On the Unity.org website, Lila Herrmann writes an interesting essay on karma and Unity. In this brief article, she briefly discusses what karma is and if it fits with Unity teachings.
As a scholar of world religions, I was a little disappointed with the lack of understanding of the detail and nuance with which the term karma is/has been used in Indian religious systems. She recognizes that it comes from Indian traditions, but cites no Hindu, Buddhist, Jain practitioners or Indologists (scholars who study the cultural and religious traditions of India), instead relying solely upon Unity leaders and ministers to corroborate her understanding of karma. Now, I have utmost respect for Charles Fillmore, Eric Butterworth, and many other Unity ministers in terms of their insight into the practice of prayer and knowledge of Unity principles, but most of them aren't scholars of Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. and so their statements of karma are, at best, simplistic and, at worst, rather inaccurate.
Herrmann does acknowledge the Sanskrit origin of the word and gives its root meaning as "action"; this is all very straightforward and accurate. However, using Fillmore and Butterworth, it seems that she depicts karma as a kind of deterministic cycle of punishment. This negative understanding of karma as dealing only with wrongdoing, sin, and/or punishment simply isn't always the case in Indian religion. It's actually much more complex than that, since we're dealing with several different religious traditions within India and a plethora of various viewpoints within those traditions. However, I'll summarize some of the trends of the Indian traditions regarding karma.
In general, most Hindus and Buddhists agree that karma isn't the accumulation of the effects of past sins or some kind of debt to be paid off from lifetime to lifetime. Rather, karma is more like a cosmic law or principle of cause and effect/action and reaction that governs all existence. This karmic principle is valuated as neither good nor bad - it simply is - it's a mechanism of the universe that directly influences the outcome of actions. Karma deals equally with positive and negative actions, since it deals with all action (hence the root meaning "action" not "negative or positive action").
Karma isn't punishment or retribution because it's simply the extended expression or fruit of actions performed. The effects of actions are also able to be influenced by other actions and are not necessarily fated or predetermined. That is, a certain action performed now is not binding on a particular future experience or reaction. Karma is not simply a one-to-one preordained correspondence of reward or punishment. Though there are some deterministic positions within Hindu philosophy, the Indian religions largely agree that humans have free will to shape their own destiny. Thus, according to the Hindu Vedas and Upanishads and the Buddhist Pali Canon (as well as other non-Indian Buddhist texts), actions have their appropriate and corresponding effect. Thus, for example, if one does a good/wholesome/healthy deed this will result in a good/wholesome/healthy effect, and if one does a bad/unwholesome/unhealthy deed this will result in a bad/unwholesome/unhealthy effect.
Jainism is the only Indian system that holds a view of karma that one could probably argue to be explicitly "negative." Jainism doesn't view karma as a law/principle of cause and effect but more like a kind of subtle material or fine energy field (often referred to as karmic dirt) that pervades the entire universe. This fine karmic matter is attracted to the soul because of vibrations created by activities of one's mind, speech, and body as well as various mental dispositions. So karma is the subtle matter surrounding the consciousness of a soul from which the soul must extricate itself before it can experience its natural state of "nirvana."
There are, of course, differences in details between the Indian religions concerning karma. In Hinduism, this principle of karma can be created and influenced by a deity/ies or not, depending on the sectarian viewpoint, whereas in Buddhism and Jainism deity/God is simply not usually part of the system. In Buddhism, karma is one of the five causal categories and so is only one of many different influences/conditions of a person's experience in the complex chain of cause and effect. (There are conditions of action (karma), environment, heredity, intention, and tendencies in nature, which all come together in various ways and combinations to bring about the events experienced in one's life.) [For more info on all the above, see R.C. Zaehner, Hinduism, 1966; L Babb, Karma: An Anthropological Inquiry, 1983; M. Weber, et al, Religion of India: The Sociology of Hinduism and Buddhism; C. Eliot, Hinduism and Buddhism, 2007; W.D. O'Flaherty, Karma and Rebirth in Classical India Traditions, 1980; P. Williams, Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations, 1989; and P. Dundas, The Jains, 2002.]
My general point is that, besides Jainism, most Indian religion understands karma not as a cycle of punishment or retribution but as a neutral,natural universal principle that brings about appropriate results of one's actions. In this light, karma is not so disparate from the "Law of Mind-Action" as outlined so well in Herrmann's essay. Much like karma, the Law of Mind-Action says that one's experiences (results/effects of action) are created by our actions (grounded in thought, but also in word and deed). This primacy of mind-intention in Unity probably places it more in alignment with Buddhism than most other Indian systems, since Buddhism grants a primary place of intention in their notion of karma. Both karma and the Law of Mind-Action recognize that in order for one to experience a life of contentment and well-being one must change one's actions (in mind, speech, and physical work) accordingly to suit these purposes. Positive and healthy activity will bring about like results.
In addition, in both the Indian religions and Unity, it is prayer, contemplation, and meditation that are considered to be the means of cultivating a life that brings about experiences of good, truth, love, and well-being.
Unity's Law of Mind-Action is much closer to some of the Indian teachings of karma than I believe Herrmann has recognized. This is likely due to the influence of Indian religious philosophy on especially Charles Fillmore who became acquainted with world religions through reading some of their texts, but mostly via the Transcendentalism movement (Emerson) and other New Thought thinkers. Regardless, though I know Unity has been striving to solidify a distinct identity, it is only fair and factual to concede that there's at least some real similarity between karma and the Law of Mind-Action.
No comments:
Post a Comment