13 Reasons I No Longer Believe In Karma Or Reincarnation
By Mike Shreve -May 13, 2020



By Mike Shreve| Teachers of Far Eastern religions (such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism and Sikhism) maintain that the process of reincarnation is necessary for the ‘reaping’ of what some call “the karmic debt.” This process supposedly determines the ongoing evolution of the soul. Every action produces either good or bad karma. Ordinarily, good karma cannot cancel bad karma (though some teach it can). Each cause must have its own effect.

I studied under a guru in 1970 before I became a follower of Jesus. In his book, The Teachings of Yogi Bhajan, he offered that idea that, “There are no accidents. Anything that comes to you, you have put out beams for it.”[1] According to this theory, if we have an accident or any kind of negative experience, we have drawn it into our lives by some former negative behaviour, probably in a previous existence.

However, Yogi Bhajan even went as far as saying that, “Every word uttered by you must come back to you within twelve years and it must grip you within the scale of seven years. This is a law of nature.”[2] If his theory is correct, karma would usually have to have its effect within the same earthly life span. The main ‘overflow’ of karma that a person would carry into the next life would primarily be the result of the last seven to twelve years of his or her life. I have never encountered that limitation in anyone else’s teaching.

Most teachers of the doctrine of karma agree that any negative or positive thing we do in life produces either bad or good karma that will inevitably be reaped, either in the same life or a future life. The object of the soul’s sojourn in this world is to walk in such righteousness, love and devotion to right religious principles that only good karma is sown. When this happens, when we become so perfected that we have no more negative karma, according to Hinduism, we attain moksha (release from samsara, the cycle of rebirths). Supposedly, this process can be quite lengthy. Some adherents of this doctrine feel it can involve hundreds, thousands, even millions of separate existences.

I passionately embraced this concept when I was teaching yoga at four universities in 1970 and running a Kundalini Yoga ashram. I was so convinced of this recurring, cyclical pattern of existence that I considered it irrefutable truth. I even told the follower of Jesus who first shared the Gospel with me that I was willing to give up many other ideas, but not reincarnation and karma.

Then, after I was born again and “the Spirit of truth” (the Holy Spirit) came to live inside of me, He began showing me the fallacy of this theory (John 16:13). I soon realised that there truly is only one life, one time of passing through this world (see Hebrews 9:27). The Bible upholds this point of view as well as logic. As we pass through the “thirteen reasons,” you will see that many not only make theological sense, but logical sense as well.

OLAADEGBU:


Read More Here

OLAADEGBU:


The Thirteen Reasons

(1) If suffering, evil, and imperfection in any individual are a result of negative karma reaped from a former life, then how do suffering, evil, and imperfection make their appearance in a soul’s first ‘incarnation’?

Since every human being goes through suffering in this world, and every person is subject to evil and imperfection, there is no person free from this evidence of previous guiltiness. Therefore, there is no proof that anyone has been born for the first time with a ‘clean slate.’

Read More Here

OLAADEGBU:


(2) It is taught that the justice of God demands the concept of reincarnation

For instance, if a child is born physically debilitated or in abject poverty, there is no other explanation for such a condition than the presupposition that this is repayment for evil behaviour in a former life. Otherwise, allowing such a circumstance would be sufficient evidence to indict the Almighty God with the crime of injustice. A loving Creator could never allow such a terrible plight to come upon an innocent child. So, negative circumstances can only be the result of karmic indebtedness.

Believing this line of logic supposedly preserves the integrity and justness of God and places the blame on human beings for their own predicaments. But does this really answer the questions we all ask concerning human suffering? Does it not instead catapult humanity into an even greater abyss of despair?

If this scenario is true, then the innocent child is no longer innocent and good people who suffer are no longer good. Quite the contrary, they are all guilty parties who should unresistingly submit to the ‘punishment’ they deserve. How could this possibly be fair and just treatment especially since those who suffer have no recollection of the ill deeds for which they are being punished? Furthermore, because there is no remembrance of the causal action, unfortunate recipients of such karmic curses cannot assess their wrong behaviour patterns in order to make necessary adjustments in their character.

The unfairness of this doctrine is magnified even more if the Buddhist doctrine of no-self (anatta) is correct. According to this view, there is no enduring self or soul that exists from one incarnation to the next. Instead, five ‘aggregates’ are disassembled at death and a new person is assembled from five new aggregates in the next incarnation. The only thing transferred from one manifestation to the next is the “unconscious disposition” with its attachment of karma accumulated from previous lives. In this scenario, a person does not suffer for his own evil deeds, but for those performed by altogether different individuals.

In the Garland Sutra (10) this is verified—“According to what deeds are done, do their resulting consequences come to be; yet the doer has no existence: this is the Buddha’s teaching.” One person being subjected to suffering because of another person’s errors is not justice; it is injustice—of cosmic proportions.

Read More Here

OLAADEGBU:


(3) If negative karma must be paid off, then any person used to execute such ‘divine justice’ unwittingly throws himself into the same vicious cycle.
For instance, if someone lived his life as a compulsive thief, it would be necessary for that same person, in a future life, to be subjected to numerous robberies. But the thieves fated to participate in this ‘karmic payoff’ would be sowing negative karma that they, too, must reap in future lives, making it necessary for a third generation of robbers to emerge. Further down the karmic road, those fated to fill the role of the fourth generation ‘robbers of the robbers of the robbers of the robber’ would also incur a load of karmic debt that must be paid off.

This would necessitate many more thieves to be born for ‘robbers of the robbers of the robbers of the robbers of the robber’ to make their appearance on the stage of life. So, the process would multiply itself exponentially into an inescapable, never-ending, infinitely-enlarging, impossible-to-solve scenario. Besides, are these thieves making the choice, out of their own free will, to rob others or did fate destine them to be thieves?

If the latter is true, a vicious form of injustice reigns over the future of the human race, because normally decent people are forced to do wicked things for which they are then punished because of karma. Like swimmers who get caught in an undertow, drown, and are swept out to sea, those ‘engulfed’ by this law are helpless participants in its execution. They are ignorant and unwilling victims of an irresistible process.

Read More Here

OLAADEGBU:
(5) Certain predictions of karmic retribution in ancient Hindu sacred texts appear much too severe and obviously unjust.

The Puranas are considered sacred and inspired writings by Hindus. The following passage from this portion of Hindu Scripture communicates a detailed warning concerning the severity of the karmic retribution resulting from specific sinful acts:

The murderer of a Brahmin becomes consumptive, the killer of a cow becomes humpbacked and slowpoke, the murderer of a virgin becomes leprous—all three born as outcastes. The slayer of a woman and the destroyer of embryos becomes a savage full of diseases; who commits illicit intercourse, a eunuch; who goes with his teacher’s wife, disease-skinned. The eater of flesh becomes very red; the drinker of intoxicants, one with discoloured teeth…Who steals food becomes a rat; who steals grain becomes a locust…honey, a gadfly; flesh, a vulture; and salt, an ant…Who commits unnatural vice becomes a village pig; who consorts with a Sudra woman becomes a bull; who is passionate becomes a lustful horse…These and other signs and births are seen to be the karma of the embodied, made by themselves in this world. Thus the makers of bad karma, having experienced the tortures of hell, are reborn with the residues of their sins, in these stated forms. (Garuda Purana 5)

Doesn’t it seem unreasonable that these terrible curses are the inevitable plight of those who transgress in these ways? Though some are extremely grave sins, such as murder and adultery, others are quite minor. Just imagine—if all those who worked in slaughterhouses are destined to become humpbacked imbeciles, the world should be full of such persons. Or what if there was a benevolent man who helped thousands, who gave to the poor, who lived and promoted truth his entire life, yet he unfortunately stole some salt when he was a boy?

According to this passage, his change of heart and his righteous acts would be of no avail. Because of one ill deed in his youth, this man would be confined to the horrid destiny of becoming an ant until his karmic debt was sufficiently paid off (because good karma normally cannot cancel out bad karma). Such severe treatment could only be labelled unfair and unjust. It isolates individual errors instead of determining a person’s destiny by the total contribution of his or her life.

Of course, it must be stated that not all proponents of the doctrine of reincarnation believe in the Puranas or accept the idea of the regression of the soul from human to animal form. For instance, Theosophist Irving Cooper commented, “Progress is forwards, not backwards, so as we advance, we always come back in human bodies, each one a little better than the previous one. Sometimes, it is true, for some grievous fault, we may during one incarnation retrace our steps to a slight extent and take birth in a less advanced type of body and under less favourable conditions. But this retrograde movement is apparent and not real, even as the backward movement of an eddy in the flowing water of a river does not change the forward course of the stream.”[3] So there is great disagreement even among reincarnationists concerning the correct revelation of this process.

Read More Here

OLAADEGBU:
(8) The doctrine of karma and the Hindu belief in cycles of creation seem to be in direct conflict with each other.

In the teachings of Hinduism there are four infinitely-repeating, cyclical ages that proceed from totally perfect (the Krita Yuga) to completely degenerate (the Kali Age—the age in which we are caught right now). How could a perfect age (the Krita Yuga) in which dharma (the moral order) is completely manifested in the human race ever degenerate into anything less? There would only be positive karma being sown. Likewise, how could this present corrupt age, the Kali Yuga, with its overload of negative karma, ever hope to be reborn into another Krita Yuga, a golden era of utter perfection? What happens to the huge amount of accumulated negative karma that must be paid off?

Furthermore, if the world in its present stage is ‘digressing’ into the ever-increasing, miry depths of the Kali Yuga, how can souls caught in this evil age ever hope to be found ‘progressing’ toward perfection and godhood? The current of fate’s influence is carrying us down, not up. Yet this is the cyclical pattern that is promoted in traditional Hinduism as the true developmental, evolutionary process of this world.

Read More Here

OLAADEGBU:


(9) If reincarnation is true, then fatalism is true.

The hypothesis is this: “At the moment of reincarnation, the soul (called the subtle body), after making the appropriate karmic calculations, attaches itself to a developing embryo.”[6] This would make it necessary for the future of that embryo to be absolutely predetermined, even in minor details.

Otherwise the calculations could not be dependable. This leaves very little, if any, room for freedom of choice or divine intervention. Men and women are no more than puppets on karmic strings, controlled by an inexorable and inescapable law. While appearing to be masters of their own future, according to this standard, men and women are really prisoners of their own past.

Read More Here

OLAADEGBU:


(10) If it is necessary for human beings to work out their ‘karmic debt’ through many incarnations, Jesus’ death was in vain and the crucifixion was not the pivotal, planetary event that Christianity claims.

If Jesus were ‘enlightened’ to the doctrine of karma, as some insist, He would have known that people’s problems may take numerous incarnations to resolve. An attempt to intervene for mankind on such a grand scale would have been a gross disregard for the karmic process. By His own admission, no man took Jesus’ life from Him. He gave it up willingly, knowing the infinite value of what He would accomplish. (See John 10:18.) The very fact that He did this, expecting it to bring salvation to the world, shows that the related doctrines of reincarnation and karma were not part of His belief system. Therefore, these doctrines should not be a part of our belief system either.

OLAADEGBU:


(11) If it is necessary for human beings to evolve to perfection through numerous incarnations, then both the resurrection of Jesus and the promised future resurrection of all believers, are stripped of validity, value and purpose.

Jesus’ physical body went through an agonising death on the cross. The same body was resurrected three days later. This literal conquering of mortality is something no other religious leader ever accomplished (though Sikhs claim something similar for their founder, Guru Nanak). After Jesus ascended into heaven, he was glorified, receiving a “glorious body,” a celestial form that shines like the sun in the kingdom of God. (Philippians 3:21)

When the biblical patriarch Job faced imminent death, he confessed to God, “All the days of my appointed time will I wait till my change come.” (Job 14:14 KJV) The Psalmist David also foretold, “I shall be satisfied when I awake in Your likeness.” (Psalm 17:15) In other words, the ultimate hope for God’s people is a final, physical change into the likeness of the Lord himself.

While on earth, Jesus promised, “This is the will of him who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:40) The Scripture also promises that he is able to “transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to his glorious body.” (Philippians 3:21) This will happen at the Second Coming of Christ, when the resurrection of the dead takes place.

Jesus explained that after that great event, in the future “kingdom of heaven,” God’s people will sit down and commune with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (the patriarchs of Judaism). (See Matthew 8:11, Luke 13:28.) If these men will be identifiable eternally as the singular personalities from around four thousand years ago, then what happened to their multiple personalities up to that point? Or what happened to any subsequent personalities they bore later? No, the implication is clear—they only lived one life and that is their identity forever!

If reincarnation is true, then the doctrine of the resurrection becomes totally confused. If we wear numerous physical bodies during many earthly sojourns, which one is resurrected? Furthermore, if the soul ultimately evolves, through the reincarnation process, into formless union with Brahman, then resurrection is unnecessary. Yet resurrection was the pattern set forth in the prototype of all sons of God.

If Jesus, the firstborn Son of God, was literally resurrected from the dead, he went through this experience to set a precedent and to give his followers hope—hope that we, too, will eventually be resurrected from the dead, in a literal sense. If Jesus was really an Avatar, and if he really studied under Far Eastern masters, why did he teach such a doctrine that is so contradictory to what they would profess. Considering these things, it must be concluded that these two doctrines—reincarnation and resurrection—are completely incompatible. Therefore, only one belief can be retained, at the expense of the other being discarded.

Read More Here

LikeAking:


The truth is before our very eyes,but because of it's simplicity we ignore it.

The guru's are right.

The reason why their religion don't trend is because it's closer to reality.

OLAADEGBU:


Was it you that suggested that folks should read the Grail Message?

LikeAking:


No.

OLAADEGBU:


(11) If it is necessary for human beings to evolve to perfection through numerous incarnations, then both the resurrection of Jesus and the promised future resurrection of all believers, are stripped of validity, value and purpose.

Jesus’ physical body went through an agonising death on the cross. The same body was resurrected three days later. This literal conquering of mortality is something no other religious leader ever accomplished (though Sikhs claim something similar for their founder, Guru Nanak). After Jesus ascended into heaven, he was glorified, receiving a “glorious body,” a celestial form that shines like the sun in the kingdom of God. (Philippians 3:21)

When the biblical patriarch Job faced imminent death, he confessed to God, “All the days of my appointed time will I wait till my change come.” (Job 14:14 KJV) The Psalmist David also foretold, “I shall be satisfied when I awake in Your likeness.” (Psalm 17:15) In other words, the ultimate hope for God’s people is a final, physical change into the likeness of the Lord himself.

While on earth, Jesus promised, “This is the will of him who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:40) The Scripture also promises that he is able to “transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to his glorious body.” (Philippians 3:21) This will happen at the Second Coming of Christ, when the resurrection of the dead takes place.

Jesus explained that after that great event, in the future “kingdom of heaven,” God’s people will sit down and commune with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (the patriarchs of Judaism). (See Matthew 8:11, Luke 13:28.) If these men will be identifiable eternally as the singular personalities from around four thousand years ago, then what happened to their multiple personalities up to that point? Or what happened to any subsequent personalities they bore later? No, the implication is clear—they only lived one life and that is their identity forever!

If reincarnation is true, then the doctrine of the resurrection becomes totally confused. If we wear numerous physical bodies during many earthly sojourns, which one is resurrected? Furthermore, if the soul ultimately evolves, through the reincarnation process, into formless union with Brahman, then resurrection is unnecessary. Yet resurrection was the pattern set forth in the prototype of all sons of God.

If Jesus, the firstborn Son of God, was literally resurrected from the dead, he went through this experience to set a precedent and to give his followers hope—hope that we, too, will eventually be resurrected from the dead, in a literal sense. If Jesus was really an Avatar, and if he really studied under Far Eastern masters, why did he teach such a doctrine that is so contradictory to what they would profess. Considering these things, it must be concluded that these two doctrines—reincarnation and resurrection—are completely incompatible. Therefore, only one belief can be retained, at the expense of the other being discarded.

Read More Here