☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Hard Talk
Why Is The Law Of Karma Rejected?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Archived_member14" data-source="post: 178754" data-attributes="member: 586"><p>Ambarsaria ji,</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Let us find out what the denial of Karma emanates from, falsehood and false conjectures or an understanding of the Truth.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What then is the Truth against which this Law is judged as false? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>*This* is conjecture.</p><p>To start with, what has necessitated the idea of things been created and therefore a creator? The concept of good vs. evil comes from the very fact that two different experiences in our lives have different characteristics, functions and manifestations and that these cause different reactions in people. What they truly are and what are the causes and conditions for their arising, this we are ignorant of, hence the speculations. </p><p></p><p>Understanding would have it that the law of moral cause and effect is inherent in the very nature of good and evil states (precisely the mental factor of intention). This however, is being overlooked due to being drawn in by the speculative idea of creator / creation against which moral states are then seen as subjected to an arbitrary law, re: the will of the creator. Is this not a case of the individual projecting his own ignorance?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Are you referring to societal rules? </p><p>Here again, instead of asking the right questions such as that, “why is it that killing, stealing, lying, malicious speech, gossiping, ill-will for example, are considered bad, and generosity, moral restraint, kindness, compassion and so on are considered good, by all people of all times?”, and perhaps come to consider that in fact these are real phenomena with distinct characteristics, knowable when experienced. Instead, having been drawn by the idea of “greater expanse” you make them inconsequential and unworthy of consideration. Yet the fact remains that you will continue to be driven by these same realities not only till the end of this life but also beyond, while forever remaining ignorant of what they really are.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Do you know the truth of the law of conservation of energy other than by being convinced through reason? Do you take reasoning using different concepts, as determinative of the Truth? But of course I am guessing that five hundred years ago, when the law of conservation of energy was still unknown, you'd have accepted it in principle due to a materialist / eternalist view influencing your thoughts. </p><p></p><p>The law of gravity and conservation of energy are conventional manifestations of underlying laws between physical realities about which science does not and will never have a clue. It is with similar cluelessness that you approach the question of birth, life and death under the influence of speculative theories where certain concepts are made to appear valid through use of reason, and no understanding of the here and now is ever involved.</p><p></p><p>“The world! The world!” is the saying, lord. Pray, how far, lord, does this saying go? </p><p>What is transitory by nature, Ånanda, is called “the world” in the Ariyan discipline. And what, Ånanda, is transitory by nature? The eye, Ånanda, is transitory by nature…objects…tongue…mind is transitory by nature, mind-states, mind-consciousness, mind-contact, whatsoever pleasant feeling or unpleasant feeling or indifferent feeling arises owing to mind-contact, that also is transitory by nature. What is thus transitory, Ånanda, is called “the world” in the Ariyan discipline."</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If a rock slides down the hill and hits me, the rock sliding down is solely due to a series of physical phenomena, including gravity. My being there and hit is due to several causes and conditions, some physical and some mental. The intensity of injury depends on many factors including the weight and angle of the rock and which part of the body is hit. The bodily pain how much or little, being a mental phenomena, is the result of another mental phenomena in the past, namely karma, and this, not only one, but many of them, one after another. </p><p></p><p>Is this how you conceive of the concept? I doubt it. If you want to argue against karma, try to do so based on this particular understanding and not what you in your own misunderstanding, make of it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>“Impacts of forefathers”!? Show me how this is not a case of asserting to be true what in fact is purely the product of imagination. </p><p></p><p>But you are correct, it must be a case of imagination too to insist on making a connection between one past deed with a particular situation of bad / good fortune in the present. The law of karma is to be understood and not speculated upon.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>People who intend to exploit will use any number of ideas to do so, the concept of God included. Why do you use this fact to prove invalid the concept of karma?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Free from the misunderstanding by pointing to the motives of those pundits or from the concept of karma itself?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ah, forefathers!!?</p><p>So the forefather's influence didn't pass down did it?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But what if Guru Nanak did not in fact reject karma, would that not make you the one insulting his teachings? </p><p></p><p>According to me, denial of karma or moral cause and effect is one of the worst attitudes to go by.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Archived_member14, post: 178754, member: 586"] Ambarsaria ji, Let us find out what the denial of Karma emanates from, falsehood and false conjectures or an understanding of the Truth. What then is the Truth against which this Law is judged as false? *This* is conjecture. To start with, what has necessitated the idea of things been created and therefore a creator? The concept of good vs. evil comes from the very fact that two different experiences in our lives have different characteristics, functions and manifestations and that these cause different reactions in people. What they truly are and what are the causes and conditions for their arising, this we are ignorant of, hence the speculations. Understanding would have it that the law of moral cause and effect is inherent in the very nature of good and evil states (precisely the mental factor of intention). This however, is being overlooked due to being drawn in by the speculative idea of creator / creation against which moral states are then seen as subjected to an arbitrary law, re: the will of the creator. Is this not a case of the individual projecting his own ignorance? Are you referring to societal rules? Here again, instead of asking the right questions such as that, “why is it that killing, stealing, lying, malicious speech, gossiping, ill-will for example, are considered bad, and generosity, moral restraint, kindness, compassion and so on are considered good, by all people of all times?”, and perhaps come to consider that in fact these are real phenomena with distinct characteristics, knowable when experienced. Instead, having been drawn by the idea of “greater expanse” you make them inconsequential and unworthy of consideration. Yet the fact remains that you will continue to be driven by these same realities not only till the end of this life but also beyond, while forever remaining ignorant of what they really are. Do you know the truth of the law of conservation of energy other than by being convinced through reason? Do you take reasoning using different concepts, as determinative of the Truth? But of course I am guessing that five hundred years ago, when the law of conservation of energy was still unknown, you'd have accepted it in principle due to a materialist / eternalist view influencing your thoughts. The law of gravity and conservation of energy are conventional manifestations of underlying laws between physical realities about which science does not and will never have a clue. It is with similar cluelessness that you approach the question of birth, life and death under the influence of speculative theories where certain concepts are made to appear valid through use of reason, and no understanding of the here and now is ever involved. “The world! The world!” is the saying, lord. Pray, how far, lord, does this saying go? What is transitory by nature, Ånanda, is called “the world” in the Ariyan discipline. And what, Ånanda, is transitory by nature? The eye, Ånanda, is transitory by nature…objects…tongue…mind is transitory by nature, mind-states, mind-consciousness, mind-contact, whatsoever pleasant feeling or unpleasant feeling or indifferent feeling arises owing to mind-contact, that also is transitory by nature. What is thus transitory, Ånanda, is called “the world” in the Ariyan discipline." If a rock slides down the hill and hits me, the rock sliding down is solely due to a series of physical phenomena, including gravity. My being there and hit is due to several causes and conditions, some physical and some mental. The intensity of injury depends on many factors including the weight and angle of the rock and which part of the body is hit. The bodily pain how much or little, being a mental phenomena, is the result of another mental phenomena in the past, namely karma, and this, not only one, but many of them, one after another. Is this how you conceive of the concept? I doubt it. If you want to argue against karma, try to do so based on this particular understanding and not what you in your own misunderstanding, make of it. “Impacts of forefathers”!? Show me how this is not a case of asserting to be true what in fact is purely the product of imagination. But you are correct, it must be a case of imagination too to insist on making a connection between one past deed with a particular situation of bad / good fortune in the present. The law of karma is to be understood and not speculated upon. People who intend to exploit will use any number of ideas to do so, the concept of God included. Why do you use this fact to prove invalid the concept of karma? Free from the misunderstanding by pointing to the motives of those pundits or from the concept of karma itself? Ah, forefathers!!? So the forefather's influence didn't pass down did it? But what if Guru Nanak did not in fact reject karma, would that not make you the one insulting his teachings? According to me, denial of karma or moral cause and effect is one of the worst attitudes to go by. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Hard Talk
Why Is The Law Of Karma Rejected?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top