The series of recent disastrous events around the world got Java into thinking about the Cosmic Law of Cause and Effect AKA Karma. The adage that ‘each and every action has an equal and opposite reaction’ is an accepted fact in the realm of Physical Science and Cosmologists through the ages have extrapolated this to apply to Cosmology. Religions also express this phenomenon in their own ways – ‘karma’ to the Hindus and Buddhists is Christianity’s “as you sow, so shall you reap”, or as Jesus is reported to have said, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” – I guess he left out “or else”!
Anyway, getting back to the recent global ‘happenings’, we see that the Japanese are ‘reaping’ a whole slew of karmic effects and it didn’t take much for Java’s imagination to realize why. Java is conviced that although the tsunami was the wrath of the ocean caused, of course, by the tectonic-plate shifts off the coast of Japan, it was also due to Japanese Whaling policies. Anyone who has seen footage of Japanese slaughtering Whales, without considering pregnant females and/or babies and juveniles will know what we mean. The Japanese have also consistently refused to agree with all the policies of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), which was signed in Washington DC, on 2 December 1946 to “provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry”. Japan is also #6 on the top ten polluting countries of the world. And now, with the debacle at their nuclear plants, one can only shudder to think of the consequences!
Getting back to some of the other happenings, particularly in the Middle-East, Java surmises that the accumulation of bad karma has finally reached bursting point and has erupted in the revolutions against the tyranny of those like Mubarak, Gaddafi and the others who have oppressed their countrymen for far too long. The ‘reaping’ of the harvest of what they have ‘sown’ has (as in the case of Mubarak) and will (in the case of Gaddafi) come to pass.
And so it goes – and will continue inexorably, as the law of the Cosmos will prevail over all. With this in mind, wise (or at least ‘savvy’) rulers will do well to pay attention, as what appears to be a rosy present could well turn out to be a nightmarish future – depending on the evil that they get up to when in power. Taking care of the environment is as important as taking care of everything else in a country and the flagrant abuse of anything will undoubtedly have ‘an equal and opposite effect’
Fair enough, huh?
31 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 28, 2011 at 4:46 am
Gallicissa
Hola!
I do believe in Karma, so what you’ve written makes good sense.
On a different note, I hope you are enjoying the cricket, Java.
March 28, 2011 at 1:55 pm
javajones
Hi Amila – Thanks.
Yeah, the matches have been pretty absorbing for the most part. Let’s hope our guys do it tomorrow and then go all the way.
Heard about your recent birding trip with mutual friends. One of these days…..
March 28, 2011 at 3:03 pm
Gallicissa
Yeah, we had a good trip.
D’s garden was superb for birding. While sipping beer there, we had a wonderful Black Eagle soaring in front of us, and also heard a Common Hawk Cuckoo, not too far. The rice and curry, and the curd and treacle mixed with cashew that followed was awesome! It was the first time I tried curd and treacle with cashew.
August 30, 2011 at 1:47 pm
Jeni Nathanielsz
Thanks for the idea of including cashew with curd and kitul…will give it a go …
April 3, 2011 at 7:55 pm
magerata
The only thing comes to my mind when “Karma” is the drinking variety (a beer branded Karma and the usual bar I drink it is pretty close to Buddha Lounge
Other than that the only religious thoughts that crossed my mind lately was, what is my Karma to live among people who burn religious books and poor souls who die for the same. We have to learn to respect, everyone. I really hope the law of the cosmos will swing away from oil soon. Good read Java.
April 4, 2011 at 1:44 am
javajones
Thanks Magerata. Hope the beer is as good as our ‘Lion Lager’!!
April 7, 2011 at 3:42 am
magerata
Hi Java, the Karma beer is good but I think the Larger from Sri Lanka have it’s own unique taste. But what really surprised me was that I was TASTING beer in Sri Lanka. Usually here we gulp down beer without knowing what we are drinking. I liked the stout too. The problem was the heat, weather wise was making me dizzier than the beer!
May 16, 2011 at 3:13 am
PravNJ
Classic post hoc ergo propter hoc with a hindsight bias thrown in. How typically Sri Lankan of you
May 16, 2011 at 11:44 am
javajones
Prav – that all depends on your point of view, doesn’t it? Which “bias” were you referring to???
And then there’s your “typically Sri Lankan” comment, which is typically Sri Lankan of you isn’t it? Wink, wink!!
May 17, 2012 at 1:07 pm
Lotus
I don’t know whether you are being facetious….. but, if you are not, I wonder whether I could clarify something? More from the Buddhist tradition which I am familiar with…..As I understand in Buddhist teachings there is no such thing as collective karma, only individual karma. So for example if there is an erupting volcano somewhere and people living at the base die, they did not collectively do something “wrong” to die at that unfortunate time but each individual may have done something “bad” in their individual capacity in a previous life. I’m not sure maybe the Hindu tradition has a different take on this.
May 17, 2012 at 4:14 pm
javajones
Lotus – Yeah, I guess there was some facetiousness there on Java’s part – the ‘individual karma’ bit comes in towards the end of the post. Although it shouldn’t be contradictory to ‘tradition’ if ‘collective karma’ (as you put it) also exists. After all, cause and effect applies to collective forces as well as to individual ones.
August 14, 2012 at 9:55 am
sharanga
the adage that ‘each and every action has an equal and opposite reaction’ is an accepted fact in the realm of Physical Science and Cosmologists through the ages have extrapolated this to apply to Cosmology. Religions also express this phenomenon in their own ways
If Karma really works like that Newton law, you should kill if you want to live. Opposite actions, remember?
August 14, 2012 at 1:26 pm
javajones
Sharanga – Interesting ‘observation’! However, you may be confusing ‘opposite’ in this context to mean ‘contrary’, as opposed to ‘inimical’, which is what is meant in the context of this post. A question of ‘semantics’?
Newton’s law should uphold this view, don’t you think? In the end it is all to do with ‘energy’, its impact and resulting effect(s).
Cheers!
August 15, 2012 at 7:29 am
sharanga
java, it is not a matter of semantics. It is a matter of maths. Newton’s Third Law is F(1,2) = -F(2,1) (can’t write the vectors and subscripts on this comment. Take F as a vector) . Anything other than this has simply nothing to do with Newton’s Third Law. Religions, discredited, just want some of the respect science has gained by its sheer real world power. If science was a religion, then its priests walk on moon.
Newton’s Third Law explains only simple physical forces, not complex, supposedly non-physical things like Karma.
I really get annoyed when people try to use science to justify their moronic beliefs. Newton’s Third Law is one that is often misused.
August 15, 2012 at 8:59 am
javajones
Hey Sharanga – thanks for the ‘scientific’ rundown. And don’t get too “annoyed” man, that emission of negative energy may bring negative results. Wink, wink…
August 15, 2012 at 9:05 am
sharanga
People don’t emit negative energy when they get annoyed, angry or mad. That’s just utter nonsense.
I have to be annoyed, on behalf of science. It’s actually quite fun.
August 15, 2012 at 9:15 am
javajones
Sharanga – “…utter nonsense” – did you miss the winks? Now here’s something you may find interesting to ponder on. http://www.sacred-texts.com/bos/bos648.htm on Quantum Mechanics and some surprises of creation
Hope you’re having fun…
August 15, 2012 at 3:31 pm
Sharanga
Java, I didn’t miss the wink. Obviously, since getting annoyed on behalf of science is fun, and I like fun, it would be irrational of me to not take a jab at the negative energy nonsense when I’ve been given the chance.
August 16, 2012 at 1:16 am
javajones
Glad you’re having fun Sharanga – helps with that positive energy flow!! Here’s something more for you to get into –
Negative energy can refer to several concepts:
* Negative rest energy, which corresponds to negative mass, which has many unusual physical consequences.
* Energy in any system below the conventionally-defined ground state. Examples are positrons under the dirac sea model of electron behavior, and the region of reduced vacuum energy associated with the Casimir effect. This type of effect typically occurs under exotic or unexpected conditions, as the definition of the ground state is usually chosen because it is the state of lowest expected energy within a system.
* Energy in any system below an arbitrarily defined zero level. Examples include electron potential energy within an atom under the Bohr model of atomic structure, and gravitational potential energy in Newton’s model of gravity.
Also, let me know what you think about this – more ‘fun-stuff’: http://javajones.wordpress.com/2008/10/07/the-hole-we’re-in/
Cheers!
August 16, 2012 at 2:33 am
Sharanga
I don’t think spiritual negative energy pundits think about negative mass when they utter nonsense. But if our brains really create negative mass when we get angry, the sensible course of action would be to get as angry as possible, and sell the good stuff to CERN, before you tell the world about your discovery.
Your universe inside a blackhole is nothing when compared to the multiverse. Being a believer of many world interpretation of quantum mechanics, I really believe that there are infinite number of universes, that those universes constantly split, so there are many many copies of me, and the number is increasing. In many of those universes I must be replying to your comment. At least in one universe, I’m not. Dig?
August 16, 2012 at 6:21 am
javajones
Sharanga – I’m guessing there are many more areas in the multiverse that ‘science’ (and your interpretations of it) can not prove or disprove. And since everything is in constant flux (and the only constant in the universe is ‘change’) ‘science’ as you are interpreting it is just another ‘opinion’.
Anyway, nice exchanging ideas with you, even though you come on as being slightly haughty about your views at times (more winks!)
Cheers!
August 16, 2012 at 11:58 am
Sharanga
Now, what exactly is the logical flow here?
1. There are things in the multiverse that science doesn’t know about.
2. everything is in constant flux.
3. Therefore, science is just another opinion.
Seriously?
Anyway, I must say, in the days of Galileo, the idea that we can learn the truth by doing experiments and making mathematical models to explain the results, instead of looking for truths in the Bible, or greek myths, was a philosophical opinion. But in the centuries that followed, science has shown its sheer real world power. Even you, if someone you love had a brain disease, would get a doctor to operate, instead of going to some african priest who thinks the patient is possessed by ghosts and so drill a hole through the skull to extract the ghost. I think science has earned itself the right not to be called “just another” opinion.
Now, there are things that science doesn’t know yet. But that doesn’t justify filling the gaps with unscientific, irrational, utter nonsesnse.
As for me being haughty, now that is an opinion(I agree with this opinion, btw), unlike gravity. No matter what your opinion about gravity is, if you jump off a tall building, you’ll die.
August 16, 2012 at 4:16 pm
javajones
Sharanga – Seriously(!), don’t get me wrong, I’m all for accepting the discoveries that ‘science’ has made and that are almost universally accepted. My point was that as everything is in flux and therefore all things being subject to change, there are many ‘truths’ that in time will not be ‘true’. The other aspects that result in my views are too profound (geez, I think that haughtiness is catching!) to discuss here, so I’ll leave it there.
On ‘opinion’ – here’s one of yours. Scientific?
“Being a believer of many world interpretation of quantum mechanics, I really believe that there are infinite number of universes, that those universes constantly split, so there are many many copies of me, and the number is increasing. In many of those universes I must be replying to your comment. At least in one universe, I’m not. Dig?”
You really believe copies of you are doing what you are doing over ‘here’, over ‘there’? Faaar out!
August 17, 2012 at 2:02 am
Sharanga
Even if science is an opinion, it is not just another opinion. It is, and must be privileged over the opinion of African priest who make a hole through the skull to extract ghosts.
In fact, since your idea that science is just another opinion, is really just another opinion, which is useless unlike science if you want to manipulate the universe to do what you want, I’m simply discarding your opinion and privilege science.
The “seriously” was because of the obviousl logical flaw in your logic. 3 doesn’t follow from 1, and 2.
1 and 2 are the same thing. They refer to the incompleteness of scientific knowledge. 1 I agree completely. 2 not so much, because the Problem of Induction makes for good philosophical reading, but in practicality, no such problem exists. The laws of the universe have not changed for 16 billion years. There’s no reason to believe they will change before the universe ends, let alone before humans cease to exist.
But even if both 1 and 2 are true, how does that make science just another opinion? What is the criteria used here? Is science an opinion because it is not god, so it is not omniscient yet? So basically, since you don’t know everything about your existence, the idea that you exist is just another opinion of yours?
If that is how you define opinion, that is a wuite interesting definition, which makes everything, including itself, just another opinion, in which case I wonder why any one should care about your opinion about the meaning of the word opinion.
I agree with you to the extent that everything we know is a creation of ours. That is, all our knowledge is subjective. But that doesn’t give you a licence to put theoretical physics and greek gods in the same category. The fact that all knowledge is subjective, doesn’t automatically mean that all knowledge is about subjective things, and there are no objective facts outside our senses.
August 17, 2012 at 2:18 am
Sharanga
Forgot about the many world interpretation. Now, the many world interpretation of quantum mechanics, is what it claims to be: an interpretation
It is not a theory. Quantum mechanics works independently of the interpretations (there other interpretations as well). We get some strange experimental results, and we have some euations that predict the results with astonishing accuracy. What scientists disagree about is how it all happens. Hence a lot of interpretations.
The reasons for why I believe Many World interpretation among others are complex, and I don’t want to discuss them here. But I would say this. Even the interpretations I disagree with needs to be privileged over the opinion that earth rests on a turtle. Not all opinions are equal.
August 17, 2012 at 4:57 am
javajones
Thanks for taking the time, Sharanga – much appreciated. I do believe you are pissed off about my “just another opinion” statement, but you can cool down now, as I am in agreement with you. It was a wrong choice of words.
Of course “interpretations” are also ‘opinions’ aren’t they? And I still think your ‘interpretation’ of the infinite number of ‘you(s)’ doing the same thing you are doing on this planet on ‘their’s’ is very far out indeed.
That’s what I like about science-fiction!
August 17, 2012 at 5:35 am
Sharanga
Interpretations are indeed opinions. They don’t have the same status as a theory. In the case of many-world interpretation however, it is a testable hypothesis, (unlike some other quantum interpretations) . It’s less far out by the way than saying that humans collapse the wave-function, so humans determine what the reality is.
I do believe you are pissed off about my “just another opinion” statement,
Well, it’s just another opinion of yours.
August 17, 2012 at 5:53 am
javajones
“It’s less far out than ….” doesn’t make it more ‘true’ does it? More opinions!
“well it’s just another…” Right!
August 17, 2012 at 6:49 am
sharanga
Less far out means it is more likely to be true. Not true, but more likely. I’m talking about Bayesian probability theory here. What I mean by less far out, is that it has a higher prior probability to be true. And Bayesian probability belongs to mathematics, so it is subjectively objective, and is as valid as science.
In simple terms, the statement “sun will rise tomorrow” is more likely to be true than “a unicorn will kill me tomorrow”, based on the prior probabilities.
August 17, 2012 at 8:47 am
javajones
“…probability …is as valid as science”. Really? Just goes to show…
I’m getting tired…
Cheers!
August 17, 2012 at 10:25 am
sharanga
Ok. Cheers!