8 Responses to “Karma & Gravity”

1. Sam Kannappan says:

   July 24, 2006 at 11:43 am

   Very well written article.
2. Jaimin says:

   August 5, 2006 at 11:29 am

   Fantastic analogy.
   These are sort of topics that ought to attract more discussion …
3. Satya says:

   August 5, 2006 at 5:17 pm

   An interesting explanation and well delivered; but would it have gotten Chris Hoddle out of trouble?
4. Satya says:

   August 5, 2006 at 10:41 pm

   Err…Glen, even (!)
5. Dangerous says:

   August 5, 2006 at 10:43 pm

   Satya, the same author of this article (Arvind Sharma) wrote an article specifically on GLEN Hoddle’s karma statements, check it out:

   http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/1999/9/1999-9-06.shtml
6. Satya says:

   August 6, 2006 at 4:18 pm

   Thanks for that Dangerous, another interesting bit. Sorry, by the way – I went to Uni with a guy called Chris Hoddle..
7. Jim says:

   August 7, 2006 at 11:29 am

   Should one seek moksha/multi or jeevanmukti? According to the religions one achieves “heaven” etc after death – so those traditions must be seeking only moksha. Is not the true goal Nar se Narayan – jeevanmukti in this life?

   To teach good dharma/karma is relatively easy. But to teach neutral karma/nirsankalp/nirakar stage one would need to have embodied good karma to have eliminated bad karma, resulting in neutral karma.

   The religious preceptors have tried but neutral karma/moksha etc has never been done (maybe for 5000yrs) – so the cycle of decline continues.

   Many have said “I am Ram/Krishna etc”. I was wondering how to devise a test to determine if someone (God candidate) was beyond the influence of their karmam indrias/senses.
8. Navin says:

   August 9, 2006 at 12:28 am

   There is a confusion between heaven and moksha. I do not believe there is concept of “neutral karma”:heaven is a place where ego is held onto in the presence of god. Most christians and muslims i talk to don’t equate this with egoless Brahmanhood. karma is a rule of cause and effect. this is not neutral but a force (gravity). Our valuation is simply our egotistical demand on telling god the way it whould be.

   I’ld say it is very hard to teach good dharma/karma. Most people seem to fail at this and thus we end up with many false prophets and prophet’s followers who end up being egotistical.

   The goal begins as something (bhakti-presence of the supreme, gyana-knowledge, karma-to do good,…) but ends as meaningless. At Nirguna we are egoless therefore goals are meaningless – even moksha.

   Now, where is god not? Are you not currently in the presence of god? Or is it your own ego demnad that god has to be in your presence in a way that you expect? What is not Rama? Must god come to you in your chosen avatar?

   The gita expressly mentions criteria for your question of discernment. The Ramayana too. But Krishnamurti and others caution that you will project onto your guru what you want to see. It is not whether you can label this person or that as a god candidate but rather if you can see the supreme in all existence and that which does not exist. When you’ve done this all that is left is prarabdha karma – the actions of so many sages and demons.

   The test then is only in prakriti on prakriti. The material answer is a deeper understanding of being as we know it – understanding the maya that we operate in (f=ma, c=2 pi R, sociology, politics, martial arts, poetry…)

   hariaum