muggle baiting vs. muggle torture

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 155410

houyhnhnm:

Karma  literally means "deed" or "act".  The law of karma 
is the binding  effect of action. Karma is not punishment or 
retribution, but simply an  extended expression of natural 
acts. It can be likened to Newton's Third  law of Motion.

In Buddhism the law of karma states that for every event  
that occurs, there will follow another event whose 
existence was  caused by the first, and this second 
event will be pleasant or unpleasant  according as 
its cause was skillful or unskillful.
Julie:
I've always thought of karmic justice as your actions coming back to bite  
you on
the a** (or reward you, depending on your action). And that type  of justice 
is based on whether your action is harmful or helpful, i.e. bad or  good, IMO. 
I found a couple of other notes on this issue of karmic justice  at Wikipedia:
 
"Karma is not fate, for man acts with free will creating his own destiny.  
According to the Vedas (Hindu), if we sow goodness, we will reap goodness; if we 
 sow evil, we will reap evil." 



Every state of existence, good or bad, is caused by ethically good or evil  
deeds, and karmic justice ultimately rewards good behaviour (by allowing escape 
 from suffering into Nirvana--in Buddhist philosophy). But each individual  
is judged **independently of any other** and actions, good or bad, just or  
unjust, will have their inescapable consequence."
 
The asterisks** above are mine. Each person is judged  *individually,* not 
based on their interactions with others who  might have committed bad or unjust 
actions. Each person is also  judged based on his/her intent in taking his/her 
specific  actions, whether such intent is bad (unjust, vengeful, selfish, 
malicious, or as  houyhnhnm says, unskilled--which would be the same as 
thoughtless/unheeding of  consequences?), or good (apply opposites here).
 
And I do realize that sometimes a person does have to act to prevent  
*further* evil (killing in war, for one example). But if the justification is  merely 
vengeance--an eye for an eye, tit for tat--I don't think  that justification 
will pass the independent judgment of one's actions  inherent in karmic 
justice. Not on the good side of the scale anyway.
 
To use one of houyhnhnm's excellent examples: The ultimate arrival of the  
DEs in HBP would not have occurred if Draco hadn't figured out how to  use the 
Vanishing cabinet to let them into Hogwarts, which wouldn't have  occurred if 
the twins hadn't stuffed Montague in the cabinet with no thought or  concern 
about his ultimate fate (thoughtless, malicious and vengeful intent).  And their 
"bad karma"/karmic justice led directly to Dumbledore's death.
 
houyhnhnm also wrote:
That is why some people on this list are concerned about 
the way in  which Hermione carried out the organization of 
Dumbledore's Army.  Her  unskillful actions led to Dumbledore 
leaving the school at a time when they  had most need of him.  
We don't know yet whether or not there will be  further 
unpleasant consequences resulting from Hermione's unskillful  
actions, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are.
 
Julie:
I agree, though I still would call Hermione's actions "bad" in the sense of  
karma. Had she been acting to *prevent* evil by having everyone sign as a  
deterrent to betrayal of the group--which would have necessitated the signers  
knowing the consequences of their betrayal beforehand--then her actions wouldn't 
 have been on the bad side (and the betrayal very likely wouldn't have taken  
place). But applying the jinx unknown to the signers and setting it to act  
only *after the fact* of the betrayal made her motive nothing more than  
vengeance for a wrong deed, which is also a wrong deed in  itself (remembering that 
karma is judged independently of others' actions). 
 
I also don't know if JKR will revisit the Hermione/Marietta business, but  
she's certainly shown before that she understands the concept of karmic justice  
and has used it knowingly and frequently in the HP books. 
 
Julie, who wonders if JKR's refusal to make clear all the religious  
implications in the
books until they are finished is not because she's Christian, but because  
she is both Christian *and* a believer in Eastern philosophies such as karma  
(which is a universal concept that rears its head in all walks of life and all  
religions, including Christianity).
 
 
 
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]