Seth on Karma

[jbseth]

Hi All,

The issue of "karma" occasionally comes up in this forum, and so I thought I'd capture some of Seth's various comments that he made on this topic.

Below I've put these Seth comments, generally in chronological order, with the exception being the very first one, which is actually a comment made by Rob about the conventional concept of karma. I thought that Rob's comments might be a good reminder for us of what some people mean when they use the word karma.



This topic really is rather confusing.

Sometimes Seth seems to be saying that karma doesn't exist (unless you believe in it) as in NoPR, Ch9, Session 636: where he says: "But in the terms used there is no karma to be paid off as punishment unless you believe that there are crimes for which you must pay...."

Then, other times, he seems to be saying that karma does exist, as in TES8, Session 388: "Karma presents the opportunity for development; to make use of opportunities that were not taken advantage of, to fill in gaps of ignorance, to enlarge understanding through experience, to do what should be done."

Along with this, he also seems to be redefining the meaning of karma. For example, in TES3, S89, he says, "nor is there in karma any suggestion of punishment.", I'd say that this comment must be coming from his redefined definition of karma. In the conventional definition of karma, if we perform a negative act in one life, then in the next life we will have to work out this karma. I think that many people would consider this working out of negative karma in the next life as some form of punishment.


The key here, I think, is when discussing karma, to try to recall how Seth's concepts: reincarnation occurs but, all time is simultaneous, there is no cause and effect, the movement is towards growth and value fulfillment, etc. impact the conventional definition of karma.


-jbseth







NoPR, Ch 2 Session 616: (these are Rob's comments about the concept of karma)
> * In Hinduism and Buddhism, karma is thought of as the total moral sum of an individual's acts in any one life — thus determining the person's fate or destiny in the next. Seth sees reincarnational lives as all existing at once, so there is constant give-and-take among them. A "future" life, then, can affect a "past" one, so karma as it is usually considered does not apply.


TES3, Session 89:
Nor does karma say anything about an eye for an eye, nor is there in karma any suggestion of punishment. Karma is merely in the physical plane, the result of personal development, and represents the maturing realization that we are all psychically and physically part of All There Is, and that when we wound, it is not another that we wound but ourselves.

TES3, Session 95:
Now. What you call karma has meaning only in basic terms within your particular plane. I do not want to get too complicated. Nevertheless personalities on your plane work out individual problems within that plane through various existences. Here we have also free will, but a continuity so to speak of purposes. No purpose is forced upon any personality. He, the personality, adopts in various reincarnations upon your plane those purposes most in keeping with his own needs. And for Mark's sake may I say that levels of existence do not necessarily imply higher or lower levels, but concentric levels, even as the layers of the subconscious do not imply upper and lower levels, but are merely terms used for the sake of simplicity.

TES8, Session 388:
Now. The basic idea of karma is not punishment. Karma presents the opportunity for development; to make use of opportunities that were not taken advantage of, to fill in gaps of ignorance, to enlarge understanding through experience, to do what should be done.

TECS3, ESP Class Session, May 4, 1971:
Now karma does not operate in terms of cause and effect though it seems to you that it must. Instead, you see, all your acts now affect all of your other reincarnational selves both, in your terms, past and present. Now you have settled upon one mathematical system to follow in your universe. Along with it you have settled upon one line of reality. This you endorse as reality, and anything outside of it does not have your stamp of approval, so therefore, it seems to you that it cannot exist, in your terms.

NoPR, Ch9, Session 636:
We have mentioned reincarnation hardly at all (but see the 631st session in Chapter Seven), yet here let me state that the theory is a conscious-mind interpretation in linear terms. On the one hand it is highly distorted. On the other hand it is a creative interpretation, as the conscious mind plays with reality as it understands it. But in the terms used there is no karma to be paid off as punishment unless you believe that there are crimes for which you must pay (as indicated in the 614th session in Chapter Two).

NoPR, Ch13, Session 650:
They may say that since an individual chose his or her problems in this life — deciding for instance to be born black, or poor, or both — that karma is being worked out; therefore such issues should not be adjusted through a change of law or custom.

NoPR, Ch19, Session 667:
Those who believe in reincarnation will ask, "What about past-life beliefs? And even if I forget the idea of guilt, am I bound to follow the rules of karma?" (See the 614th session in Chapter Two.)

WTH, Ch 8, May 26, 1984
There is also a rather conventional stereotype version of karma that may follow such beliefs. Therefore, you may be punished in this life for errors you have committed in a past one, or you may actually be making up for a mistake made thousands of years ago. Again, all of a person's reincarnational existences are, indeed, connected — but the events in one life do not cause the events in the next one.

END

[happiness]

Hi jbseth, thank you for putting the time and effort to consolidate these! They are really helpful!

Below is also an important material on karma:

TES8, Session 388

Now. The basic idea of karma is not punishment. Karma presents the opportunity for development; to make use of opportunities that were not taken advantage of, to fill in gaps of ignorance, to enlarge understanding through experience, to do what should be done.

Free choice is always involved. The purpose is always knowledge and development, rather than punishment, self-punishment.

TES8, Session 397

Evil, so termed, is a lack of knowledge, a lack of fulfillment, a lack of growth, measured against that which has felt inward enough to understand more of its nature. Evil is therefore less desirable. The whole process however is toward understanding in which the evil is doubled and erased, but the growth must come from something that is not yet grown, and you cannot call a seed evil because it is not yet the flower.

We will in the future deal with the problem of evil, and hint of some of its implications in our life after death material.

Disease is not evil, for example. The murderer kills no one, yet if his intent is to do so then he must face the consequences of his intent. Crime after death is not punished. There is no crime to be punished, but between those last two statements lies a world of understanding, and knowledge that must be attained. And punishment enters in between those two statements as the individual takes the consequence for the action and the intent.

By the time he realizes the truth of the second statement, neither crime nor punishment affect him.

There is no final judgment, for nothing is final. (Long pause.) There is no judgment because all is in transition toward greater knowledge and understanding. Between those two statements again lies worlds that must be deciphered.

The child is not evil because he is not a man, and cannot be judged for his childishness. Value fulfillment is always working, yet there is between those two statements—you realize the ones to which I refer—the idea of judgment as an impetus and spur against the inner self's knowledge of the growth that must come.

[Deb]

TES8, Session 388

Now. The basic idea of karma is not punishment. Karma presents the opportunity for development; to make use of opportunities that were not taken advantage of, to fill in gaps of ignorance, to enlarge understanding through experience, to do what should be done.

Free choice is always involved. The purpose is always knowledge and development, rather than punishment, self-punishment.

To me, this explains it all.

[inavalan]

Sometimes the quotes collections (unintentionally) misrepresent the context they're extracted from.

For example the quote presented in the opening post:

NoPR, Ch13, Session 650:

"They may say that since an individual chose his or her problems in this life — deciding for instance to be born black, or poor, or both — that karma is being worked out; therefore such issues should not be adjusted through a change of law or custom."

This is the context, that adds the needed clarification to the quote:

Seth, The Nature of Personal Reality,  Session 650

"Many believe that it is "good" and morally superior to be Christian, white, wealthy and in excellent health. Now, the word "male" can also be added to this list of preferred attributes. These people may be of any age. They may come from any economic environment. Now if you happen to be Protestant, male, white, American, rich, and healthy, at least within the framework of your beliefs you can look at yourself with "clear" eyes. Your foundation is shaky, indeed, but at least you fit within it for the moment. You will notice that I added "Protestant" to our value system, as well as "American." If, however, you hold this group of beliefs and you fall short - that is, if in some way you do not fit in - then even within that system you are in trouble.

In that chart of belief, disease, poverty, femininity to some extent, non-Christian concepts, and a non-Caucasian racial heritage, are all considered wrong to one degree or another.  Now: Any intrusion of other beliefs here will be considered threatening. Both racial problems and religious dissension will be rationalized from the standpoint of these beliefs. Some of my readers may consider themselves quite enlightened, believing, for example, in reincarnation as a series of consecutive lives.  However, they may then use that concept to justify their belief in the inferiority of other races. They may say that since an individual chose his or her problems in this life-deciding for instance to be born black, or poor, or both-that karma is being worked out; therefore such issues should not be adjusted through a change of law or custom. Period.

On the left side, looking at a second diagram, you will find people in this case, and in this country, of a more "liberal" frame of mind. But you will not find them quite as liberal if you understand that they are as prejudiced in one direction as the first group is in another.

Here we have a system of belief in which it is wrong to be white, American, or wealthy, or even at all well-off in financial terms. All of the distortions in Christianity are apparent, where the first group is blind to them, of course. Here, though, wealth and a white skin are not only bad, but obvious symptoms of moral deterioration. If the first system of beliefs sees money and goods as a sign of God's blessing, the second group views all material possessions as evidence of spiritual decay.  Here the exotic is romanticized, the foreign held up, the picturesque seen as the real. Black skin or brown skin becomes the criteria of spiritual perfection, and poverty as a badge of honor to be worn not only proudly, but often to be used as an aggressive tool. The people who follow these belief systems think that they are right. Their living style, community affiliations, and political leanings will be in direct opposition to the "white-wealthy" ethic.

Now, if you happen to be black or brown, poor, and believe in this system, you will at least feel secure within it. If you are instead white and wealthy and hold such beliefs, you will think yourself quite inferior indeed, and do everything in your power to show how picturesque and liberal and open-minded and black or brown you can be while still being white, fairly well-off, and perhaps secretly addicted to your Christianity.  You will doubtlessly have Buddhas tastefully displayed, and Indian beads."

The quote is taken from this blog. It can also be read from the book.

[inavalan]

I Just signed up to this forum. Do you discuss here only Seth's teachings, for better understanding, or you can also present alternate opinions about a given concept, e.g. karma?

[Deb]

Hi inavalan, welcome to the forum! I'm traveling abroad right now, have been a little quiet due to a lack of consistent WiFi.

To answer your question, we discuss Seth for better understanding, but presenting alternate opinions is also a part of discussions. So, we also discuss the teachings of others—we try to cover all the bases. If you take a look at the Index you'll see there are boards for a variety of things such as Books by Other Authors, Seth and Other Teachers, Inspiring Teachings, etc. But even in topics that are dedicated to Seth, quotes or book references by other authors occasionally creep in. Not a problem.

Thanks for the quotes from NoPR, it's my favorite book, along with Mass Events. The quote about left & right is frightening in its accuracy today. And as far as context: I totally agree that's a real issue when it comes to quotes. Thank you.

We look forward to hearing more from you!

[jbseth]

Hi inavalan,

First of all, welcome to the Seth forum. 

In regards to your comment in Reply #3 above, "Sometimes the quotes collections (unintentionally) misrepresent the context they're extracted from."


Thank you for that, that's is a very important point.

We have a Seth Search engine here, and I was using it to pull together some comments that were made by Seth on the topic of Karma.  I thought that this would help us all get a better understanding about this topic. 

I did go through most of them before I posted them but that one must have slipped by.

Thanks again, and welcome to the forum


- jbseth