A karmic right to curse someone?

[JustGeorge]

I was actually pondering on this earlier...

There were some pretty significant curses placed in the Mahabharata. What would have unfolded without them?

 

[Aupmanyav]

I would monitor the situation and keep a lawyer handy.

He flat out said, "Tell me, why does an atheist keep invoking a deity, he does not believe in, to keep damning things around him?"

What I do in such a situation is to say "Thank Allah" or say "Alhamdulillah". I do not believe in existence even of Hindu Gods and Goddesses since I am a Hindu atheist, therefore, the two expressions are clearly just for fun.
Yeah Jai, karma will act in its own way, but fighting the case in court is your 'dharma'. I hope NJ courts can reimburse your unnecessary law expenses. Indian courts perhaps do not always do that (I am not sure of that).

Sure, one has the right to curse another. One should just be prepared for karmic impact.
It will only impact the landlord if she accepts the curse into her own reality (in other words believes in curses). If it was me, I would just allow her karma to work itself out.
While I'm thinking of it, what would a curse to an apartment do since it's not a sentient being?

The question for an atheist (Hindu) is whether a curse is effective? It may be effective in the way that it may put a fear, a doubt, in the mind of the opponent (like Salix said). But otherwise, I do not see its utility.
Cursing an apartment may not be the right thing to do. What if an innocent person happens to occupy it later and has to face difficulties for no reason?

.. it should and could be thrown out of court out-of -hand.

So, that is it. Karma has played its hand in case of your land lady.

I think the worst that comes out of my mouth anymore is, "Oh snap."

Does not come out of my mouth, but my mind uses the choicest Indian abuse.

I was actually pondering on this earlier...
There were some pretty significant curses placed in the Mahabharata. What would have unfolded without them?

Dwarika (that is the correct spelling, Jai would sure know it. Dwarka is wrong) - would not have been submerged.

 

[Jainarayan]

.. it should and could be thrown out of court out-of -hand.

So, that is it. Karma has played its hand in case of your land lady.

Yes, yes it has. And it's a wonderful thing. Seriously, I'm not one to easily latch onto the idea of "instant karma", but who knows why it seemingly happens.

I received a call from my lawyer yesterday. We did financially qualify for free legal representation because of our income as senior citizens. She said her office has been reviewing the case, and based on the first email and letter asking us to vacate, but giving no reason, the lawyer is filing a motion for immediate dismissal. In other words, my landlord, in giving no reason in the "notice-to-quit", has shot herself in the foot and sabotaged her own case.

In the US in general, and my state specifically a valid and legal reason has to be given in the "notice-to-quit". She even admitted in a phone conversation she didn't follow legal procedure. I mean, "like what!?" She got a lawyer after this was done, so she didn't have legal advice when she started. That's what happens when people say "I know my rights" and "I know the law". Her lawyer is also not familiar with tenant/landlord law, we found out. So he filed the motion to sue for eviction and taking her money for no result.

Long story short, if all goes well, the opposing lawyer will advise my landlord to withdraw the case because it has no legal basis, or the judge (or mediator) will dismiss it out of hand. In either of those cases we won't even set foot in court and the deal is dead. My landlord will be responsible for all lawyer and court costs.

There is, however, the possibility that the landlord will try to get stupid and retaliate with an outrageous rent increase (also illegal) or ignoring us when we need repairs (also illegal). My lawyer said we'll address that if it happens. We will be saving to move out of here as soon as possible because this has created an adversarial relationship. We won't stay where we're not wanted.

धन्यवाद भगवन्
Dhanyavāda Bhagavan.

 

[Jainarayan]

Dwarka is wrong

You're kind of right. Modern designation is Dwarka. I think that's a Hindi-izing of it. Historically and scripturally in Sanskrit the name is Dvārakā. The Dwarkadhish Temple is the modern name. I'm not sure why it's Dvārakādisha and not Dvārakesha according to sandhi.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It is not Hindi-izing, it is localization and Angli-izing. In Hindi, it is still Dvarika, and Krishna is Dvarikadhīsha (द्वारिकाधीश).

"We will be saving to move out of here as soon as possible because this has created an adversarial relationship. We won't stay where we're not wanted."
Yeah, agree with you.