Hi guest! As you can see, the new Wizard Forums has been revived, and we are glad to have you visiting our site! However, it would be really helpful, both to you and us, if you registered on our website! Registering allows you to see all posts, and make posts yourself, which would be great if you could share your knowledge and opinions with us! You could also make posts to ask questions!
Excellent summaries in your reply. And if I remember correctly, belonging to a certain caste meant that you were subject to specific religious strictures that did not apply to members of other castes, e.g. with regard to diet (Brahmin being not allowed to eat meat, Kshatriya even being required to in order to make them more martial? Something like that). It's just that you have to use some word to refer to the phenomenon that action (or inaction) has consequences somewhere down the line, no matter how long that line is, the butterfly effect and all that jazz, so you might just as well use 'karma'. The word is clearly not suited to describe rough justice, like some sin being immediately punished by a vengeful god hurling thunderbolts or going medieval on your ass for some small infraction.
I sometimes wonder about all those people who flocked to lectures by the likes of P. Manly Hall, Dion Fortune or Rudolf Steiner… was there some discussion afterwards or did people just lap it all up uncritically because TV wasn't invented yet? Was it all simply spiritual mind porn to them?
TV makes people critical? I find it a sort of prism for refracting credulity in myriad new directions.
Hall, Fortune, and Steiner (et.al., et.al.) were scarcely above criticism by their auditors. Even in their ranks, there was the usual round of believers breaking with each other and all that dreary drama. As for the public at large, the vast majority of people were indifferent or sceptically amused. My own early background was in the military and then academia. I was probably over thirty before I heard "karma" said in all good earnest without irony or a sneer.
Answer? Not all by itself. Still, wisdom can suggest lines of enquiry. If there were not some value in it, why have this forum? (Of course, we could all be dupes. Still...)
The Lords of Karma are recorded in many traditions under various names such as the Recording Angel and the Lipika Lords. And there are many injunctions such as: As you sow, so shall you reap, Easy come, easy go,...
It is the great controlling Path of Karma. The Lipika Lords are on this Path, and all who are fitted for that line of work, and who are close to the Logos in a personal intimate sense, pass to the Path of absolute Sonship. It is the Path of the special intimates of the Logos, and into Their hands He has put the working out of karma in the solar system.
I meant that such audiences lapped up those lectures like so much phantasy entertainment, like listening to grandpa's tales on long winter evenings because otherwise the boredom would soon become unbearable.
I was aware of various schisms among believers (after all, Steiner himself broke away from the theosophists) but maybe I harbor this prejudice that people back then had yet to learn discernment as well as tolerance for differing opinions regarding doctrine, like telling Dion Fortune "Your book on the Qabalah is a masterpiece but I really can't accept your ideas about Atlantis" while still reminaing a loyal follower of hers, that everything was more black and white. It's back to the history books for me then, I guess.
I meant that such audiences lapped up those lectures like so much phantasy entertainment, like listening to grandpa's tales on long winter evenings because otherwise the boredom would soon become unbearable.
I was aware of various schisms among believers (after all, Steiner himself broke away from the theosophists) but maybe I harbor this prejudice that people back then had yet to learn discernment as well as tolerance for differing opinions regarding doctrine, like telling Dion Fortune "Your book on the Qabalah is a masterpiece but I really can't accept your ideas about Atlantis" while still reminaing a loyal follower of hers, that everything was more black and white. It's back to the history books for me then, I guess.
Read Stefan Zweig's "Die Welt vom Gestern" (The World of Yesterday) for a peek into the mind of the era of Steiner and Fortune. Your average educated bourgeoisie in Europe generally was literate in four languages and graphomania was a culture-wide phenomenon. These people were scarcely naive rubes. Educated people were EXPECTED to engage opinions they disagreed with in print. A sixth grader of the year 1900 read at the level of today's high school junior. (That's high school juniors who are passing their classes, not the pongoids being passed along to get rid of them.)
By the by, where is tolerance for differing opinions today? Cancel culture represents a spiritual straitjacket. The only difference is that today one just loses his job, as opposed to the NKVD shooting him in the police precinct basement. (So far, anyway.)
Well, let's look into Thorwald Dethlefsen's Challenge of Fate, which I read through a couple of months ago. Dethlefsen wrote in German, but an unofficial English translation can be found
. His book is an esoteric look into fate, destiny, and dis-ease. He makes the distinction between scientific (linear causality) and esoteric thinking (synchronicity). His "cure" for the physical manifestation of illness is the healing of the spirit.
He does not write about KARMA from the strict Hindu sense of the word, but he includes a chapter on "karma" as most have come to think of it in the West. In the chapter on "Religion and Reincarnation," he wrote that the common people generally believed in reincarnation during the time of Jesus, but if any such explicit teaching had been recorded as a doctrine in the early church, it was considered heresy by the 6th century C.E.
Redactions never fully expunge the evidence, and Jesus' words to his disciples allow us to read between the lines. Anyone familiar with the accounts knows that John the Baptist was believed to be the reincarnated Elijah. Whether true or not, the controversy and Jesus' own words bring us the conclusion that the concept of reincarnation was known and believed outside of Hinduism. The fact that the concepts existed and were understood 2000 years ago, and they did not need to use the word "karma," ought to tell us something about useless syncretism.
At this point I'll simply quote Dethlefsen:
"And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, 'Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?' Jesus answered, 'Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.'
"The question of whether the cause of the blindness lay in his own sin or in that of his parents presupposes the acceptance of earlier incarnations. This is not affected by Jesus' answer, which does not cast doubt on the validity of the question but merely reveals a third aspect that was not taken into account by the questioner.
"Many more statements about reincarnation are to be found in the writings of the Church Fathers whose pronouncements on the subject are often unequivocal. K. O. Schmidt in his book Wir leben nicht nur einmal (“We don't live only once”), has collected many relevant quotations, some of which are worth repeating here. The great Origen writes:
"'If one wants to know why the human soul at one moment follows good and at another evil, we must look for the reason in another life which precedes this one. - Each one of us hastens towards completeness through a succession of lifetimes. - We are bound always to lead new and better lives, be it on earth or in other worlds. Our surrender to God which cleanses us of all evil, signifies the end of our reincarnations.'"
"The question of whether the cause of the blindness lay in his own sin or in that of his parents presupposes the acceptance of earlier incarnations." This is the premise upon which Dethlefsen based his ideas that past life regression therapy could bring about "miraculous" cures. He proposed that unresolved lessons from past lives follow the soul on its journey. These lessons would be learned one way or another, whether painfully or via "healing."
Is this true? I'm not committed to anything at this time other than holding onto a tolerable degree of cognitive dissonance.
The operative word here is FATE. Though Dethlefsen mentioned "karma" in his book, the title of the book is Challenge of Fate. When you speak of a desire for justice, when you say that you believe in powerful entities who oversee the FATES of beings within their jurisdictions, you're not doing anyone a favor by creating a false syncretism with another religion. I'm not Hindu. If anything, my English and German heritage would lead me to the Norns: Urðr, Verðandi, and Skuld. Also, closely related and applicable to those of the West would be the FATES: Clotho, Lachesis and Atropos.
This image is copied from How to Become a Modern Magus by Don Webb. (I bought a physical copy of Webb's book because someone shared a PDF of it in the WF library, and it looked useful to me.) It illustrates a Minkowski space-time cone. Notice how the future is causal? That's because humans are multi-layered beings. A part of ourselves exists beyond the "here and now" that has an "effect" on the "here and now" when ever that may be called "the present."
"The present has the special property of being the place of objective action. I can do things in the present moment, and, once done, they slip into the lower cone. Because of my soul (and its separate evolution from my body), I can do things that aren’t mechanically determined by all of the forces of the cone of the past. Because of the multilayered nature of the soul (as you have explored the past four months), you understand the human dilemma. Your surface consciousness is as baffled by your actions (coming from a hidden soul part) as an outside observer might be. That means I have a destiny and not a fate. Fate is a fixed pattern that a being moves along, like a train on its tracks. Many ideologies believe in fate—Christianity, Marxism, corporate advertising, Skinnerism, and so on. Matter and energy have fate, but humans can work with what they have, what they desire, and what they’re willing to do to have a destiny. Magicians must reject fate as a model and embrace destiny." - Don Webb, How to Become a Modern Magus
Now that humans know how to do parallel processing and scientists demonstrate entanglement and speak of parallel universes, the concept of causality within a single time line may need to be extended.
Well, let's look into Thorwald Dethlefsen's Challenge of Fate, which I read through a couple of months ago. Dethlefsen wrote in German, but an unofficial English translation can be found
. His book is an esoteric look into fate, destiny, and dis-ease. He makes the distinction between scientific (linear causality) and esoteric thinking (synchronicity). His "cure" for the physical manifestation of illness is the healing of the spirit.
He does not write about KARMA from the strict Hindu sense of the word, but he includes a chapter on "karma" as most have come to think of it in the West. In the chapter on "Religion and Reincarnation," he wrote that the common people generally believed in reincarnation during the time of Jesus, but if any such explicit teaching had been recorded as a doctrine in the early church, it was considered heresy by the 6th century C.E.
Redactions never fully expunge the evidence, and Jesus' words to his disciples allow us to read between the lines. Anyone familiar with the accounts knows that John the Baptist was believed to be the reincarnated Elijah. Whether true or not, the controversy and Jesus' own words bring us the conclusion that the concept of reincarnation was known and believed outside of Hinduism. The fact that the concepts existed and were understood 2000 years ago, and they did not need to use the word "karma," ought to tell us something about useless syncretism.
At this point I'll simply quote Dethlefsen:
"And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, 'Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?' Jesus answered, 'Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.'
"The question of whether the cause of the blindness lay in his own sin or in that of his parents presupposes the acceptance of earlier incarnations. This is not affected by Jesus' answer, which does not cast doubt on the validity of the question but merely reveals a third aspect that was not taken into account by the questioner.
"Many more statements about reincarnation are to be found in the writings of the Church Fathers whose pronouncements on the subject are often unequivocal. K. O. Schmidt in his book Wir leben nicht nur einmal (“We don't live only once”), has collected many relevant quotations, some of which are worth repeating here. The great Origen writes:
"'If one wants to know why the human soul at one moment follows good and at another evil, we must look for the reason in another life which precedes this one. - Each one of us hastens towards completeness through a succession of lifetimes. - We are bound always to lead new and better lives, be it on earth or in other worlds. Our surrender to God which cleanses us of all evil, signifies the end of our reincarnations.'"
"The question of whether the cause of the blindness lay in his own sin or in that of his parents presupposes the acceptance of earlier incarnations." This is the premise upon which Dethlefsen based his ideas that past life regression therapy could bring about "miraculous" cures. He proposed that unresolved lessons from past lives follow the soul on its journey. These lessons would be learned one way or another, whether painfully or via "healing."
Is this true? I'm not committed to anything at this time other than holding onto a tolerable degree of cognitive dissonance.
The operative word here is FATE. Though Dethlefsen mentioned "karma" in his book, the title of the book is Challenge of Fate. When you speak of a desire for justice, when you say that you believe in powerful entities who oversee the FATES of beings within their jurisdictions, you're not doing anyone a favor by creating a false syncretism with another religion. I'm not Hindu. If anything, my English and German heritage would lead me to the Norns: Urðr, Verðandi, and Skuld. Also, closely related and applicable to those of the West would be the FATES: Clotho, Lachesis and Atropos.
Post automatically merged:
This image is copied from How to Become a Modern Magus by Don Webb. (I bought a physical copy of Webb's book because someone shared a PDF of it in the WF library, and it looked useful to me.) It illustrates a Minkowski space-time cone. Notice how the future is causal? That's because humans are multi-layered beings. A part of ourselves exists beyond the "here and now" that has an "effect" on the "here and now" when ever that may be called "the present."
"The present has the special property of being the place of objective action. I can do things in the present moment, and, once done, they slip into the lower cone. Because of my soul (and its separate evolution from my body), I can do things that aren’t mechanically determined by all of the forces of the cone of the past. Because of the multilayered nature of the soul (as you have explored the past four months), you understand the human dilemma. Your surface consciousness is as baffled by your actions (coming from a hidden soul part) as an outside observer might be. That means I have a destiny and not a fate. Fate is a fixed pattern that a being moves along, like a train on its tracks. Many ideologies believe in fate—Christianity, Marxism, corporate advertising, Skinnerism, and so on. Matter and energy have fate, but humans can work with what they have, what they desire, and what they’re willing to do to have a destiny. Magicians must reject fate as a model and embrace destiny." - Don Webb, How to Become a Modern Magus
The problem with reading between the lines of the Gospels is that I see one thing, Tolstoy quite another, Renan something else, Al Schweitzer yet other, Artificial Intelligence sees... &c&c One suspects the various readers of reciting graffiti they added themselves. Mebbe just say one's piece and leave Jesus out of it.
I think I know what you're saying. I'm attempting to look at a concept from as many perspectives as possible. It doesn't mean I necessarily agree with everything I quote. I rather hope for others to relate insights that they may have.
I think I know what you're saying. I'm attempting to look at a concept from as many perspectives as possible. It doesn't mean I necessarily agree with everything I quote. I rather hope for others to relate insights that they may have.
Now that humans know how to do parallel processing and scientists demonstrate entanglement and speak of parallel universes, the concept of causality within a single time line may need to be extended.
Recently I have been seeing parallel streams of higher Light entering some human heads. The streams differ slightly in quality and intent, thereby producing harmonic resonances. The resonances can manifest through chakras above the head.
These entangled streams of Light generate strong directional impulses into the physical, emotional and mental worlds. Those causations are from outside time and space
The typical human has a single flow of vertical Light but visitors typically have 2 flows. I have asked a few of those about irregular heart beat and they all have had that.
Like it or not, we are caught in linear time - we can go back in time to the past (in the form of memories, for example) or forwards to the future (plans, hopes, etc.) but only in our head. Cause & effect rule supreme in the ordinary course of things. Sure, we can concoct all manners of exotic spatial-temporal models featuring cyclic time or some double-helix corkscrew inter-dimensional universe but when all is said and done, we have to live in the ordinary world as we perceive it in our day-to-day life. Magic (we hope) is capable of altering this mundane life, of reversing time and the cause & effect chain but not in every instance and not very reliably. It's always thrilling to think outside the spiritual box and to escape the prison of earthly existence in our minds, but that's all just speculation and of no practical use, at least that's what I think.
But I agree, the idea of attempting to balance the karmic budget by accumulating merit (hindu/buddhist model) or by atonement (abrahamic religions) is ludicrous - a crime you commit stays committed, even if you 'pay your debt to society' for it by going to prison, a lie stays told even if you say five Hail Marys after Confession, etc. And just because you may be able to assuage your own bad conscience by doing penance doesn't make things right again.
When you cross the bardo after death and then reincarnate in a specific realm corresponding to your karma in the buddhist paradigm, however, karma DOES matter. So say you've mostly behaved like an asshole in your previous life but felt sorry sometimes for it, you might get reborn in a world where people are assholes most of the time because you subconsciously carry over some natural affinity for such people - in fact, all we might be living in such a world right now! This means you don't get unequivocally rewarded or punished, you just live yet another existence in which people shun you or even retaliate when you are spectacularly behaving out of line.
Whenever I read something about the alleged "Law of Karma", I just shake my head. What goes around does not always come around. Sociopaths prosper while good guys finish last. Criminals do not always get caught or are punished commensurately. Unexplicable twists of fate occur all the time. We all live in a small self-created pocket of order within a vast chaotic multiverse, or at least that's my own worldview. We try to navigate our lives according to the rules of this ordered pocket but now and then, the surrounding chaos intrudes and the whole karma business becomes a farce.
To sum up: There is no escaping linear time and causality in this life, whatever otherworldly dimensions may exist. Karma matters only within certain religious paradigms and is not universal outside them. Whenever people think they see the karma police in action, it's mostly just society (or sometimes inexplicabe synchonicities) pushing back. And I agree, balancing karma is futile because 'bad' deeds stay happened whatever merit you acquire or however you try to placate the furies.
Yeah, I like what he said about being caught in linear time. One grows bone weary of reading how, "time is subjective and how we can manipulate it at will, and how one can simply choose to stand outside time and"----OH SHUT THE BLOODY FEKK UP! For the writer is balding at the top, graying at the margins, thickening at the middle, varicosing at the extremities and has as little idea as a fylgja-less house cat of how he plans to cheat the death he so busily denies.
Yeah, I like what he said about being caught in linear time. One grows bone weary of reading how, "time is subjective and how we can manipulate it at will, and how one can simply choose to stand outside time and"----OH SHUT THE BLOODY FEKK UP! For the writer is balding at the top, graying at the margins, thickening at the middle, varicosing at the extremities and has as little idea as a fylgja-less house cat of how he plans to cheat the death he so busily denies.
I usually liken it to driving a large truck with no brakes; you can turn the wheel to go on this path or that, but the truck keeps thundering forward regardless.
Post automatically merged:
"Standing outside time" is like being a flying fish; sure you can leap out of the water for a little time, but nothing can prevent you from falling back down into the water.
What about the good old saying "Harm none and do what thou will"? Seems an easy way to not accumulate negative karma, unlike what I've done in the past.
Well, let's look into Thorwald Dethlefsen's Challenge of Fate, which I read through a couple of months ago. Dethlefsen wrote in German, but an unofficial English translation can be found
. His book is an esoteric look into fate, destiny, and dis-ease. He makes the distinction between scientific (linear causality) and esoteric thinking (synchronicity). His "cure" for the physical manifestation of illness is the healing of the spirit.
He does not write about KARMA from the strict Hindu sense of the word, but he includes a chapter on "karma" as most have come to think of it in the West. In the chapter on "Religion and Reincarnation," he wrote that the common people generally believed in reincarnation during the time of Jesus, but if any such explicit teaching had been recorded as a doctrine in the early church, it was considered heresy by the 6th century C.E.
Redactions never fully expunge the evidence, and Jesus' words to his disciples allow us to read between the lines. Anyone familiar with the accounts knows that John the Baptist was believed to be the reincarnated Elijah. Whether true or not, the controversy and Jesus' own words bring us the conclusion that the concept of reincarnation was known and believed outside of Hinduism. The fact that the concepts existed and were understood 2000 years ago, and they did not need to use the word "karma," ought to tell us something about useless syncretism.
At this point I'll simply quote Dethlefsen:
"And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, 'Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?' Jesus answered, 'Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.'
"The question of whether the cause of the blindness lay in his own sin or in that of his parents presupposes the acceptance of earlier incarnations. This is not affected by Jesus' answer, which does not cast doubt on the validity of the question but merely reveals a third aspect that was not taken into account by the questioner.
"Many more statements about reincarnation are to be found in the writings of the Church Fathers whose pronouncements on the subject are often unequivocal. K. O. Schmidt in his book Wir leben nicht nur einmal (“We don't live only once”), has collected many relevant quotations, some of which are worth repeating here. The great Origen writes:
"'If one wants to know why the human soul at one moment follows good and at another evil, we must look for the reason in another life which precedes this one. - Each one of us hastens towards completeness through a succession of lifetimes. - We are bound always to lead new and better lives, be it on earth or in other worlds. Our surrender to God which cleanses us of all evil, signifies the end of our reincarnations.'"
"The question of whether the cause of the blindness lay in his own sin or in that of his parents presupposes the acceptance of earlier incarnations." This is the premise upon which Dethlefsen based his ideas that past life regression therapy could bring about "miraculous" cures. He proposed that unresolved lessons from past lives follow the soul on its journey. These lessons would be learned one way or another, whether painfully or via "healing."
Is this true? I'm not committed to anything at this time other than holding onto a tolerable degree of cognitive dissonance.
The operative word here is FATE. Though Dethlefsen mentioned "karma" in his book, the title of the book is Challenge of Fate. When you speak of a desire for justice, when you say that you believe in powerful entities who oversee the FATES of beings within their jurisdictions, you're not doing anyone a favor by creating a false syncretism with another religion. I'm not Hindu. If anything, my English and German heritage would lead me to the Norns: Urðr, Verðandi, and Skuld. Also, closely related and applicable to those of the West would be the FATES: Clotho, Lachesis and Atropos.
Post automatically merged:
This image is copied from How to Become a Modern Magus by Don Webb. (I bought a physical copy of Webb's book because someone shared a PDF of it in the WF library, and it looked useful to me.) It illustrates a Minkowski space-time cone. Notice how the future is causal? That's because humans are multi-layered beings. A part of ourselves exists beyond the "here and now" that has an "effect" on the "here and now" when ever that may be called "the present."
"The present has the special property of being the place of objective action. I can do things in the present moment, and, once done, they slip into the lower cone. Because of my soul (and its separate evolution from my body), I can do things that aren’t mechanically determined by all of the forces of the cone of the past. Because of the multilayered nature of the soul (as you have explored the past four months), you understand the human dilemma. Your surface consciousness is as baffled by your actions (coming from a hidden soul part) as an outside observer might be. That means I have a destiny and not a fate. Fate is a fixed pattern that a being moves along, like a train on its tracks. Many ideologies believe in fate—Christianity, Marxism, corporate advertising, Skinnerism, and so on. Matter and energy have fate, but humans can work with what they have, what they desire, and what they’re willing to do to have a destiny. Magicians must reject fate as a model and embrace destiny." - Don Webb, How to Become a Modern Magus
I like this view and image as well.
It seems to me that following a handful of rules will help one avoid karma --
Do not murder,
Do not steal,
Do not covet your neighbor/neighbors goods,
Do not bear false witness,
Honor your mother and father,
Love your neighbor as yourself.
Certainly. There are however more aspects of karma than personal.
For example much of the subtle matter and intelligence in this solar system was carried over from the previous version of the solar system - previous "incarnation" of the solar Logos. What was carried over should operate at subconscious levels.
Many humans, however, cling to the spiritual ways of the previous solar system. They tend to slow the unfoldment of this latest solar system. Much personal and group karma can result.
I haven't read the thread, so, maybe this was aleady addressed? Lacking linear time, all choices and all outcomes are predetermined. If there is balance to the karmic debt or credit, the events which are balancing are always and forever fixed.
This naturally leads to questioning freewill. If there is no freewill, then, this also discourages any "attempting" to do anything.
I resolve this with the many-worlds-interpretation:
There are nearly infinite versions of me on nearly infinite time-lines. Each and and every possible combination of choices and resultant outcomes exist as one of these time-lines. When I make a choice, I am choosing which of those nearly infinite time-lines is "mine". The choices and outcomes are predetermined within each time-line. But the assumption that there is only one time-line is discarded.
If there is a karmic balance as a universal law applied to each and every time-line, then, my choices determine how that balance is actualized in my life. Is the path pain or is the path pleasure, is the path smooth or is the path rocky? That is partially my choice. But the balance is always happening. Nothing changes that.
FYI: There are a lot of misconceptions about what's perscribed for "sin" in the abrahamic religions, but you are 100% correct. Atonement is not absolution. There is a path for absolution, it's virtually impossible, but I've met 1 person whom I think has acheived it. They literally became a different person.
This is important because, everyone makes mistakes. In the abrahamic model, none are perfect ( with only one exception ). If there are no ways to balance the scales, so to speak, then once a person makes any mistake, they might decide to just give-up on trying to do good. They're already sullied, so, what's the point? If they cannot answer this question, then, they resolve to take the least effort approach to everything. If it causes harm, so what? They're already going to hell.
The reason to attempt to balance the scales while in the material realm is, the "balancing" that happens in the here-and-now are finite. If I do the crime, I absolutely want to "pay the fine" or "due the time" here on earth. If it's beyond? Those events are ongoing. These issues of crime and punishment are complicated. Very complicated. That's why a justice system is needed. Individuals need to work as a team to establish earthly justice. From the abrahamic perspective, since none are perfect, the divine intention is improvement. ( Genesis 4:7 ).
They don't. Each event is like a card in a deck. The card has attributes assigned to it. Among those attributes are a "web-of-causation" a "web-of-consequences", a significant event prior, and a significant event following it. All of the events in a specific time-line can be layed out sequentially determined by the attributes assiged to the event. That's linear.
Take 52 cards, splay them out in order. Expand the the number to 100, 1000, 10000000, 1000000000000.... as the linear sequence approaches infinity, the significance of the divisions between each event is decreasing. Once infinity is acheived, there is zero significance of the divisions between the events, but, that does not change the attributes on the card. So, from an infinite perspective all the cards are more-or-less gathered up together in a deck. They're all "concurrent" and "omnipresent". The attributes are still assigned to them. The deck can be shuffled. It doesn't change the cards. The event defining it which was prior, is still assigned as prior. The event defining it which is following, is still assigned as following. The web-of-causation hasn't changed. The web-of-consequences hasn't changed. The signifiicance of the divisions is "null" if the number of cards in the deck is limitless.
What about the good old saying "Harm none and do what thou will"? Seems an easy way to not accumulate negative karma, unlike what I've done in the past.
