Theos-Talk Archives (July 1997 Message tl00313)

I seem to be "inspired" by your statements and questions, Kym, although it may
seem that I frequently answer with a "yes, but". Actually, since you ask
questions about things many of us don't take the time to think to their
conclusions, you spur a deeper thought about them. Hidden behind the "obvious"
are things that aren't really obvious.

> I agree, but Karma does seem to be basically illogical.  For example -
> as in your "putting the cat in the toilet" analogy in one of your other
> posts - when the child is doing this, the child is "punished" or
> reprimanded immediately after the act.  The child KNOWS what the error
> was and can, therefore, learn correctly and more quickly.

I can think of one advantage to a delayed "punishment", though that seems to
be a needlessly anthropomorphic word for it. If you experience a "kick in
the butt" immediately, you stop what you're doing and you don't carry out your
experiment to the fullest and see the complete consequences to others besides
yourself.  A delay let's you experience thoroughly the heights and depths of
your actions and their consequences to others. Think of how you teach others.
You let them have a hands on experience and don't intervene too often.

Ann Ree Colton wrote of an Undersoul that is a kind of buffer for karma. We
don't experience all the bad consequences at once because it would be too
overwhelming. Soul mathematics determines how the karmic lessons are timed.
Eventually, she says the Undersoul will be a fifth body.

> But Karma does not do that.  You get a "kick in the butt" without having
> the slightest inclination why.  People are then forced to guess - Is God
> in one of THE moods?  Is God testing me?  Was I a serial killer in a
> previous life?  Is Satan tormenting and taunting me?  To cope, humanity
> spins terrifying tales such as Job or Hell or Heaven, or thinks itself
> base and undeserving.

Agreed, it is quite a bit of detective work to see what is speaking through
misfortune. Part of the problem is that our lessons must be gut-level. Knowing
emotionally as well as intellectually. We can't tell a person something is
harmful to them unless we experience the consequent feelings of despair, pain
and "hopelessness" and think it through ourselves. If the archangel dropped
out of the heavens and said, "This is why you are suffering," would we really
get it? Insights we think through in detail ourselves are always better than
ones we're handed on a platter.

My best research has been motivated by pain. Nothing induces the highest
degree of attention that pain does.