The Little Purple Notebook On How To Escape From This Universe
Copyleft � 1998 by Maximilian J. Sandor, Ph.D.
Subscription Information: Maria Loren
[email protected]
Website:
http://transmillennium.net/pnohteftu/
The Clockwork Of Karma
The concept of Karma can be found throughout the recorded thoughtworks of
mankind. It takes on many different forms, from deifications to
mechanistical, 'scientifical' views of 'cause and effect'.
In its most simplistic representation it condenses to 'what goes around
comes around'. In nearly all treatises on this subject, however, the
paragraph on "How It Works", is omitted altogether.
Without an understanding of 'how it works', the knowledge of 'Karma' as a
phenomenon can be quite frustrating, to say the least, and it can even lead
a person astray, ultimately wreaking havoc.
The word 'karma' itself comes from Vedic Sanskrit 'karman' which simply
means 'work', 'profession', or, informally, a 'job'. In Pali, the language
of Buddhist recordings, this word mutated into the a-declination,
misleading many translators to interpret the word as a past tense participe
(lit.'what was done').
In any case, over time, the word 'karma' came to be known as a name for the
phenomenon that 'one reaps what one sows'.
Now, if one would always reap what one has sowed, any attempt to 'change'
future karma would be utterly futile, as pointed out already by Gotamo
Siddharto (now known as the 'Buddha') 2,500 years ago.
This circumstance becomes apparent only to the degree that a person becomes
able to recall past lives. While the vast number of thoughts and actions
just within the current life time is staggering already, the view of life
time sequences in the current Universe (Snskrt:'kalpa') is mind-boggling.
Adding on to this the recall of Universe-Rings (maha-kalpas) and the recall
of Rings of Universe-Rings (maha-maha-kalpas), any illusions of the
predictability of future 'karma' will
certainly be destroyed thoroughly .
The question of 'karma' seemingly becomes a problem of 'Chaos Theory': the
most innocent and minute action can cause re-actions that surpass its
original scope and strength by orders of magnitude - the flap of a
butterfly becomes the starting point of a storm.
As Gotamo noted, there would be no 'escape' from this for any Being after a
sufficiently long time of dwelling in this (or a similar) Universe - every
person 'remembers' its past deeds (mostly super- and/or subconsciously) -
and so do ALL other players in the game.
Merely adding on 'good deeds' would not change things in the big picture:
if there are 10 trillions 'good' deeds and 10 trillions 'bad' deeds, one
'good' deed by itself couldn't possibly beat the statistics.
Fortunately, though, it can be found that the instantiation of 'karma' is
being 'triggered' by the person itself.
This means, that, in order to find the key to 'switch off' at least the
negative effects of 'karma', it will be necessary to find the _trigger_
that prompts 'bad karma' to take its course.
Viewing all past actions as a multi-dimensional vector matrix of forces:
how does the 'Universe' 'know' what's next in store for a person?
The answer is surprisingly simple, once known: a person triggers a response
through its own mind: exactly that what a person feels bad about, will
cause the entities in the person's environment to remember what the person
did.
In other words, if a person would no longer feel 'bad' about anything it
did in the past, the person would not trigger any negative responses within
its environment.
This circumstance has been known for a long time (at least intuitively).
Many 'religions' established an institutional procedure known as
'confession': the person gets the remembrance
of the 'bad' deed 'off his chest' by confiding it to 'God' via a priest.
While this can work perfectly well, it can also be a double-edged sword: if
'God' has become personalized in the mind of the confessing person, the
off-loading of the remembrance of the
'bad' deed will not result in a confession to _all_ players in the
Universe.
Instead, it will result in the phenomenon of 'righteousness': the person
ceased to hold back its memory of bad things done to a personified 'God'
but it now holds back this very memory
from the rest of the Universe. This will usually lead to a _repetition_ of
the 'bad' deed, now based on the internal justification of 'being in
harmony' with God - the person may act in a devastatingly harmful manner to
itself and its environment.
If the act of ceasing to restrain oneself due to a 'bad' action in the past
is done in a 'workable' way, the person will give up any thought of hiding
anything from the rest of the Universe.
This is the magic of 'surrendering' to the Universe - a phrasing that could
be misunderstood to delegate the cause of future events to the environment.
What it means in this context, however, is that the person simply does not
need to hold back any of its feeling - it doesn't hide anything
from anybody anymore and is thus by-passing the triggers of 'bad karma'.
'Not holding back' doesn't mean to 'spill one's guts' - in the contrary,
the person doesn't feel compelled to communicate the sad things about it
anymore at all. After all, 'spilling one's guts' is exactly an effort to
bring about a confession with the desired result of off-loading bad
feelings about past actions. Such a confession, however, becomes obsolete
once the person has a 'clean' mind.
As soon as a person does not hold back anymore, any _new_ 'small' deed that
is held back will weigh like a ton.
This can be visualized using the picture of a scale: if there are a hundred
pounds on each side of the scale, another gram won't tilt the scale.
However, if there is no load (or 'charge') left on either side of the
scale, even a seemingly insignificant event can now prompt the scale to
veer off to the according side.
Once 'cleaned', the effects of karma will be incredibly magnified - to
survive nevertheless, a person thus 'cleaned' must act in a comprehensively
ethical manner. The justification
of _new_ 'bad' deeds with the prospective of the possibility of cleaning it
up afterwards (as practiced by some institutions nowadays) is a dangerous
and truly self-defeating enterprise.
To sum it up nicely: shit happens because people think that shit should
happen to them because they caused shit to happen to someone else AND they
are afraid to admit it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyleft � 1998 by Maximilian J. Sandor, Ph.D.
