2 Answers

Karma has an interesting interpretation in the west. Most people believe the underlying philosophy of karma to be something along the lines of do bad and bad will come to you. Dictionary.com defines karma “as bringing upon oneself inevitable results, good or bad, either in this life or in a reincarnation”. Karma to wikipedia is “the concept of “action” or “deed” in Dharmic religions, understood as a term to denote the entire cycle of cause and effect as described in the philosophies of Hinduism and Buddhism.”

The popular understanding, along with both dictionary.com and wikipedia are missing the actuality karma. The literal translation for karma is action, which is what wikipedia had it as.

This is where it all starts going wrong.

Read more here >http://themiddleway.net/?p=21

karma |?kärm?|
noun
(in Hinduism and Buddhism) the sum of a person's actions in this and previous states of existence, viewed as deciding their fate in future existences.
• informal destiny or fate, following as effect from cause.
DERIVATIVES
karmic |-mik|adjective,
karmically |-mik(?)l?|adverb
ORIGIN from Sanskrit karman ‘action, effect, fate.’

The concept of karma is broader than the Christian concept of ’sin’ because of it’s excessively stressed condemnation of/for regrettable error. The karma concept seams to suggest balance. Both ’sin‘ and karma are essentially dualistic ….right v wrong. The dualistic theater of concepts is a very ignorant way to choose a course of action because of it’s Grand exclusion...and in that employ denial and/or acceptance as a way to exclude further consideration in the subject. Obviously whoever made dualism, did so to kill its followers as that is the result of its temporal embrace…to exclude by division progressively…to death.