Been flirting with a few concepts lately. The idea of Karma: What goes around, comes around. Also the idea of destiny, of things that are/were meant to be will always be, coupled with the idea of of every action has a reaction.
Im really on the fence with regards all these ideas, valuing all in varying degrees. Which idea beats the other? Don't know. Can we even compare them accurately?
With karma, or the concept thereof, I regard is concrete practical idea where doing good, good becomes thereof. I don't believe, or I reserve judgement, that it has magical outcomes. Only that if you are kind to someone, in most cases if you come across that some one again in the future, they will be good to you, as you were to them - not that some magical good will result like you win a business deal - its more isolated than that. Which leads me to the next idea, that you will win the next business deal because you made it happen, you took steps to increase your chances of winning - put yourself forward, did stuff. The last idea being that if you let things run their course, which is that of natural unrestricted interference and letting the path of least resistance determine the destined outcome of everything - you wait and see how things tend to pan out. Perhaps use the idea of karma to facilitate these last two ideas.
My opinions have changed about which of the 3 I value more. I've for a long time believer in letting life runs its course, however as I encounter the power of making things happen that i want happen, being a result of me taking steps to produce this result, the more I realise that waiting for an expected eventuality wastes time when you can define, design and dictate an eventuality.
I guess this progression is a product in a maturing view of knowing what one wants. When one doesn't know, letting life run its course is an attractive means not having to act, because you don't know if the result of explicitly acting or doing is what you actially want. As you realise that you want certain things, this view changes because you can get what you want by doing something and there is a longer wait or even no eventuality that you'll get what you want.
This leaves Karma, devoid of the battle above and I guess this us because Karna is not a strategy like the above fight between destiny and cause of effect. It's a more of a state of mind, a means to satisfy your psyche.
So in this way, I guess I am regard myself not favouring one and throwing out the other, more that I'm armed with awareness of the results of all these ideas.
and that's not a bad thing.
Im really on the fence with regards all these ideas, valuing all in varying degrees. Which idea beats the other? Don't know. Can we even compare them accurately?
With karma, or the concept thereof, I regard is concrete practical idea where doing good, good becomes thereof. I don't believe, or I reserve judgement, that it has magical outcomes. Only that if you are kind to someone, in most cases if you come across that some one again in the future, they will be good to you, as you were to them - not that some magical good will result like you win a business deal - its more isolated than that. Which leads me to the next idea, that you will win the next business deal because you made it happen, you took steps to increase your chances of winning - put yourself forward, did stuff. The last idea being that if you let things run their course, which is that of natural unrestricted interference and letting the path of least resistance determine the destined outcome of everything - you wait and see how things tend to pan out. Perhaps use the idea of karma to facilitate these last two ideas.
My opinions have changed about which of the 3 I value more. I've for a long time believer in letting life runs its course, however as I encounter the power of making things happen that i want happen, being a result of me taking steps to produce this result, the more I realise that waiting for an expected eventuality wastes time when you can define, design and dictate an eventuality.
I guess this progression is a product in a maturing view of knowing what one wants. When one doesn't know, letting life run its course is an attractive means not having to act, because you don't know if the result of explicitly acting or doing is what you actially want. As you realise that you want certain things, this view changes because you can get what you want by doing something and there is a longer wait or even no eventuality that you'll get what you want.
This leaves Karma, devoid of the battle above and I guess this us because Karna is not a strategy like the above fight between destiny and cause of effect. It's a more of a state of mind, a means to satisfy your psyche.
So in this way, I guess I am regard myself not favouring one and throwing out the other, more that I'm armed with awareness of the results of all these ideas.
and that's not a bad thing.