Group: A Karmic With-Bond
(Individualism vs. The Species)
According to the laws of language, a group is a number of persons or things gathered, placed, or classed together, or working together for some purpose. Because the nature of a group is to be loosely knit, it is relatively easy to destroy any group; one need only follow the following four happenstances:
If the members of a group wish to expand, they must expand their original base. If they abandon their base, the group will fall. This is independent of value judgments of whether this breaking up is good or bad. A less effective way of keeping the group together is to solidify the base. This does not allow for as much growth as expanding the base.
Solidification is the process of attaching religious [fanatacism] concepts to the group's values, whereby faith becomes the tenacity to keep the group whole, as opposed to logic which would otherwise update the values to meet the needs of the new situation.
Attitudes are always what change first; then, other things will change after the attitudes change. The more those changes are against the original purpose for the group, the closer that group is to destruction.
Things begin to change. Ridicule of those things that a group holds sacred may cause attitude changes, thereby bringing about destruction. If any one individual puts his own priorities above the priorities of the whole group, he must be cast out if the group is to endure.
Group Karma:
An extremely important, widespread example of a with-type bond relationship is that of group alignment. Let us say that you think of and present yourself as a member of an organization, such as The Club Extra (a mythical organization). In doing so, you have entered into a with-bond relationship with said organization. As a part of that group, you have agreed to behave in a predetermined way. Namely, you have agreed to maintain certain beliefs, do certain things, and to not do other things, etc. The danger in this type of relationship lies in the fact that most people do not realize that they must share in the Karma created by any group to which they belong.
Let us say that you become a member of The Club Extra. This means, from karma's point of view, that you uphold the precepts of The Club Extra. The problem arises because many, if not most, individuals do not fully accept the teachings of this club, or whatever group it is to which they belong. Thus, many who call themselves Club Extras use birth control devices such as condoms, birth control pills, etc. This is in direct opposition to Club Extra's edict. These individuals, because they represent themselves as Club Extras, must bear the Karma of being deceivers and liars. It is safe to say that many individuals never consider these type of things when they create their own system of beliefs but maintain that they belong to a larger group.
The second point to examine is that as a member of a group, one must bear the Karma for any behaviors committed by that group, regardless of whether one condones them, and regardless of whether these behaviors are congruent with how you want or expect the group to function. Again, it is safe to say that many people are completely unaware of this aspect of Karma, if indeed, they are aware of Karma at all! Thus, through affiliation with a group, many individuals gain negative Karma without ever knowing how or why. An example will show how.
Let us say that one day the Pope issues the decree that it is alright to kill other human beings. You, as a member of the Catholic Church, will share in the Karmic responsibility for the murdering of any individuals due to this decree! The only way you could avoid this is to immediately, fully renounce any affiliation to the Church, physically, emotionally, mentally, financially, and in any other -ly. Still, you would bear the group Karma of murder for those who were killed while you were a member of the Church. Only if one were truly unaware that the Church had condoned and was carrying out murder, would one escape this Karma. After all, however harsh it may be, Karma is absolutely just, and if you were unaware of what the group was doing, then you cannot have had a part in it.
This scenario is not as preposterous as it may seem. It is recorded history that the Pope of the Catholic Church, at one time, did indeed authorize the mass murder of the Inca Indians. He pronounced that it was alright to kill the flesh in order to save the soul. All those who were members of the Church at this time, knew of these goings on, and neither left the Church nor tried to change it from within, bear the group Karma for these murders. At some future time they will have to again become members of the Church in order to equalize this Karma.
The preceding only goes to show to what extent the laws of Karma trap Man. What makes it even worse is that many people do not, cannot, or will not accept that Karma is an actual force that must be reckoned with. Sadly enough, the web of Karma goes much deeper than even the preceding scenario illustrates. Consider the following examples.
A member of the Catholic Church realizes the hypocrisy of the Church. He knows it is wrong, and does not condone their behavior. Still, he feels that he simply cannot leave the Church; his beliefs mean too much to him (Remember, the world of illusion is the driving force for reality!). So, he keeps what he values of the Catholic belief system and trashes the rest. As we said before, he must bear the Karma for deceiving others by maintaining that he is a Catholic, when in fact, he is in disagreement with the leader of the Church, the Pope. So, in this case, the individual gets it from both ends, so to speak. He gets bad Karma for once having been in the Church, and he gets bad Karma for not being able to divorce himself from the Church even though he does not agree with their behavior. It is the interplay of Karma with the individual's illusions that denies him the freedom to leave the Church completely (It is an example of the Now-Effect. The Now-Effect is the interaction of the role as that role interacts with the scenario). It is quite possible that this individual will have to change many things before his illusions grant him the freedom to completely turn his back on the Church and thus stop piling up the negative Karma associated with this relationship. There is no telling how long this may take the individual.
Let us assume that the individual chose another path--he decides to become more involved with the Church--to try to create positive change from within. Although the intentions are noble, there is a paradox in that the individual will actually be taking on worse Karma in his quest to change things (nothing is for free). This is because, as he becomes more involved with the Church, he will become more aware of the possible negative aspects of the Church; as such, he will then be Karmically responsible for this new information's acts.