ACCORDING to Christian conceptions,1 sin is a violation
of the personal will of, and apostasy from, God. The flesh
is the source of lusts which oppose God’s commands, and
in this lies its positive significance for the origin of a
bias of life against God. According to St. Thomas, in the
original state, no longer held as the normal, the lower
powers were subordinate to reason, and reason subject
to God. “Original sin” is formally a “defect of original
righteousness,” and materially “concupiscence.” As St.
Paul says (Rom. vii. 8, 14), the pneumatic law, which
declares war on the lusts, meets with opposition from
the “law in the members.” These and similar notions
involve a religious and moral conscious judgment which
is assumed to exist in humanity alone. Hindu notions of
pāpa (wrong) and puṇ ya (that which is pure, holy, and
right) have a wider content. The latter is accordance
and working with the will of Īśvara (of whom the jīva is
itself the embodiment), as manifested at the particular
time in the general direction taken by the cosmic process,
as the former is the contrary. The two terms are
relative to the state of evolution and the surrounding
circumstances of the jīva to which they are applied.
Thus, the impulse towards individuality which is necessary
and just on the path of inclination or “going forth”
(pravṛ ttimārga), is wrongful as a hindrance to the attainment
of unity, which is the goal of the path of return
(nivṛ ttimārga) where inclinations should cease. In short,
1 See authorities cited in Schaaff Herzog Dict.
what makes for progress on the one path is a hindrance
on the other. The matter, when rightly understood, is
not (except, perhaps, sometimes popularly) viewed from
the juristic standpoint of an external Law-giver, His
commands, and those subject to it, but from that in
which the exemplification of the moral law is regarded
as the true and proper expression of the jīva’s own
evolution. Morality, it has been said, is the true nature
of a being. For the same reason wrong is its destruction.
What the jīva actually does is the result of his karma.
Further, the term jīva, though commonly applicable to
the human embodiment of the ātmā, is not limited to it.
Both pāpa and puṇ ya may therefore be manifested in
beings of a lower rank than that of humanity in so far as
what they (whether consciously or unconsciously) do is a
hindrance to their true development. Thus, in the Yoga-
Vaśiṣ ṭ ha it is said that even a creeping plant acquired
merit by association with the holy muni on whose
dwelling it grew. Objectively considered, sin is concisely
defined as duhkhajanakam pāpam. It is that which has
been, is, and will be the cause of pain, mental or physical,
in past, present and future births. The pain as the
consequence of the action done need not be immediate.
Though, however, the suffering may be experienced as a
result later than the action of which it is the cause, the
consequence of the action is not really something separate,
but a part of the action itself—namely, the part of it
which belongs to the future. The six chief sins are kāma,
krodha, lobha, moha, mada, mātsarya—lust, anger,
covetousness, ignorance or delusion, pride and envy.1
1 This in part corresponds with the Christian classification of the
“seven
deadly sins”: pride, coveteousness, lust, anger, envy, gluttony, and
sloth
which if deliberately persisted in, drive from the soul all state of
grace.
All wrong is at base self-seeking, in ignorance or disregard
of the unity of the Self in all creatures. Virtue
(puṇ ya), therefore, as the contrary of sin, is that which
is the cause of happiness (sukhajanakaṃ puṇ yam). That
happiness is produced either in this or future births, or
leads to the enjoyment of heaven (Svarga). Virtue is
that which leads towards the unity whose substance is
Bliss (ānanda). This good karma produces pleasant
fruit, which, like all the results of karma, is transitory.
As Śruti says: “It is not by acts or the piṇ ḍ as offered by
one’s children or by wealth, but by renunciation that
men have attained liberation.”1 It is only by escape
through knowledge, that the jīva becoming one with the
unchanging Absolute attains lasting rest. It is obvious
that for those who obtain such release neither vice nor
virtue, which are categories of phenomenal being, exist.
KARMA
Karma is action, its cause, and effect. There is no
uncaused action, nor action without effect. The past, the
present, and the future are linked together as one whole.
The icchā, j?āna, and kriyā śaktis manifest in the jīvātmā
living on the worldly plane as desire, knowledge,
and action. As the Bṛ hadāraṇ yaka Upaniṣ ad says:
“Man is verily formed of desire. As is his desire, so is
his thought. As is his thought, so is his action. As is his
action, so his attainment.”2 These fashion the individual’s
karma. “He who desires goes by work to the
object on which his mind is set.”3 “As he thinks, so he
1 Na karmaṇ ā, na prajayā, dhanena
Tyāgena eke amrtatvam ānaśuh. (Taittiriyopaniṣ ad).
2 Chapter IV, iv. 5.
3 Chapter IV, iv. 6.
becometh,”1 Then, as to action, “whatsoever a man sows
that shall he reap.” The matter is not one of punishment
and reward, but of consequence, and the consequence of
action is but a part of it. If anything is caused, its result
is caused, the result being part of the original action,
which continues, and is transformed into the result.
The jīvātmā experiences happiness for his good acts and
misery for his evil ones.2
Karma is of three kinds—viz., saṃ cita-karma—that
is, the whole vast accumulated mass of the unexhausted
karma of the past, whether good or bad; which has still
to be worked out. This past karma is the cause of the
character of the succeeding births, and, as such, is called
samskāra, or vāsanā. The second form of karma is
prārabdha, or that part of the first which is ripe, and
which is worked out and bears fruit in the present birth.
The third is the new karma, which man is continually
making by his present and future actions, and is called
vartamāna and āgāmi.3 The embodied soul (jīvātmā),
whilst in the samsara or phenomenal world, is by its
nature ever making present karma and experiencing the
past. Even the Devas themselves are subject to time
and karma.4 By his karma a jiva may become an Indra.5
Karma is thus the invisible (adṛ ṣ ṭ a), the product of
ordained or prohibited actions capable of giving bodies.
1 Chāndogya Upaniṣ ad, III, xiv. 1.
2 Mahābhārata, Śāinti-Parva, cci. 23, ccxi, 12.
3 Devī-Bhāgavata. VI. x, 9, 12, 13, 14.
4 So it is said:
Nasmastat karmabhyo vidhirapi na yebhyah prabhavati, and
Ye samastajagatśṛ ṣ ṭ isthitisamhārakeṇ gāh.
Tepi kāleṣ u līyante kālo hi balavattarah.
5 Devī-Bhāgavata. IX. xxviii, 18-20.
It is either good or bad, and altogether these are called
the impurity of action (karma-mala). Even good action,
when done with a view to its fruits, can never secure
liberation. Those who think of the reward will receive
benefit in the shape of that reward. Liberation is the
work of Śiva-Śakti, and is gained only by brahmaj?āna,
the destruction of the will to separate life, and realization
of unity with the Supreme. All accompanying
action must be without thought of self. With the cessation
of desire the tie which binds man to the saṃ sara
is broken. According to the Tantra, the sādhana and
ācāra (q.v.) appropriate to an individual depends upon
his karma. A man’s tendencies, character and temperament
is moulded by his saṃ cita karma. As regards prarabdha-
karma, it is unavoidable. Nothing can be done
but to work it out. Some systems prescribe the same
method for men of diverse tendencies. But the Tantra
recognizes the force of karma, and moulds its methods
to the temperament produced by it. The needs of each
vary, as also the methods which will be the best suited
to each to lead them to the common goal. Thus, forms of
worship which are permissible to the vīra are forbidden
to the paśu. The guru must determine that for which
the sādhaka is qualified (adhikārī). |
