Why Gnosticism Does Not Support Karma

 

Why Gnosticism Does Not Support Karma  

The concept of karma, which originated in India with the *Rig Veda*, is not a Jewish, Christian, or Gnostic teaching. Karma, as commonly understood, is a principle of cause and effect where actions determine future experiences, often linked to reincarnation. However, neither Valentinian Gnosticism nor the teachings found in *Eugnostos the Blessed* support such an idea. Instead, these traditions address fate and providence in distinct ways, but neither suggests a system of karmic justice governing human existence.  

The word karma originates from the Sanskrit root kṛ, meaning "to act" or "to do." In Hinduism and Buddhism, karma refers to the moral law of cause and effect, where one's actions determine future experiences. However, this concept is distinct from the Greek and Hebrew terms used in biblical and Gnostic texts. The Greek word for fate, μοίρα (moíra), refers to an allotted portion or destiny, while πεπρωμένο (peproméno) signifies something that has been predetermined. Neither of these terms carry the moral causality implied in karma. Furthermore, fate is not the same as providence, which is expressed by the Greek πρόνοια (pronoia), meaning divine foresight or care. Unlike karma, which suggests an impersonal moral mechanism, providence implies an intentional guiding force, often associated with God’s will in biblical thought.

Ecclesiastes 9:11 provides a perspective that directly contrasts with the deterministic implications of karma. The verse states: "I returned and saw under the sun that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happen to them all." Here, the Hebrew word מִקְרֶה (miqreh) and the Greek ἀπάντημα (apántēma) convey the idea of random chance or unforeseen events, emphasizing unpredictability in life. This contradicts the notion of karma, which suggests that one’s past actions always determine their future outcomes. Instead, the biblical and Gnostic perspectives recognize that human experiences are shaped by a mixture of fate, providence, and random occurrences, none of which align with the karmic cycle of action and reaction.

## The Valentinian Perspective: Fate and Providence  

Valentinian Gnosticism acknowledges the existence of fate (*heimarmene*) and providence (*pronoia*), but it does not equate these with karma. Fate is seen as a system of opposing forces that influence human existence through cosmic alignments, while providence is the means by which salvation is granted through Christ. According to the Valentinians, the celestial bodies and their movements indicate the workings of unseen powers, but they do not independently cause events. Instead, these movements display the activity of higher powers, which guide births and circumstances.  

However, Valentinian Gnosticism teaches that the coming of Christ liberates believers from fate, transferring them to divine providence. This transition is achieved through baptism, which is not merely a ritual but a transformative act that frees one from the constraints of fate. Before baptism, fate is real, but afterward, it no longer holds power over the believer. This belief places emphasis on knowledge (*gnosis*) as the key to salvation, rather than on a deterministic system of cause and effect like karma.  

The idea that one's destiny is shaped by past actions and carried forward in a cycle of rebirth is absent in Valentinian thought. Instead, fate governs those who lack *gnosis*, while those who attain knowledge are freed from it. The Valentinian tradition presents a dualistic worldview where opposing forces influence human existence, but ultimate liberation comes through the knowledge and guidance of Christ, not through karmic retribution.  

## Eugnostos the Blessed: A Rejection of Fate and Providence  

The non-Valentinian text *Eugnostos the Blessed* goes even further in rejecting any concept of fate, providence, or self-governance. Unlike the Valentinians, who see fate as real until transcended, *Eugnostos* dismisses all such concepts as misguided human speculation. The text states:  

> “The wisest among them have speculated about the truth from the ordering of the world. And the speculation has not reached the truth. For the ordering is spoken of in three (different) opinions by all the philosophers; hence they do not agree. For some of them say about the world that it was directed by itself. Others, that it is providence (that directs it). Others, that it is fate. But it is none of these. Again, of three voices that I have just mentioned, none is true. For whatever is from itself is an empty life; it is self-made. Providence is foolish. Fate is an undiscerning thing.”  

This passage makes it clear that *Eugnostos* does not accept fate as a governing force over human affairs. It also rejects providence as lacking wisdom and denies the idea that the world directs itself. Instead, the text argues that true knowledge comes not from philosophy or cosmic determinism, but from the revelation of the true God. 

Both *Eugnostos* and Ecclesiastes emphasize the limitations of relying on external forces and highlight the randomness of existence, which stands in direct contrast to the structured cause-and-effect system of karma.   

## Galatians 6:7-8 and the Rejection of Karma  

Galatians 6:7-8 states:  

> “Do not be deceived: God is not mocked. For whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life.”  

At first glance, this passage may seem similar to karma because it speaks of reaping what one sows. However, the key difference is that this principle is not an impersonal law of cause and effect operating over multiple lifetimes. Instead, it is a moral and spiritual truth governed by God’s judgment, not by an automatic system. The passage warns that choices have consequences, but these consequences are based on divine will, not a mechanical cycle of rebirth or karmic debt.  

Unlike karma, which suggests that every action produces a corresponding effect in a future life, Galatians 6:7-8 presents two clear paths: corruption for those who live according to the flesh and eternal life for those who live by the Spirit. This distinction is not based on an endless cycle of rebirth but on a direct relationship with God, who grants eternal life as a gift. The emphasis is on spiritual transformation rather than inevitable repayment for past deeds. This understanding of sowing and reaping is rooted in the biblical concept of divine justice rather than an impersonal cosmic law, making it incompatible with karma.

## 

## Gnostic Thought and the Rejection of Karma  

Neither Valentinian Gnosticism nor *Eugnostos the Blessed* supports the idea of karma. The Valentinians acknowledge fate as a temporary condition from which one can be liberated through Christ, while *Eugnostos* outright denies fate, providence, and self-governance. In both perspectives, salvation comes through knowledge, not through a cycle of moral retribution.  

Unlike karma, which suggests that past actions determine future experiences in a continuous cycle, these Gnostic perspectives emphasize the role of knowledge in transcending worldly conditions. Valentinian thought allows for fate’s influence until it is overcome, while *Eugnostos* dismisses the very idea that fate or providence has any real power.  

Thus, Gnosticism does not support karma, because it neither upholds a system of moral causality nor believes in reincarnation. Instead, it presents a path of liberation through knowledge, rejecting the idea that human existence is bound to an endless cycle of consequences dictated by past actions.