Comments on birth, illness, recovery, death and re-birth of the being

Binary matrix of the karmic mechanism

In physics, the third law of motion states that to every action corresponds an equal and opposite reaction. Although with a very remote origin, we find the same principle in the fundaments of the karmic postulate. It states that every event originates from a cause and the effect can be annulled only by annulling the cause that manifested it. From this philosophical equation originates the term karma corresponding to the correlation between cause and effect.

In the terms of this philosophical equation we can assume that every thought, word and action expressed originate chains of complex reactions in the physical-emotional sphere of both who produced them and who received them. This shows for the first time a new assumption: the principle of interaction that links every component of the humankind through an endless chain of actions and reactions. The karmic model, through this law, demonstrates that no individual is ever alone or disconnected from his similes. The karmic philosophy reveals that there are actions with a big reactive ability; it also shows that there are causes that move almost endless effects, which involve wide parts of humanity and reveal the existence of a common destiny [1].

From the principles of this teaching we assume that destiny is neither fatal nor impenetrable; it descends from a consequential process that proceeds from clear and comprehensible causes.

The karmic reactivity is basically moved by two sources and therefore it is said to be binary.

The most easily perceivable karmic source is the individual one, whilst the least obvious is generated by causes common to wide parts of the humankind. The supreme source of the karmic activity is individual will, which generates a complex system of relations supported by a lesser binary system, through emotions, passion and desires.

Every thing, deed or person that inspires attracting (will of pos-session ) or rejecting (will of destruction) emotions, starts a karmic activity. Those who are involved in the attraction or rejection, despite being actors or second lead, are implicated in the effects of their emotional will. These effects can take the shape of an external factor; even then, though, they will still be only the reaction to one’s actions. When the meeting occurs in far future the origin can’t be traced and it becomes mysterious. This is destiny, linked to the idea of fate and impenetrable fatality.

Still, destiny might not have a fortuitous form if its cause was the more or less conscious will of an author, director or actor. If the so-called destiny is not of a fatal nature, then it can be channeled, smoothed, deviated and reduced through suitable actions, as it is taught. This is the ultimate goal of the most esoterical part of the teaching. To be able to cohabit with one’s karma and to use its push to reach a goal that can be shared by both (individuality and soul).

First we need to recognize its causes. They can be personal or coming from other agents, even far away, ignored or forgotten ones.

There is an intense network of intentions that connects the karmic activity; it would be a mistake to consider it only referred to the individual. Everything affects everyone and everyone affects humanity with deeds and thoughts that project and multiply their effects as much as possible; they join and go back to the sources that generated them.

In this panorama we can see how a kind of instinct for survival penetrates the world of ideas and turns them into a mobile sphere with its own life. It is the psychic sphere that science knows as conscious, sub-conscious and super-conscious life; with its impulses, the latter seems to push the ideas to survive their creators, joining and making alliances with the similar mechanisms they find inside and outside human nature.

The karma, as we said, is the result of causes which are past but not extinct; either we want it or not we must resolve their effects. Every result must be solved; otherwise it will pile up with the other ‘knots’ of life that stop the flow of individual advancement. This is the sense of karma, after all.

It is a mechanism of the conscience of human nature that acts by induction like the balance that is its symbol. It is a device that must be understood for its function and there’s no point in rejecting it or trying to escape from it, just like other psychic mechanisms. It is much better to reasonably back up its specificity and gradually curb the push that affects our life. We can then use intelligence rather than passive acceptance.

Not everybody has the same point of view. Some people interpret it as an event that hangs over, a quiet, obscure event, detached from human reality.

It is an independent reality called Master. It is a divinity with contradictory origins that acts as a wheel, which draws one or the other and assigns good or evil by inexplicable principles [2].

These confused interpretations create fear and lead people to believe in the existence of divine aversion. Many people try and avoid the latter by fancying propitiatory processes that divinities can appreciate, that can inspire divine sympathies and avoid the most critical judgments; they try and win their indulgence with pleas or devotional (but impious) commerce.

When we reflect on the ‘divine’ plane the attraction-repulsion, which is the lesser result of human heart, we originate the superstitious thought that fuels cults and pleas; the latter, though, will never be able to change the imprint given to a life.

These habits are all cancelled by the introduction to the rule of spiritual evocation-invocation, which the initiate is educated to; this will annul the feelings of attraction and rejection that have guided him through the season of impulses and passion.

The Law of Cause and Effect is not a product of action but rather of intention.

The karmic motion doesn’t originate from actions and facts, but rather from choices and decisions made.

This implies that the karma has a mental cause instead of a physical one. On the other hand, unless we are talking about a demented person, it is obvious that every action is a consequence of a person’s will.

Every karmic reaction descends from will and thought rather than physical causes. Although causes and aggravations belong to different levels, in the karmic process they remain in very close relation. Indeed, their effects concur and sum up; they multiply, so to speak. Let’s see how.

The thoughts that move on the mental levels, the words that move on the emotional plane and the deeds that move on the physical one are all karmic generators; by moving simultaneously they produce their effects on every level. It doesn’t surprise us that the same cause marks every involved level with its effects. It expands quite a lot its intromission in the planes of conscience of the individual who is, so to speak, subjected to it and has his chance to reply compromised.

To exorcise a karmic knot doesn’t mean to ‘resolve’ it. It is useless to turn to emotional processes deformed by fear and hope. Karma is a mechanism that finds its impulse in the energy of the conscience. It is a kind of mental imprinting; it can’t be solved by the optimism that would like to cancel any imperfection, neither from the pessimistic absolutism that can only state dramas, faults and punishments.

In actual fact neither in naturing nature nor in natured nature there is any relation both with pessimism (melancholy) and optimism (inebriation), because the ‘hues’ that color emotions are the expression of passional nature. They are an artificial product of the physical mind, which often finds its reasons in biological and chemical factors and hormonal alterations. If the natural, naturing or natured principles don’t involve either pessimism or optimism, it seems extravagant the will to state the existence of a punishing or saving element above the causes.

Therefore the karmic teaching seems to be the third way. A middle way between free and uncommitted rescue and the eternal punishments for momentary faults.

The third way is the correction through experience. It is the responsible comprehension that follows the acknowledgment of the mistake and its redemption through a complete correction of both the cause and the effect. This looks like the ideal instrument to improve oneself; only by educating ourselves we can think of improving humankind.

The only thing to do now is to consider the karma as a process that expresses the effects caused by individual or group volunteers, bringing them back in the sphere that determined them. We need to proceed with balance and to distribute competences and resources neither pessimistically nor optimistically but ‘fair’.

Athos A. Altomonte

________________________________________
[1] If we could conceive a form of destiny that joins every member of the humankind, we could accept the existence of other ‘strategies’ such as a common good or evil. This would clarify many mysteries.

[2] Sometimes by following the principles of some popular beliefs it is difficult to distinguish a God from another.
God as a non-manifested principle is often obscured in the forms of a god as it is imagined by men. Popular imagination has always had the tendency to reduce into human shape every phenomenon, principle or idea they couldn’t explain with reason, or anything that couldn’t be verified in the physical world. Men have always pictured an image to replace it, on which to base a pile of finite reasoning. They haven’t considered, though, the consequences that lowering the ‘tone’ had on the people who didn’t perceive the presence of the infinite inside themselves and ended up by not distinguishing any more between metaphor and a higher and farther reality. The use that has been made of the idea of destiny is a clear example of some disorders which have made metaphors told by men indistinguishable from reality.

The terms Master of the karma or God are examples of how a metaphysical principle has been humanized, so much that its appearance hides its essence.

Both in good and evil many men have been able to create a destiny for themselves and for those who believed in them and followed their example

To create a destiny for a people or a country has been a frequent event in the history of humankind.
Even when the project is big, it is not opportune to join a particular destiny to a global and huge will such as the ‘Will of God, because it is disjoining and improper. Many religious fundaments are based on this theory, though. The result is that the destiny of a people or a country is marked by the generation of a particular and personal God, rather than a ‘group spirit’. This God will be elected to protect a part and not others.

This is not God but only the will to affirm a destiny. For the exegete it is an individual destiny, whilst it will be collectively shared by the group or the people who were fascinated by his charm or deeds.