Beyond Karma
Beyond Karma
Beyond Karma
Winfried Corduan
.
Christian students of world religions have often become occupied,
perhaps even preoccupied, with finding the beliefs that correspond to Christian
doctrines in other religions. They want to know what terms they should
substitute for, say, God, the Bible, sin, or salvation, as they learn about what
non-Christian religions teach. Underlying such a quest is obviously the
assumption that all religions conform to a basic pattern (which frequently just
“happens” to be that of Christianity), and that studying other religions means
learning to insert the right concepts into their appropriate slots, as dictated by
the paradigm. I do not think we need to belabor the fact that this approach
can seriously distort the beliefs of other religions. However, the abuse of such
a search for equivalences does not negate the fact that sometimes there are
similarities that we should recognize as such.1
Let me clarify that I am not taking issue with the fact that karma (kmR or
First of all, we need to recognize that the word “karma” has a broader
meaning, apart from its role in samsara. “Karma” more literally means
“action” or “duty” and is used to refer to the obligations that a person lives
under, particularly those engendered by his caste. Let us cite a few examples.
In the Rig Veda “karma” can refer to obligations, sacred duties, or just
plain works or actions. Here, side by side, are some verses from the Rig Veda
and their 1896 translations by Ralph Griffith, along with my analysis.
Now, those who know a little bit about the Gita are aware of its fundamental
message, namely that people should not to work for the fruit of their karma,
but to focus on Krishna himself. Why should that be the case? It is so
because, as we see in the above quotation already, good deeds as well as evil
ones bring about the consequence of samsara.
Everyone is familiar with the notion that as long as you do evil deeds,
you will suffer seemingly endless reincarnations. Thus Krishna declares:
However, good deeds may not result in as much immediate suffering, but they
only prolong the agony.
But do not for a moment think that you can trick your way out of the dilemma
by simply doing nothing:
3:4a na karmanām Not by abstention Finally, lest one think
anārambhān from actions does a that the solution is not
naiskarmyam man attain the state to perform any actions
purusoshnute beyond karma. at all, such a sham
na ca samnyasanād eva maneuver would not
siddhim samadhigacchati stop the cycle of
rebirths either.
If you do evil, you will be reborn; if you do good you will be reborn; if you do
neither you will still be reborn. Now, it would be instructive to follow the Gita
for its proposal for an escape from samsara, namely devotion to Krishna, but
this attempted solution is not the focus of this paper.11 My point is that if even
good actions and no actions at all have roughly the same results as evil actions,
then karma, even though a gigantic obstacle, is nothing like sin in this respect.
The word “sin,” after all, is usually reserved for something evil. That fact is the
reason, then, why karma and sin are not equivalent.
But this is not right either. Even if Hume had phrased his observation with
more sensitivity toward the diversity within Hinduism, he would still be wrong
in saying that Hinduism has no “real sin.” Hume only recognizes “lamentable
philosophic ignorance (avidya) and practical violation of caste rules,” which he
considers to be “defects” only.13 This judgment is very difficult to sustain in
light of the reality of Hindu thought.
Thus we see that “pāpa” can refer to an evil action, the evil that happens to a
person in this life because of an evil action, and the bad karma a person may
incur because of an evil action. Vyasa, the mythical collector of the Vedas and
fountainhead of Vedanta, is supposed to have summarized all Vedic truth by
saying:
As far as I can tell, enas is a term that is more likely to be associated with
specifically religious violations than pāpa. One example can suffice here
because, even though all words, including enas, have shades of meaning, the
meaning of enas as “sin,” “violation,” or “trespass” is quite dominant.
C. Klesha (Klez)
On the opposite end of the spectrum, the meaning of klesha as “sin” is
clearly secondary. Its primary range of meanings includes such notions as
“toil,” “trouble,” “difficulty,” “hindrance,” “obstacle,” possibly even “pain” in
the sense of the pain engendered by hard work, though there is a stronger word
“duhkha” for more intense agony.
This is also the only way in which klesha appears in the Bhagavad Gita.
D. Adharma AxmR
Hinduism is all about following the dharma. The dharma is personal, religious,
societal, and cultural. It prescribes proper deportment, worship, rules of
interaction, marriage, occupation, and the caste system, to mention just a few
of its all-pervasive dimensions. Adharma refers to anything that violates the
Hindu way of life, as it were. It absorbs the three previous concepts, while
adding cultural infractions. Thus, evil and immorality are adharma, but so is
violating social customs along the line of “this just isn‟t done.” As a brief
example, consider the rules of marriage. The proper ceremony is to be done by
a Brahmin priest with the sacred fire in a complex ritual. It would be adharma
for two persons of different castes to marry. However, if two people of the
same caste go off privately and take their vows in the presence of a deity, they
are within the dharma, even if their action is considered undesirable.
Conclusion
Let me reiterate that the main obstacle in Hinduism is karma and its
fruits. However, this fact does not mean that karma is the same thing as sin.
In fact, we have now seen that there are separate words and concepts for sin,
and these sins will directly influence a person‟s karma.
They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience
also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them.
Romans 2:15
wncorduan@tayloru.edu
http://www.wincorduan.com
Notes
1
Please see my A Tapestry of Faiths: Common Threads Among the World’s Religions
(Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009) for a larger study of this issue.
2
Dean C. Halverson, Compact Guide to World Religions (Minneapolis: Bethany
House, 1996), p. 90.
3
See, for example, George Thundiparambil, “The Source of Bias against
Hinduism” URL: http://www.indiacause.com/columns/OL_030526.htm
4
The Rig Veda in Sanskrit, URL: http://www.sacred-
texts.com/hin/rvsan/index.htm
5
Rig Veda, trans. by Ralph Griffith, 1896. URL: http://www.sacred-
texts.com/hin/rigveda/index.htm
6
In Sanskrit, the as ending is frequently changed into o as a part of the process
of producing fluidity in sound, depending on the initial consonant of the
subsequent word.
7
Manu Smriti—Sanskrit Text with English Translation. URL:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7189037/Manu-Smriti-Sanskrit-Text-With-
English-Translation.
8
The English translations are from George Bühler, The Laws of Manu in Sacred
Books of the East, vol. 25. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/manu.htm
9
All of the translations from the Bhagavad Gita come from Winthrop
Sargeant, tr., The Bhagavad Gita (Albany, N.Y.: SUNY Press, 1994).
10
There are, of course, four Vedas. However, the fourth Veda, the Atharva
Veda, is considered to be inferior, consisting to a great extent of magic spells.
This pattern of 3+1 also applies to the caste system, where the top three castes
(Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and Vaishiyas) are considered to be superior to the
fourth, the Shudras.
11
I touch on this point in a different paper, which conceptually follows this
one. “Words for Grace in Hinduism.” Published online at http://www.isca-
apologetics.org/sites/default/files/papers/Jared%20Martinez/Corduan-
WordsForGraceInHinduism.pdf
12
Robert E. Hume, The World’s Living Religions, (New York: Scribner‟s, 1959), p.
40.
13
Ibid.
14
Thus, for example, George Thundiparambil states, “Essentially, there is no
'sin' included in Hinduism, let alone an 'original sin'. It is natural for humans to
make mistakes that have a potential to harm other beings (not just humans),
which are mentioned as pāpa-karma. But mistakes are no 'sins' and occur due to
ignorance. But once the ignorance is removed, the mistake doesn't repeat. On
the other hand, an act of "charity" (such as the ‟Lord God‟s‟ command) with an
ulterior motive is a misdemeanor, because that is definitely unnatural, and it is
what we in the civilized world call a „fraud‟. Acts qualify according to the
motivation.” Thundiparambil, “The Source of Bias against Hinduism.” URL:
http://www.indiacause.com/columns/OL_030526.htm Nevertheless, as with
all religious claims, we profit from examining whether this theoretical claim is
genuinely true for the religion as it is usually practiced, and I dare say that it is
not.
15
Please keep in mind that English translations of Hindu texts are not
necessarily reliable in undertaking this kind of investigation. They may use “sin”
where it does not literally belong, or they may avoid the term where it clearly
appears in the original. The venerable translations of the 19th century, e.g. the
50-volume Sacred Books of the East, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1879-
1910) often intentionally copied Christian phraseology, and more recent
translations may be slanted one way or the other.
16
praepkar puNyay papay prpIdn<. Even though this statement is quoted widely,
it does not seem to be attached to one specific written work.
17
“Rajas” refers to one of the three characteristics of human beings, the three
gunas. Its nature is active and energetic, and it is opposed by tamas, darkness
and dullness. The third guna is sattva, balanced and composed being.
18
Yoga Sutras of Maharshi Patanjali (Fairfield, Iowa: Maharishi University of
Management Press, 1998).
19
Translations by BonGiovanni. URL: http://www.sacred-
texts.com/hin/yogasutr.htm