Emotion and Karma
There are two points in a recent post I will comment on.
First: “I don’t remember who, but somebody said that karma is created when one or both (or several) parties have any energy involved. If nobody cares, nothing happened. For example, I don’t think any of you care what kind of toilet paper I buy.”
Karma is usually defined as either a debt to be paid or a positive balance from which one may draw benefits. Thus the mere act of caring has little to do with the creation of karma.
I believe I know the teaching you are referring to, however, which I believe to be a true one and it goes something like this.
Strong emotion such as love or hate, desire or repulsion, fear or protectiveness creates not karma, as we understand the term, but an energy link that will bring you into repeated contact with the person with whom you share such emotion. If such emotion carries with it any degree of attachment then this person must be faced in relationship again and again, life after life, until you learn to detach yourself from him or her and the emotion connected with the relationship.
Even the lower octave of love creates this problem. Love from this angle would be defined as: “the desire to keep another in relationship because of what they do for you rather than what you can do for them as the prime motivator.
This is why forgiveness is so important. If you hold a grievance and do not forgive then that negative feeling creates a link that will draw that person back into your life until you do learn to forgive him on all levels.
Imagine the future consequences if you have a dozen people in your life that you have not forgiven. In a future time or life you will have a dozen annoying people in your circle of work or friends and be beside yourself as to how you could have such bad luck in choosing associates.
If you merely have a feeling of attachment toward another a real debt (karma) is not created. Thus you can free yourself of the link instantly at the moment you let go of attachment. This concept is probably why some believe that you can release yourself from karma with a decision – because they have mistakenly called the linkage of attachment a karmic debt. Instead, the linkage we have to others because of attachment merely holds a lesson to be learned.
Karma is different. You can learn your lesson, but still owe the debt just as happens in real life. You can run up your credit card balance too high and learn the lesson not to let that happen again, but the sinking in of the lesson does not pay the bank. You often find yourself making payments long after you have learned to not over extend yourself.
The linkage because of emotion creates no karmic debt, but is immediately dispelled by forgiveness or the release of the binding emotion.
Second: In response to my comment on breaking promises the reader states:
“There again, humanity has made a collective judgment that it is “wrong” to share sexual partners with others. That is not the ultimate “truth” in my mind, but something we have made so.”
The main point I was making was not around sex, but around the subject of honoring your commitments and your word. If a person makes a promise to not eat peas and another is depending on this promise for some reason then he should honor his word. If he does not want to honor it then he should seek a release from the person to whom the promise was made. This has little to do with whether peas are good or bad for you.
If we are to learn to be one with God and establish reliable soul contact through that oneness then we must all learn to honor our word when it is given to another, especially if it would create pain or harm to this trusting person if the word is broken. If we wish to obtain liberation then we must learn to be as the Spirit of God within and keep our word on all matters. When we thus become like the Spirit we commune with the Spirit.
Because I understand this principle I have always been very selective about giving my word, for the breaking of it does create definite effect and karmic debt that must be dealt with in a future time.
If you have an uncommitted relationship and have sex with another person with the understanding that multiple partners is part of the agreement then you are not responsible for your friend’s hurt if he should take offense. But when you make a promise to another soul and that person places trust in you because of that promise then the breaking of that promise can create tremendous pain, pain that would not occur if both parties were true to their word.
If you thus betray a loved one through the breaking of your word, the time will come that one with whom you have placed your trust and given your heart will betray you.
The pain through the betrayal of a loved one has little to do with attachment. You can be very detached from a spiritual point of view yet suffer pain through the broken word.
But do not we suffer pain in relationships because of attachments?
Not necessarily. In a romantic relationship there is a bonding through the circulation of energy for the two become one as the scriptures says. Now you may figure that you are not attached to your little finger and could live without it, but this detachment does not spare you any pain if someone were to rip it out of your hand. Similarly in a committed relationship the other person becomes like a extension of your body and this severing of half of that which makes up a greater life is very painful no matter what state of detachment you have reached.
The Christ himself, the greatest of us all, formed a greater life out of the twelve disciples and because of the flow of energy and the betrayal by Judas he suffered enormous pain and came close to dying in the garden of Gethsemane as a result.
One who is detached as the ancient wisdom teaches can release any person from any relationship and let hem go their way. But he will realize the principles involved and work with the energies so the pain on all sides is at a minimum.
Question: Do you think that honesty and the keeping of your word will have a positive effect on health? Why?
Some have indicated that we should not put a lot of weight on past writings like the scriptures, Blavatsky or Alice A. Bailey. What do you think? If a writing or teaching is confirmed by your soul does the passing of time lessen the value of the teaching?
From Whence Cometh my Writings?
It seems that skeptics are always trying to figure out where I get my writings from, as they think they must have been lifted from somewhere. Now I have just been accused of copying them from The Keys of Enoch by J J Hurtak.
Of all the books to pick that I may be lifting material from I would say that the Keys of Enoch would be far down the list.
The first book to use if such an accusation could be attempted would be the Bible. Of all the written word, that has been the strongest influence in my life. Second would be the writings of Alice A. Bailey. There have been times that I have written something that I thought was pretty original and the later found that AAB’s writings either spoke about it or hinted at it.
Hurtak and I both claim to have keys and that is pretty much where the similarity ends. None of the Keys I either have or will present will be the same as his. He writes from a scientific point of view and I do this to an extent, but I write with much more simplicity than he does and do not include a plethora of obscure words to cause the reader to have to constantly have a unabridged dictionary at his side.
You indicate the Song and the New Jerusalem meditation was lifted from Hurtak. That’s outrageous. The Keys of Enoch has nothing like either of these. Do you care to give evidence of this observation?
As far as the story of Joseph, I do not know what you are referring to here. I do not recall Hurtak or myself elaborating on a story of Joseph. I have given some details about the life of Joseph Smith, but Hurtak gives no elaboration on him, even though he briefly mentions him.
Any two metaphysical writers who write a book will say at least several similar phrases and possibly present some similar ideas in different language, but I challenge you to find anything in my writings that seem to be lifted from his.
On the other hand, I think Hurtak’s book is very similar to the Urantia book concept. He just added a much more sophisticated terminology and teachings. Many phrases he uses are borrowed from Urantia however; others are fairly original.
As far as you being so detached that the one to whom you may be committed would not bring you any pain even if the relationship should be suddenly shattered by betrayal let me say this.
The only way to accomplish this sterile undesirable objective is to not give of your heart, to not let the energies of love and romance flow between the two of you. Once the energies are in circulation there is indeed the possibility of pain if there is sudden interruption through betrayal.
He who is not willing to give to another to make himself vulnerable in this way is missing the most wonderful dimension of human existence and until one has this willingness he cannot commune with completeness to the souls of humanity.
Just as oxygen does not combine with hydrogen to make oxygen more complete even so in true union of souls the male does not unite with the female for completeness, but for the experience of greater life and livingness. Oxygen remains what it is when water is formed and I still remain what I am in my union with my wife. If she should be severed from me I would still remain complete, but miss the experience of the greater life her presence offers me.
A reader criticized me for copywriting my writings stating that it is wrong to copyright truth as no one owns it. He also thinks I have borrowed a lot of my ideas.
First I will again state that a lot of the things I write do not come from any book that I am aware of and one reader certainly stretched his imagination when he tried to prove that the early Mormon writers have covered my material. Few of them even had an elementary understanding of reincarnation.
Contrary to popular belief there are new things under the sun, and thank God for this. Who would want to go on a recycling of the past for all eternity?
I think I explained this before but the reason I started putting a copyright notice under my writings is that I noticed in another group there was a copyright notice at the bottom and it was not from the group admnistrator, but Microsoft Corporation. That could mean that if a reader posted some of my material and Bill Gates copyrighted it and later decided that he wanted to own it instead of me that he could prevent me from using my own material.
Actually a similar experience happened to me, as did another member, for I once wrote a parable and gave a copy to a friend of mine on the way to California. A couple years later I discovered that the parable was picked up by someone else and published and copyrighted in nationally distributed book. Now I am in danger of being sued if I publish my own material. For this cause, I have not even shared the parable with the group – one of the best I have written.
As far as copyrighting truth… I think you know that is not the idea. Did you copyright your own book? Did you see yourself as copyrighting truth??? I don’t think so.
April 16, 2000
Copyright by J J Dewey
JJ’s Amazon page HERE
Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE