Talk:Karma/Archive 1

message: With due respect to Hindus and Buddhists.
Should only Christians write about Angels, Devils, Heaven, etc. ? I'm sure there are Hindus, Buddhists who have written about these.
Should only Japanese write about Zen and Karate? Many Americans have written about Zen. 
Angels, Devils, Heaven,  Karma, etc. are ubiquitous , well known, universal  concepts known all over the world, by the average man on the street and not limited to one religion, system of thought, etc.
===Orientation of the (newbie) reader and avoiding confusion===
A 'daemon' is a computer server. It is also a Greek concept meaning something like guarding spirit. Many Hindu programmers know the Greek concept as well. The best people to explain Greek concepts to Hindus are other Hindus (I think) already familiar with the concepts. e.g. a Hindu interpretation of 'Daemon' (with Hindu orientation). For this same line of thinking,  there is a 'Western interpretation'  with western orientation.  Newbies to any system of thought, might get bogged down and confused with all other details and deep Hindu concepts. Intertwining creates confusion. 
Care must be given to make things easy to understand and familiarity with the orientation of the (Western, Christian, Muslim, etc. ) reader.--Jondel 03:39, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Categorization 2 

message: A 'daemon' is a computer server. It is also a Greek concept meaning something like guarding spirit. Many Hindu programmers know the Greek concept as well. The best people to explain Greek concepts to Hindus are other Hindus (I think) already familiar with the concepts. e.g. a Hindu interpretation of 'Daemon' (with Hindu orientation). For this same line of thinking,  there is a 'Western interpretation'  with western orientation.  Newbies to any system of thought, might get bogged down and confused with all other details and deep Hindu concepts. Intertwining creates confusion. 
Care must be given to make things easy to understand and familiarity with the orientation of the (Western, Christian, Muslim, etc. ) reader.--Jondel 03:39, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Orientation of the (newbie) reader and avoiding confusion

message: The concept of Karma is also becoming more ubiquitous even in 
the Western (Christian) world.  People for example attribute bad luck to 'Karma' for example.  For some people (with western orientation) who can not accept suffering('ITS UNFAIR!' etc.. ) , the Karma concept offers a way of controlling destiny and becoming more responsible, I think. (It is fair. It was always fair. Your are responsible.) 
 
BTW , I don't claim to be an authority on Western interpretation of Karma so in the same wikipedia spirit,  anyone or everyone with authoritive or good sources are invited to contribute, edit and delete if need be. 
Anyway, a Western interpretion or conceptualization of Karma is bound to come out .--Jondel 01:24, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Karma is becoming universally recognized

message: I have added this article to :Category:New religious movements, not because the concept itself is new (obviously), but because of the growing section in this article on its treatment by the new religious movements. --Gary D 19:04, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:New religious movements]]

message: Karma can become a very sophisticated , complicated subject.
However the concept  satisfies a need to believe that
The Universe and Life is Just and Fire (in the light of injustice).
That we are in control and responsible for our circumstances.
That the Golden Rule(Reciprocity), Rules.--Jondel 03:39, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Universal Need To Believe

message: I'm not happy with the burgeoning size of this section, particularly because a lot of it doesn't 1) seem appropriate and 2) present anything new. Some of the sections sound like moral apothegms and others represent certain ideas of 'collective karma' (and other such thoughts) as if they were established, brought to new light or revolutionized by Cayce (and new schools in the West), none of which things is true. Also, beyond these two problems, these sections are meant to be either brief elucidations of karma or mentions of influential systems utilizing karma; I understand Cayce and the supposedly 'new western' looks are ostensibly both of these, but in actuality neither is Cayce (or the West) so looming a figure nor the information and theories so original as to merit devouring half the article. I'm not going to excise any material that is not mentioned elsewhere, though the Cayce examples don't seem appropriate and at best should be featured on a separate 'Cayce' article; {with)in a week or so, I'll be trimming it down substantially.
:I 'll be creating a Edgar Cayce on Karma and transferring. Hope this is agreeable to everyone.--Jondel 00:24, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me. And when you do, you can transfer the :Category:New religious movements tag over to it, since this section is the reason for that tag being on this article. Thanks. --Gary D 01:11, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: OK with the New religous tag.  How about this Talk/discussion ->Archive?  delete ?Transfer to E.C. on Karma from Categorization 2 par down?. I'll be doing this very soon.--Jondel 02:40, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say archive or sort or sort and archive, use your discretion. --Gary D 03:09, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Western Interpretation Section 

message: I do not believe in Karma. Why? Think of all the children with cool and loving families (therefore fairly unlikely to commit "mortal sins") getting brutally raped and beaten to deaths due to racial/social class hate/vendetta. Think of the poor children in Sudan or Ethiopia starving to deaths whilst sick from AIDs. Karma tells me that all these children deserved to die horrific deaths because they have, or would all commit crimes in their lives had they lived. Karma tells me, Africa is a place of bad Karma, because it has so much suffering, and people are only Africans because they have bad Karma. I do not believe in this, and I do not want to believe that there are people who would believe in Karma based on these grounds. Please do prove my interpretation wrong. RZ heretic 01:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: My Rebuttal

message: ' Karma as a term is often misunderstood to mean specific accumulation of a sort of negative energy from misdeeds (compare with aspects of the Golden Rule).  In fact, while karma includes this concept just because it includes the consequences of all human existence, it is really about accumulation of worldliness, in the sense of worldliness inhibiting spiritual passage. '
:I'm not sure if I understand exactly what you are saying, and I think that a refrased version of this would be better suited to later in the article, rather than as the introduction. Sam Spade 04:37, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Tbis is an article that explains NOTHING about karma to the reader unless and until they are willing to wade well into it.  There needs to be an introductory summary to give a) the casual reader who won't go deeply into the subject a rudimentary understanding, and b) the serious reader an initial orientation to better form a framework of understanding.  The article like it is reads fine as an abysmally arcane piece of esoterica (I do not mean to cast any aspersions on either writing or substance, which seem fine); it needs to be more accessible to the average reader. jaknouse 15:58, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to refrase it. I agree with Jaknouse that there should be a summary in the introduction before the table of contents.Andries 19:02, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it how it is now, great work. Sam Spade 19:52, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Much better.  Thank you. jaknouse 03:24, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: What about "if you have sinned in your heart" and all that rah rah? - Nat Krause 09:47, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose that should be considered equivalent to volitive Karma.  However, the schools of thought of what is generally meant today by "Christianism" tend to claim that such "Karma" is made null and void by proper practice and faith in God.  I am not sure how best to word it - if at all; IMHO Karma simply isn't a very good fit to Christian teachings.  Luis Dantas 13:06, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the parallel with Christianity and mention of thoughts.I believe that Karma covers a broad field, including thoughts, although it is a Hindu concept. Jesus seemed to hint that even wrong thoughts can be sinful because the Jews (no offence intended to Jews)in his time seemed to be satisfied at overtly just following the 'Laws' as pointed out in the 'If you have sinned in his heart...' .   Jondel 08:00, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: moved from article

message: I'm not happy with the burgeoning size of this section, particularly because a lot of it doesn't 1) seem appropriate and 2) present anything new. Some of the sections sound like moral apothegms and others represent certain ideas of 'collective karma' (and other such thoughts) as if they were established, brought to new light or revolutionized by Cayce (and new schools in the West), none of which things is true. Also, beyond these two problems, these sections are meant to be either brief elucidations of karma or mentions of influential systems utilizing karma; I understand Cayce and the supposedly 'new western' looks are ostensibly both of these, but in actuality neither is Cayce (or the West) so looming a figure nor the information and theories so original as to merit devouring half the article. I'm not going to excise any material that is not mentioned elsewhere, though the Cayce examples don't seem appropriate and at best should be featured on a separate 'Cayce' article; {with)in a week or so, I'll be trimming it down substantially.
:I 'll be creating a Edgar Cayce on Karma and transferring. Hope this is agreeable to everyone.--Jondel 00:24, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me. And when you do, you can transfer the :Category:New religious movements tag over to it, since this section is the reason for that tag being on this article. Thanks. --Gary D 01:11, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: OK with the New religous tag.  How about this Talk/discussion ->Archive?  delete ?Transfer to E.C. on Karma from Categorization 2 par down?. I'll be doing this very soon.--Jondel 02:40, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say archive or sort or sort and archive, use your discretion. --Gary D 03:09, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Archive was done. Also a new wiki page on Edgar Cayce on Karma  . The Cayce material was transferred. --Jondel 00:09, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: What is "the Karma cannot be proven as easily as the law of gravity" supposed to mean?  Karma isn't something that is/can be proven, it's an ideology.  The first sentence is just a waste of words and should be removed as well. Prometheus235 17:14, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Western Interpretation Section 

message: I like the concept of Karma. I makes me awake. I see myself quite smoking because I see the cause not the fun of smoking. I see the result of extreme pain and suffering.
:Karma includes everything, even thoughts.--Jondel 08:42, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karma is good. 

message: I wrote a brief, very simple definition at the begining. The article is long and detailed, but someone simply wanting to know what karma stands for would have had a hard time. I am sure it will help the uninitiated. --Subramanian 19:08, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial Definition 

message: Cynics tend to twist it around to "No good deed goes unpunished"
i needed to put that somewhere :) - and no, i'm not a cynic :P
-- — Nate | Talk 13:04, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:: A good example of Cynical Karma: http://cynical-karma.blogspot.com
24.155.158.226 17:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cynical karma 

message: In one sense, there is a similarity. Both karma and the teaching of Jesus on what he calls “sin”—both include the idea that man can and does do things wrong and evil. That there is something wrong with the human race is somewhat included in both of these concepts.
But the differences are great. The source of our problem and how to counteract it are very different in the teaching of Jesus. The Bible teaches that man lives once, and then after death there is judgment. Karma assumes many lifetimes in order to escape the cycle of birth and death and be freed from the web of Samsara. Jesus teaches that all men accrue a debt that comes from one life of deeds, motives, words, and thoughts that are bent or evil. In the teaching of Jesus, having more than one lifetime would only make the problem worse, the Visa debt would simply climb higher and higher.
The solution to sin is also deeper in the Christian teaching, in that deeds and meditation are not acceptable balances to the problem. Jesus teaches that God is absolutely perfect and demands this from His creatures as well. Man cannot make up for evil deeds with good deeds, because the standard is not a balance of good and evil, but goodness and purity and perfection. The Visa bill that is due is not payable in money or in pilgrimages or good deeds: in fact it is the lack of the fullness of these in a complete way that brings the debt due. 
Jesus also reveals that God is compassionate and full of grace. The teaching and life of Jesus is that He came as God in the flesh, the only incarnation of God among men, and that He went to a cross intentionally-- to pay the debt for all the world’s sin. As the only perfect man, he was qualified to pay the debt. As God incarnate he has the full weight to pay for the sins of the entire world. The way of forgiveness is simply to address the Visa bills: “payable by Jesus.”
:Thank you . I honestly like very much hearing opinions. 1)The thing is if for example, Hitler became a Christian before he died. Is if fair that he goes straight to heaven? Or if a priest or any holy person who did good all his life, suddenly makes one mortal sin before he dies , does he burn in hell for eternity? What about a sincere communist doctor or Buddhist social aids worker who spend there life helping people do they burn in hell with the Devil for eternity? Wha do you feel the answer is? Isn't it better that the law of right and wrong be written in the soul of a person by experience? 2) Does it mean that if I believe in Jesus Christ, I can't believe in Karma? Can't I believe in both Jesus and Karma --Jondel 
I am not here to Judge or think on behalf of God  (thus creates cult) on the judgment of Hitler or the communist Doctor, The 'Karma' (Which associated with reincarnation) is no way related to bible or Christianity, I would like to remove the passage which reads "Parallels in Christianity" 
I am really not here to debate what is right and what is wrong, it is a blasphemy to say that bible supports eastern version of ‘Karma’
>it is a blasphemy to say that bible supports eastern version of ‘Karma’
:Blasphemy is the defamation of the name of God. The article is not defaming the name of God.  Please fulfill your declaration to not Judge or think on behalf of God and not  call Parallels in Christianity  blasphemy.--Jondel 01:15, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Not Supported By Christianity

message: ::Dear user 20040302, the mental construction you presented to us here is very well conceived and clear, however the final results may fail to represent 'reality' due to just one nuclear detail: it is based upon the social/cultural general assumption of what the religion of Christ and related Teachings are; assumption that was developed or imposed by the dominant group of human beings (organized in this physical world to this end, of interpreting what was transmited to human beings, as what we may call a 'church' or 'mainstream denomination') throughout the last two millennia and adopted collectivily and in an inconscient way by the evolving majority; assumption developed through human conceptions of ignorance related to Spiritual teachings (not of this world).
::If you consider to apply your mental construction, with your own life experience, without these limitations (unpreconceived as the mind of a little child) you may find yourself discovering relations and creating representations of what reality may be related to what Cristianity truly is or to any other Religious teachings, as if their, and our, development could be represented through the image of an iceberg, or any other you might be able to create. P.S.: 
::These words are also related to my last edition in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bible_and_reincarnation#samson in response to the conservative (if not of 'censor' like if in the middle ages we were) editions of User:Goethean and User:Karma2Grace. Regards, --212.113.164.104 23:29, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi 212.113.164.104, sorry - this means nothing to me. I'm not interested in any form of supposed objective truth: My interests are those that reflect the socio-cultural assumptions, conventions and languages that populate our world.  Moreover, I do not find your paragraph to be particularly relevant to the current discussion, and I am wary of the doctrines and metaphysical vocabularies that you adopt. Lastly, if you wish to be taken even slightly seriously by Wikipedians, register a username. (20040302 00:50, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: our [[mental]] conceptions regarding [[spiritual]] reality

message: I examined the former seven paragraphs of under the parallels section, and most of it has decayed into a discussion on the relative merits/demerits of faith and grace, which do not really have much to do with Parallels to Karma. Therefore excuse the large editorial swipe - and it's replacement with a paragraph that draws out the analog of Karma with God the Judge.
I propose that we add an additional paragraph that deals with the redundancy of both God the Judge and Karma - but this is far more to do with those religions that assert both (Hinduism, Spiritism, etc), rather than those religions which do not (mainstream Christianity).
As for the issues of Karma vs. Grace, it may be possible to add yet another paragraph concerning that - (and once again, Grace is a concept we find in Hinduism - and the Grace vs. Karma arguments have a history related to the Hinduism vs. Buddhism dialogues, rather than anything to do with Christianity)
Lastly, there are enough pages on WP for quotes from the bible - and IMO this article is not an appropriate forum; generally, non-christians do not accept the bible as  having any divine authority or mandate. If we wish to quote from scriptures concerning Karma, that is fine - but quoting from scriptures to concern ourselves with Grace in Christianity is - IMO - severely off-topic. (20040302 09:17, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 20040302, I must say I find the inclusion of the mentioning of Spiritism as Christian group who believes in karma very necessary, as they use the very word karma in their doctrines. After all, the article is about karma, and every important view on karma should be mentioned. This specific one is noteworthy as it is a christian group using this eastern concept.  Subramanian talk 17:29, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I refer you to List of Christian denominations, where Spiritism is not included. Though I have no opinion on that. However I guess I consider the inclusion of Spiritism on a general article about Karma to be rather spurious. (20040302 17:42, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It´s not included because it´s mostly a Brazil-based faith. It has three million followers here. Since this is the English Wikipedia, it has no proper representation; see . Three million is a large enough group to be representative of Christians believing in Karma, isn´t it? There are less than a million Quakers, for example, and they are noteworthy.  Subramanian talk 20:46, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I get your point, though just because it's an English site isn't relevant - I was implying that if you wish to argue the case for Spiritism as a Christian Denomination, then you should do so on the List of Christian denominations article, rather than here. My personal experiences differ from your assertions though: I lived with a Spiritist partner a few years ago, and she never really thought of Spiritism as being Christian - her views were that it was partly derived from Christianity, but not really Christian. After all, there is a strong Catholic presence in Brazil, and I am not sure that many Spiritists consider Spiritism to be "Christianity", but rather more auxiliary to Christianity. Regardless, there are also more strong cases to be made for Karma in Christianity - after all, as mentioned before, Buddha has been recognised as a catholic saint for about a thousand years, and he definitely teaches Karma *smile*  (20040302 12:13, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've addressed this question in the List of Christian denominations as List_of_Christian_denominations#Christian_mystery_religion and in the discussion page Talk:List_of_Christian_denominations#Christian_mystery_religion. Yet, it is not a definitive answer as in order to fully understand their roles (Spiritism and Esoteric Christianity) it is necessary a deeper understanding of the Gospel of John ("The Promises of the Spirit") than the one I am able to present here at this time. May it be, at least, a basis for further research. Regards, --194.65.22.226 18:39, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Parallels => Analogs

message: Karma in Hinduism is a better repository for the 'Hinduism Small' template. I have adjusted the template, this article, and Karma in Hinduism to match. (20040302 09:26, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Hinduism Small

message: This article, like the article Bible and reincarnation, is being submited to an anathema of current-days, regarding the issue of the 'Law of Karma' in Christian religion, by users which want keep a biased vision of the social-cultural reality defended by the literal radicalism in mainstream denominations (Evangelists, Protestants, Catholics,...) and through these invious actions are trying to throw into oblivion  alternative views (Esoteric Christianity groups, Spiritism, ...) which are able show through intellectual logic the existence of the 'Law of Karma' and 'Reincarnation' in the Teachings of the Christ and are able also to help us to re-acquire the forgotten faith in God our Father.</br>
These destructive actions of the mainstream denomination(s) were done also in the past through long centuries (almost two millenia) of persecution, suffering and death to the labeled "heretics" (Alexandria Gnostics, Cathars, Knights Templar, Operative Masonry, Mystical Rosicrucians, and others) which were taughting the "mysteries", spoken by the Christ, to a minority prepared to receive them with the mind of a "little child".</br>
And these mainstream churches still expect to acquire "salvation", and preach it to other fellow human beings, through the example of these invious actions! Don't be hypocrite! IT IS TIME things change as we have now a developed mind which can "think", the basic information is available around us and individual freedom is being acquired!
P.S.: Eastern and western religions, all alike, will have to give place to the new world Religion as their Teachings, as sound and deep as they are, stop at one point: the point where the Mission of the Christ becomes "the Way" to all of them and to all of us, human beings in a "vigil" state of consciousness (remember the words of the Christ: "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6; KJV) and "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now." (John 16:12)).
Best regards, In Christian Fellowship ("GOD IS LIGHT. If we walk in the Light as He is in the Light we have FELLOWSHIP one with another.")</br>
Below is the most NPOV introduction to the theme, brought to us by user Subramanian, which was sadly deleted: --194.65.22.226 22:37, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parallels with Christianity (section) 

message: The word "karma" is of course regularly applied to the explicitly-scored experience or "point" systems implemented in various open, on-line communities, those that attempt to reward good behavior (and punish undesired behavior) in a fair and group-consensual but automatic and impartial way, without the need for godlike administrators to dole out favors or capriciously punish suspected wrongdoers.  Slashdot's moderation system is the best-known example, but I'm pretty sure the concept is widespread.  The question is, does this usage deserve a section in this article, or a separate article?  (This sense is mentioned on the Karma (disambiguation) page, but it points broadly to the slashdot and GameFAQs message boards articles, not specifically to a discussion of karma point systems in general, which I think would be appropriate, somewhere.) Steve Summit (talk) 17:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  simplistic/modern/slashdot-style interpretations 

message: Karma exists throughout the universe.  It is simply the law of action and reaction at work.  For every action there is a reaction.  If the action is bad then the reaction is bad.  If the action is good then the reaction will be good.  This is a Divine Law in the universe.  It has nothing to with religion at all.  It is merely a Divine Spiritual Law.  Religion has nothing, whatsoever, too do with spirituality. I make this comment simply because it is what I found in my studies on the subject of Karma.  --Bumpusmills1 18:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karma is Action/Reaction Based 

message: I have removed the external link *Charred mouse burns house. Not only is the link itself broken, but the story it refers to is irrelevant to the topic, and of dubious origin. See Urban Legends Mouse Fire--Sentience 07:09, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Mouse in the House 

message: OK so the link has died but the story lives on - I don't know where you found that link from (denouncing the story)but this link shows that the story indeed happened as reported. Some people denoounce WWII concentration camps - does that means we remove any refernce to them from the wiki - I think not! The ABC is the Australian Government's TV station, and the story is to be added in as an external link as it is relevant and according to the story it DID happen.http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200601/s1544597.htm
:1) Snopes is a website dedicated to looking at urban legends in order to assess whether the stories are valid or not. It classes the mouse burns house story as undecided.
: 2) Just because it's reported briefly in a paper, that doesn't mean that it's true; other urban legends that I've seen on Snopes (and that have been shown to be false) had been reported in papers. 
: 3) The mouse burning the house story, regardless of its truth (even as a made-up story, it would be instructive as a parable) is a rubbish example of karma in action; it over simplifies the concept and makes it look like a mere reward/punishment system.
: 4) Godwin's Law :D Kantiandream 13:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  20. Mouse Indeed Burns House 

message: Who cares about the mouse? This article is a great example of one the underlying problems w/ Wikipedia: 15 or 20 ppl have seen fit to edit in their ideas about what 'karma' is or isn't, and reoughly 3 of them seem to have a) any clue about the technical meaning(s) of the word, or b) any clue about 'reference' or 'encyclopedic'. There is so much wrong with this article now. 
* The intro para still doesn't clarify that the word is a hindu word, originally (and still commonly) used technically in hindu religions.
* What the heck is that 'Theory of Karma' section, introduced in toto on 25 May by one User:Sheborg12??? It is unrelated, unreferenced, and pretty unconventional. A purely psychological explanation for the karmic mechanism? Gimme a break.
* The 'dharma-based religions' section is turgid, and too short to be useful.
* The 'Analogs' section, which ya'll have so "lovingly" crafted over the months, is completely unreferenced, and (with apologies) worthless. Anytime you start by saying "If we accept [proposition x]..." and you're not quoting someone else's research, then you're probably doing original research yourself.
* The phrase 'what Bhudda is asking them to believe' smacks of evanglism to me, and the bullet points that follow make no damn sense at all (also smacking of evanglism ;/ ).
* The whole 'omniverse karma' thing is also unreferenced. I've never heard of it, have you?
* And last but not least, there's far too little consideration of the actual common usages of the word in English speaking countries today. For a word to go from obscure foreign-language religious technical term to common American slang deserves a bit more exploration. And the very common 'net usage (such as slashdot's) should definately be referenced.
And why, you quite correctly ask, have I not stopped whining and did something about it? Dunno, exactly, except I got distracted with a pleasant little reworking of the article on Kardecism, and now I'm tired. We shall see how the karmic threads weave themselves around my spirit tomorrow... Eaglizard 11:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Godwin, indeed 

message: 'Karma means "(the result of) action", generally taken as a term that comprises the entire cycle douglas of cause and effect.'
What, may I ask, is a cycle douglas? --Nickinuu 02:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Douglas? 

message: I find, in the intro paragraph: "Karma is a sum of all that an individual has done, is currently doing and will do. Individuals go through certain processes and accompanying experiences poop throughout their lives which they have chosen, and those would be based on the results of their own creations: "karma"."
POOP?  Surely, this isnot what the original author intended.  I know not what to change it to, however, this reference needs to be changed...it may work if you think enough about it, but frankly, this is nowhere near a professional standard of work.
64.241.37.140 19:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MORE vandalism:  

message: The following paragraphs seem to contradict one another (the first stating that only the Moksha state prevents karma from accumulating, the second stating that the Turiya state also does so even before achievement of the Moksha state). I do not know enough on the subject to fix this properly, hopefully someone will though. Seraphimblade 19:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Seeming contradiction