Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Celebrity Karma Theory

What if the thing that enables celebrities to be able to enjoy a life of luxury more than anything is their karma for entertaining millions of people by bringing them joy through whatever they're famous for? Music, movies, television, artwork, inventions, etc.. all the things that they created and participated in that resulted in the happiness of others is what actually made them rich and happy and famous. Any time you do something that gives others a good feeling will result in you being rewarded by something happening that enables you to enjoy life more.. whether it's an ability or just an enlightenment.
Gloomy · F
If this logic were consistant why are doctors, social workers, firemen, ... not equally able to enjoy their life in luxury?
I doubt karma will ever get anyone rich. They've worked hard for their money and I have noticed that most rich people are not really generous, but selfish and don't help others. Some do, but most are greedy and keep it to themselves.
AngelKrish · 26-30, M
It's love of audience who makes them famous and gives them money !
Karma done under righteousness gives one sucess,love , growth, fame....when one chooses path of unrighteousness to make money then it spoils his/her all efforts.....it is applicable on every individual on this earth!
Generally speaking the idea of karma originated in the "eastern" faiths, alongside the idea of multiple lives and time spans beyond that envisaged in the Abrahamic Faiths.

Accordingly, in the basic Theravada Buddhist texts where karma is mentioned it involves far more than the simplistic idea of "instant karma". Instead, it is implied that those enjoying good fortune could well be using up the very last dregs of good karma, while those apparently suffering could be enduring the vary last dregs of bad karma - and so forth.

Whatever, this obviously negates the nonsense that would cause some to equate good (or bad) fortune with any particular moral judgement of another human being.

This post can now safely be ignored.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
You could be right!

Obviously it's as unsafe to generalise the famous as it is to generalise anyone, but there are two strong drives there. One is being creative, the other making so many people happy by their work.

I separate the two motives because clearly such people love being creative or at least skilled in performing other's creations; but very few actually achieve any fame through it. For them the making or the performing is what matter even if purely as amateurs with very limited audiences.

That so, perhaps the fame and money are a bonus.
Or sell your soul…
Musicman · 61-69, M
@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout I have wondered about that myself.
Graylight · 51-55, F
Why not the set designers that made that possible? Why not the writers, cinematographers, prop guy? Actors stand on a spot someone else pointed out saying words written by others while behaving in a way someone else suggests. He's a posable mannequin.
GeniUs · 56-60, M
Ok so how come the Kardashians were rich before they started befouling the airwaves with their nonsense?
@GeniUs Because papa Robert Kardashian was lawyer to the studios that would get their A listers out of trouble when they got into scandalous behavior, he made beaucoup bucks.
GeniUs · 56-60, M
@NativePortlander1970 Pretty much my point nothing Karmic about that straightforward villainous behaviour but apparently within the written law of the land 🤷🏼‍♂️
CrazyMusicLover · 31-35
That's not karma, that's the logical outcome. People pay for the entertainment they provide so they become rich.
Delilah5 · F
As long as they stay humble...it's all good.
No, it's because they sold themselves out to be shills for distraction during the culture wars.

Post Comment