>>14771 My view: Curses don't normally make use of the target's own negative energy, for the simple reason that those who throw curses are often evil people themselves, trying to suppress good and innocent people. They attack the target with external negative energy, which they create through evil act. Meaning, they are sending their own karma at the person in the form of a curse. They do this through methods such as sacrificially killing someone during a ritual, which creates this negative energy. Then through the format of the curse, this energy is sent to suppress the target, and may effect their physical situation so much that they die from it, because humans are no immune to large amounts of negative energy being flooded into their environment. At this point, it doesn't matter that there is some greater justice. The curse-thrower caused the death of 2 mostly innocent people and will pay for that, but the damage is done.

>>14774 >will pay for that Or not. My experiments have shown me there is no justice dispensing God or God disguised as "karma". He will pay if the energy gets to him. A completely perfect saint, who did the curse without other motivation than to prove a point, would be immune to any side effects from it. Do you want to argue for the universe having Western Judeo-Christian morals?

>>14783 >He will pay if the energy gets to him Yes. And he will attempt to deflect, but it's always a matter of time. It doesn't matter if that time is 1000 years or more in hell, or half a million years away in a different universe, the energy tied to a person isn't detached from just be "disconnected" by being far away. >A completely perfect saint, who did the curse without other motivation than to prove a point, would be immune to any side effects from it. But is this saint an evil person attempting to kill an innocent person by sacrificing another innocent person? The saint if he is a real saint, would not perform this curse. I don't believe in "morals" other than as "moralism", a manifestation of blindness to the real function of karmic principles. When someone can't see why something happens, but there seems to be a pattern, they will create some ruleset to describe it, but failing to actually understanding it, and that is "morals". Now let's say God in the Abrahamic sense is actually as defined "a being beyond your comprehension, an eternal source", then you cannot claim that you know him or understand his workings, because the very definition says that you can't understand him. So then you are only understanding a manifestation or reflection of him, which is where the sefirot enters as a concept. An imperfect material manifestation of something eternal, which doesn't describe him. If by this definition such a being tells someone that killing is ok under certain circumstances, which is the actual way the torah is written ("thou shall not kill", is the christian version, it's not the original meaning or context, which instead simply says "don't kill in ways God doesn't permit", a larger difference than modern people perhaps wants to realize), then maybe a saint could do this, because the eternal source allows it and it doesn't have negative effects. The saint would then be evil by our standards, but not by someone else's standards, which also changes the idea of who is innocent. But now we're talking about morals more than actual material energy, be it physically visible or only to those with special vision, which would "scientifically" prove if the act had a negative effect or not, as the negative energy exists and will by its function remain with the person until transformed again, where it would produce the retaliative effect.