Oops, that should be LOA vs. LOK
A recent coincidence/synchronicity occurred that started me reading a book that I've had in my possession for over 30 years that I had never read. It is a fascinating book, but one of the things in it that I was reading about over the weekend was the law of Karma. Basically, it puts forth the teaching/idea that we can't get something for nothing. If we precipitate or manifest something, we have to pay for it one way or another. This is nothing new in my experience or education, if you will.
There was something that was brought up that I had never really considered before and that was the idea that when we help someone who is suffering, we could be incurring karmic debt. The premise is that someone who is suffering may just be paying back some of their karmic debt and that by helping them (giving them something for nothing), we are not only postponing the suffering they need to incur, but thereby also further increasing their karmic debt. This then also increases our karmic debt (if we have any). The example used was a panhandler that instead of working or looking for work takes the easy way out and lives off of others' generosity.
When the source of wisdom was asked how one is to know the difference between someone who is deserving of assistance and someone who is not, the answer was through observation and spiritual guidance. Given that most of you appear to be much further along than I am, I was hoping that I could get some input on this topic as I find it of great interest.
I would also be interested in how you feel this works in your own life in terms of "paying back" the abundance that you are trying to manifest in your life. It seems very easy to reconcile from the standpoint of love. The more love you show and distribute, the more you receive and I doubt one could incur karmic debt from giving too much love. However, I would be think that manifesting "things" for sense gratification would be subject to accountability at some point. What do you think? Do you take this into consideration or not?
A recent coincidence/synchronicity occurred that started me reading a book that I've had in my possession for over 30 years that I had never read. It is a fascinating book, but one of the things in it that I was reading about over the weekend was the law of Karma. Basically, it puts forth the teaching/idea that we can't get something for nothing. If we precipitate or manifest something, we have to pay for it one way or another. This is nothing new in my experience or education, if you will.
There was something that was brought up that I had never really considered before and that was the idea that when we help someone who is suffering, we could be incurring karmic debt. The premise is that someone who is suffering may just be paying back some of their karmic debt and that by helping them (giving them something for nothing), we are not only postponing the suffering they need to incur, but thereby also further increasing their karmic debt. This then also increases our karmic debt (if we have any). The example used was a panhandler that instead of working or looking for work takes the easy way out and lives off of others' generosity.
When the source of wisdom was asked how one is to know the difference between someone who is deserving of assistance and someone who is not, the answer was through observation and spiritual guidance. Given that most of you appear to be much further along than I am, I was hoping that I could get some input on this topic as I find it of great interest.
I would also be interested in how you feel this works in your own life in terms of "paying back" the abundance that you are trying to manifest in your life. It seems very easy to reconcile from the standpoint of love. The more love you show and distribute, the more you receive and I doubt one could incur karmic debt from giving too much love. However, I would be think that manifesting "things" for sense gratification would be subject to accountability at some point. What do you think? Do you take this into consideration or not?
Comment