Re: ARTICLE : karma = invented, non-scriptural, a myth (bad karma)!

Posted By mike@sporitu.compulink.co.uk (mike@sporitu.compulink.co.uk)
Mon, 22 Dec 1997 11:48:06 GMT

The validity of the law of karma does not depend on it being
documented in an original scripture any more than the validity of the
law of gravity depends on its formulation in Newton's origianal notes.
The law of karma is best described in the Gita. The Gita is widely
mis-understood as a religious book which should be worshipped and this
may be the case for people who are bhakti (devotional) minded. (Not
being such I can not comment on this aspect). However the Gita is
really a book of knowledge and the main topic is Karma Yoga. The Gita
being a book of knowldge then we need to approach it as a course of
study. Swami Dayananda Sarswati's 2 year home study programme is
highly recommended for the purpose of understanding Karma and Karma
Yoga. Web site is www.epix.net/~arsha. One can e-mail from there. The
course is quite expensive at $400.00 but the quality of the teaching
makes it worthwhile.

Ashok Aggarwall
On Fri, 19 Dec 1997 01:34:34 GMT, hagen@igr.nl (Hagen) wrote:

>These are some messages I have send to ISKCON (Hare Krishna),
>and other experts on Hindu beliefs.
>Until now, I have not received any response that has showed me wrong
>on my conclusions regarding the concept of the law of karma.
>Maybe someone in this newsgroup can proof my wrong, about the invented
>origins and subjective
>and therefore mythical, non-scriptural origins of this concept.
>
>Opinions on karma part (1):
>
>I approach the law of karma as a scientist.
>At first hand I have the idea therefore that karma is something manmade.
>
>Not scriptural in a literal sense.
>What are the scriptural texts that prove, the law of karma is not
>something made up, later, by smart people, but something that is clearly
>
>outlined in the original scriptures of Hindu and Vedic religion.
>
>So where is the text that can been seen as the deepest foundation
>explaining the law of karma.
>At least, the texts that you repeat (refer to), are not clear enough for
>
>this purpose. It can only be seen as a very tiny small part.
>Can you please give me the places of books, where I can find the
>foundation texts for the law of karma. Maybe it is possible for you, to
>email me those texts?
>
>Opinions part (2)
>There is no text at all in Hindu or Vedic scriptures that speaks and
>clarifies in depth the outline of the law of karma.
>It is manmade for the entire.
>You are right that few people approach myths and belief systems totally
>scientificly.
>Why don't people present the foundation texts that outline karma in the
>original scriptures?
>Can't they.
>I think this is a good example of bad karma. The worst kind of karma I
>can think of.
>To hell with all those creeps.
>
>If you happen to know of texts that make my karma negative because of
>this conclusion, then, please let me know where I finally can get these
>foundation scriptures to read.
>
>Opinions part (3):
>I read your page on karma.
>
>What I was hoping for was the original texts in the scriptures of Hindu
>or Veda's, that outline the precise deifinitions of the law of karma.
>Since I can't find these texts, I have to assume that this law is
>manmade in origine.
>Invented thus, afterwards, based on a teaching, based on some lines in
>the scriptural texts.
>So this is subjective. Not objective mentioned in the original
>scriptures.
>
>The conclusion can then be no other, that in its own ball game, the
>presentation of the law of karma, other then based directly on an
>original text, is very bad karma.
>Please show me the texts that prove me wrong.
>Otherwise I have to stay in my conclusions, and even have to accuse you
>of
>irreasonable misleading people, with the claims to be both scientific
>and scriptural.
>You have a high regard of philosphy. It is the most precise form of
>science. It is more precise than even maths, because it is thinking
>about thinking, analyses about analyses.
>
>Thus as a philosopher I challenge you. Are you a philosopher.
>Then, show me the texts, that outline karma, in their original form.
>I doubt that you can, or anybody.
>Surely, there will be some remarks of rebirth and so on, and I would be
>glad to know of their mentioning (the precise texts), but the concept of
>
>the law of karma based on such texts alone, is not enough to present
>them as scriptural. They are an invented concept.
>Of course this does not say, that it might not be true or wrong, or not
>be fit for eventual scientific proof, once the techniques will become
>available for research on this level. Nevertheless, presenting the idea
>other than with this addition/disclosure statement, is speculation.
>Please show me that this (my) analysis is wrong.
>
>>From Jan Hagen
>hagen@igr.nl-------------------------------------------------------------------
>Mail posts to: ghen@netcom.com : http://www.hindunet.org/srh_home/

Advertise with us!
This site is part of Dharma Universe LLC websites.
Copyrighted 2009-2015, Dharma Universe.