lot harder to take full responsibility when you have a lot of capacity.

I can’t tell you what caused this. It could be he was bad to other unintelligent people in a past life and needs to learn from the experience of being like them. There could simply be some physical cause preventing his higher capacities to come out, and this means he will have to postpone that to a future life. Perhaps his is a case of deserving a life of being taken care of, having given more than his share in previous lives and not being ready for more taking on a large responsibility in this one.

Take your pick.

Anyhow, the past is the past. The present is more important: It is the responsibility to those around him to make sure he lives the best life he can: doing what he can do himself and being helped to the extent that he needs it.

The law is sending all of you a message, not just him. It’s a message of Love – consciousness comes in all kinds of forms, and we have to respect that.

Good karma and money

Katinka - Spirituality — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:44:47 +0000

I guess I can’t get away from the topic of karma. In my post on karma and right action I wrote that

The doctrine of karma is in Biblical words ‘as you sow, so you will reap’. Contrary to what many people suggest it is a long term doctrine. It means in simple terms that if you want to have lives upon lives of living well off – be nice, generous, good and honest consistently throughout your lives.

That was admittedly simplified to the extreme. And my words were not as clear as they might have been, which perhaps explains the angry e-mail I got in response to that. ‘living well off’ means, in my opinion, simply having all you need. Could be a limitation of my English. Anyhow, to illustrate I’d like to go back to what one of theosophy’s less well known classic authors, W.Q. Judge had to say about the relationship between poverty and karma.

The old definition of what is good and what bad Karma is the best. That is: “Good Karma is that which is pleasing to Ishwara, and bad that which is displeasing to Ishwara.” There is here but very little room for dispute as to poverty or wealth; for the test and measure are not according to our present evanescent human tastes and desires, but are removed to the judgment of the immortal self–Ishwara. The self may not wish for the pleasures of wealth, but seeing the necessity for discipline decides to assume life among mortals in that low station where endurance, patience, and strength may be acquired by experience. There is no other way to implant in the character the lessons of life.

It may then be asked if all poverty and low condition are good Karma? This we can answer, under the rule laid down, in the negative. Some such lives, indeed many of them, are bad Karma, displeasing to the immortal self imprisoned in the body, because they are not by deliberate choice, but the result of causes blindly set in motion in previous lives, sure to result in planting within the person the seeds of wickedness that must later be uprooted with painful effort. Under this canon, then, we would say that the masses of poor people who are not bad in nature are enduring oftener than not good Karma, because it is in the line of experience Ishwara has chosen, and that only those poor people who are wicked can be said to be suffering bad Karma, because they are doing and making that which is displeasing to the immortal self within.

Ishwara (or Ishvara) is the word used to describe the higher self – or that in us which learns.

W.Q. Judge makes two valid points:

We can’t see from the outside whether something that happens to someone is good karma or bad karma.
A good person will learn what needs to be learned and do what needs to be done in any circumstance. In that sense all they go through is good karma. A bad person vice versa.

Judge was very good at simply explaining things. In light of current day psychological insight however I think it is necessary to stress that most of us are neither 100% sinner nor are we 100% saint. We are somewhere in between. To the extent that we meet life’s challenges without lowering our moral standard, it was clearly duty we were ready for – a lesson we were ready to learn perhaps. But when we meet challenges we aren’t ready for, ones we meet with anger, frustration, disappointment perhaps – without learning the lessons we were meant to learn – that is bad karma. Because as long as we don’t learn those lessons, similar circumstances will keep returning to us…

Money is of course a very relative thing. We live, in the West with an amount of wealth that is honestly shaming to see. More worrying perhaps is that they have become necessary for us. For instance: I can’t do my job without a computer. Without an internet connection.

Yet millions live in poverty, don’t have a roof over their head, don’t have a place to stay that is peaceful, don’t have clear drinking water etc. The evils of this world are too many to enumerate here. But the point is this: the doctrine of karma makes it clear that this is karmic in cause.

However, even in such awful circumstances there are those that learn the art of self-sacrifice. There are those who turn into thieves. There are those who flee. There are those that fight. All such choices have their own karmic consequences. The main insight to be learned from such extremes of poverty is perhaps the one that Dumbledore tried to teach Voldemort: there are worse fates then death.

“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” (Matthew 19:24)

This is, I think, because wealth is so very seductive. It is easy to come used to. It is easy to become vain. It is easy to be greedy about money – especially once you have it. It is easy to see it as a privilege instead of a responsibility. It is easy to say ‘I need this money’.

The karmic advantage of poverty is, in my opinion, clear: there is less responsibility. Less responsibility means less chance of messing up.

I found the inspiration for this post in an article on ‘The Pathology of the SuperGuru‘. It ends with the following – which I would like to end my post with as well:

Fortunately I had many memories of simple, even barren, rooms in which I had sat with great saints in India, rooms where they stayed in joyful contentment, living the simplest of lives. Before going to India I had seen the two tiny rooms in which Paramhansa Yogananda, head of a world-wide spiritual organization, had lived for over a quarter of a century, as well as the simple little kitchen where he had so often cooked for his beloved students.

“Contented in the Self by the Self, then he is said to be one whose wisdom is steady. (Bhagavad Gita 2:55)” I had seen Krishna’s words verified in the lives of the true yogis.

Karma and learning from life

Katinka - Spirituality — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 15:34:25 +0000

One of the harder parts of Blavatsky’s explanation of karma and reincarnation is that she insisted that only the best in people goes on to form part of the divine Ego. That is: a person without a shred of goodness in them will be lost to the higher self. They will have lost the opportunity for learning experiences for the Higher Self and it is in that sense a lost life.

Yet – the higher self that was attached to that criminal person goes on to form a new personality in a new life… (From Blavatsky on Karma in 1883)(...)
Read the rest of Karma and learning from life (519 words)

Karma and right action

Katinka - Spirituality — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:59:57 +0000

I find myself writing posts in reverse order: starting with the complicated stuff and ending with the basics. Today’s post is the basics, but it is in some ways also the hardest part of the doctrine of karma.

The doctrine of karma is in Biblical words ‘as you sow, so you will reap’. Contrary to what many people suggest it is a long term doctrine. It means in simple terms that if you want to have lives upon lives of living well off – be nice, generous, good and honest consistently throughout your lives.

Specifically Buddhism tells us that there are three ways to be a good person. The first is right thought. Right thought includes not dwelling on ill done to you as well as thinking positively where one can. This can be practiced by making sure that you keep trying to see the good even in people you dislike. This is also quite practical. It is not unusual for people who try that to find that it transforms relationships for the better.

Right thought should be followed by right speech. In other words: only speak the truth as you know it. Don’t spread negative rumors. Watch other people’s reputation as you would your own. This ties in with my earlier post about gossip.

Right speech should be followed by right action. Right action means at the very least to ‘put our money where our mouth is’.

Getting back to karma: right thought, right speech and right action all have karmic consequences. Practicing those consistently means setting up habits that will last throughout the rest of our lives and which will bring at least peace of mind and likely also financial security (not necessarily wealth, because who really needs wealth?).

[Note: after publishing this I got an outraged e-mail from an Indian reader. He clearly feels the pain of the millions suffering on this planet. He refers to poverty, people lacking clean drinking water, people lacking computers. I might add war, disease, girls in forced marriages at a young age etc. Indeed: for many this world is hell as my correspondent notes. He asks the age-old Indian question: why would anybody want to return here at all? However: if the doctrine of reincarnation is true: we do return here. I was just explaining some of the mechanics of that.]

Karma and Time

Katinka - Spirituality — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:39:56 +0000

Comments on my posts about group karma have made it clear that not all of my readers are aware of the basics of the doctrine of karma.

The law of karma (a law of nature just like the law of physics) basicly states that all action will have consequences for the person acting. In everyday life the word karma is often loosely used in a way that reminds one of the word fate. Something bad happens and we might say “that’s your karma”. In other words: apparently you deserved that, based on past action.

In my explanations of group karma I mainly focused on the present and the future however. I stressed that current actions have future consequences.

Generally speaking I think group karma is something that works within one lifetime. That is: part of each individuals karma is the group they were born into. This aspect of karma is the response of the impartial law to actions in past lives. Similarly – I am a member of certain groups as a result of actions in this life. I will have to deal with the consequences of the group karma of those groups in this life. For instance, were I to join a racist group – I would be subject to the negative stigma attached to that group. All of that is short term karma.

Long term however I’m responsible for my own actions. The actions of groups are only relevant to the extent that I personally contributed to them. Still, joining a racist group would make me actively co-responsible for the continuation of racism in the world. Karmic consequences might include being born into such a group in a future life. There would be, in that case, good reason for me to have to face the group karma of black people. I hope it is obvious that the only way to break a cycle like that is to not be racist and to oppose racism. Saying ‘they deserve it, it’s their karma’ is almost as bad as actively contributing to the stigma.

These examples show, I hope, that the law of karma is about cause AND effect. It is about how we act today, taking the responsibilities life makes us take TODAY. Because not taking responsibility, means having to face up to them another day. Taking responsibility, acting kindly, wisely, independently today – means growing in wisdom and avoiding the future bad karma associated with indifference, hate, ignorance and group thought.

The law of karma does not distinguish between sociological, psychological, economical or other ways to look at human action. Sociological theory focuses on how humans interact on a large scale. It’s a useful science that shows just how much we are dependent on each other. Just how important culture is. That sort of thing. To explain human nature we need sociological theory. But sociological theory does not address the question of the individual. Why did I end up where I ended up? What is my responsibility in this situation? What is right action? The law of karma does say something about each of these questions. The answer to the question ‘why did I end up here?’ is – this is exactly where you deserve and need to be right now. This is where your life’s lessons are. This is where your potential for growth is. This is where you need to clean up a mess that you helped create in a past life.

The answer to the other two questions ‘what is right action’ and ‘what is my responsibility’ is more simple to put into words, but harder as well. The answer is simple: your responsibility is to do the best you can in your circumstances. The hard part is of course acting on that. Luckily for me, that’s beyond the subject of today’s post.

Karma and Harmony

Katinka - Spirituality — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:14:52 +0000

Group Karma is but the specific working out of a more general aspect of karma that gets ignored or forgotten too easily. In the words of H.P. Blavatsky:

Nor would the ways of Karma be inscrutable were men to work in union and harmony, instead of disunion and strife.

and(...)
Read the rest of Karma and Harmony (409 words)

Group Karma and the Economic Crunch

Katinka - Spirituality — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:42:37 +0000

The concept of group karma was introduced into theosophical literature when an Anglican Priest (C.W. Leadbeater) was asked to go to India to support Blavatsky when she was under attack from missionaries there. The main issue then was perception. It was good for the public perception of Blavatsky to be supported by a minister.

Recent events however have made it clear to me that group karma is also at play in the economic field. What follows is my laypersons summary of what’s going on:(...)
Read the rest of Group Karma and the Economic Crunch (520 words)

All Considering » Karma and Reincarnation

Karma in the Bhagavad Gita

Related Posts

Free will, karma and reincarnation

Related Posts

The karma of disease and health

So, what does karma have to do with all this?

Source for Geoffrey Hodson and Oscar Kollerstrom

Related Posts

A question about (Group) karma: below average intellect?

Related Posts

Good karma and money

Related Posts

Karma and learning from life

Karma and right action

Related Posts

Karma and Time

Related Posts

Karma and Harmony

Group Karma and the Economic Crunch