KARMA the unique concept

Rajaram Krishnamurthy Mon, 11 Aug 2025 20:00:30 -0700

Karma is a concept of Hinduism

Karma is a concept of Hinduism which describes a system in which
beneficial effects are derived from past beneficial actions and harmful
effects from past harmful actions, creating a system of actions and
reactions throughout a soul's (jivatman's) reincarnated lives,forming a
cycle of rebirth. The causality is said to apply not only to the material
world but also to our thoughts, words, actions, and actions that others do
under our instructions.

The earliest appearance of the word "karma" is found in the Rigveda. The
term karma also appears significantly in the Veda. According to Brahmanas,
"as his creations is born to the world he has made" and one is placed in a
balance in the other world for an estimate of one's good and evil deed. It
also declares that as a man is 'constituted' by his desires, he is born in
the other world concerning these. The doctrine of transmigration of the
soul, concerning fateful retribution for acts committed, appears in the Rig
Veda (Mandala 1, Sukta 24, Mantra 2), with words like "saha na mahye
aaditaye punar-daath pitharam drisheyam matharam cha" (You must also know
that one God to be a giver of rebirth, non-else can do this work. It is he
who gives birth to emancipated people also through parents at the end of
Maha Kalpa.) Rebirth is also mentioned in the Yajur Veda (Mandala 3,
Mantras 53-54):

We call the spirit hither with a hero-celebrating strain, Yea, with the
Fathers’ holy hymns (53)

Rig Veda 1.24.1 “Of whom, or of which divinity of the
immortals, shall we invoke the auspicious name? who will give us to the
great Aditi that I may again behold my father and my mother.”

Commentary by Sāyaṇa: Ṛgveda-bhāṣya Aditi =earth;

Adit = earth. Rāmāyaṇa, b.i, ch.61 presents Śunahśepas, son of the Ṛṣis
Ṛcika and is sold for a hundred cows by his father to Ambaṛṣa, king of
Ayodhyā, as a victim for a human sacrifice. He sees Viśvāmitra, near the
lake Puṣkara and learns a prayer when repeated at the stake induces Indra
to come and set him free. Aitareya Brāhmaṇa has the legend: the rājā is
Hariścandra, who has no sons and worships Varuṇa to obtain a son and
promises to sacrifice to him his first-born. He gets a son, named Rohita;
when Varuṇa claims this son, the king delays the sacrifice using various
pretexts, until Rohita attains adolescence. When Rohita is told of the
rājā's commitment to Varuṇa, Rohina refuses to submit himself and moves
into the forests. In the forest, Rohita meets a ṛṣi, Ājīgartta who is in
great distress. Rohita person ades the ṛṣi to part with his second son,
Śunahśepas, to be substituted for Rohita as an offering to Varuṇa. The deal
is struck and Śunahśepas is about to be sacrificed. On the advice of
Viśvāmitra, an officiating priest, Śunahśepas appeals to the gods and is
ultimately liberated. This hymn is uttered by Śunahśepas when bound to the
Yūpa, or stake, as the puruṣaḥ-paśuḥ, the man-animal (or victim), as the
Bhāgavata terms him: "Of whom" (kasya) may also be rendered; of Brahmā or
Prajāpati (also called ka): as ko ha vai nāma prajāpatiḥ (Aitareya Brāhmaṇa
3.21; 7.26)

कस्य । नूनम् । कतमस्य । अमृतानाम् । मनामहे । चारु । देवस्य । नाम । कः । नः ।
मह्यै । अदितये । पुनः । दात् । पितरम् । च । दृशेयम् । मातरम् । च ॥

The spirit comes to us again for wisdom, energy, and life, That we may long
behold the Sun (54

The earliest evidence of the term’s expansion into an ethical
domain is provided in the Upanishads. In the Brhadaranyaka, which is the
earliest of the Upanishads, the Vedic theologian Yajnavalkya expressed: “A
man turns into something good by good action and into something bad by bad
action.” The doctrine occurs here in the context of a discussion of the
fate of the individual after death.

The belief in rebirth is, suggests Radhakrishnan, evident in the
Brāhmaṇas, where words like punar-mrtyu (re-death), punar-asu (coming to
life again) and punarajati (rebirth) are used to denote it. Radhakrishnan
acknowledges that other scholars interpret certain punar-mrtyu verses
of Rigveda
to be discussing "repeated deaths"; however, he suggests that it might also
be re-interpreted to imply rebirth, as in "come home once again”. The
significance of reinterpreting religious principles such as karma in the
Bhagavad Gita as an important source, as well as a dedication to
benevolence, applied spirituality, and religious activism The topic of
karma is mentioned in the Puranas.

Markandeya Purana According to the Markandeya Purana,
Shani (Saturn) is described as the son of the Sun god, Surya, and his wife
Chhaya (shadow). Saturn is characterized as cold and dry due to its
internal core structure made of ice. Internally, he is considered pure. The
Purana also states that Shani was entrusted with the role of the Lord of
Karma and Justice by the Trimurti.

In Vedanta philosophy, this idea is defended in the Brahma sutras, a major
scriptural source for Vedanta.The Brahmasutras (3.2.38) state:The fruits of
action (phalam) come from Him (The Lord, Isvara), since this is reasonable
(upapatteḥ).

In the non-dualistic (Advaita) school of Vedanta, the creator God (Ishvara)
is not the ultimate reality, instead the formless Brahman is the supreme
truth. As such, the teaching of karma is part of Maya, or the relative and
ultimately illusory reality. Nevertheless, Advaita also shares the general
concepts of karma and rebirth with other Indian religions, with some
differences. In a commentary to Brahma Sutras (III, 2, 38, and 41), a
Vedantic text, Adi Sankara, an Indian philosopher who consolidated the
doctrine of Advaita Vedanta, a sub-school of Vedanta, argues that the
original karmic actions themselves cannot bring about the proper results at
some future time; neither can super sensuous, non-intelligent qualities
like adrsta—an unseen force being the metaphysical link between work and
its result—by themselves mediate the appropriate, justly deserved pleasure
and pain. The fruits, according to him, then, must be administered through
the action of a conscious agent, namely, a supreme being (Ishvara).

Shankara (8th century) comments as follows: Karma is insentient and
short-lived, and cannot therefore be expected to bestow the fruits of
actions at a future time according to one’s deserts. We do not see any
insentient thing bestow fruits on those who worship it. Therefore it is
only from the Lord, who is worshipped through actions, that their results
proceed. A human's karmic acts result in merits and demerits. Since
unconscious things generally do not move except when caused by an agent
(for example, the axe moves only when swung by an agent), and since the law
of karma is an unintelligent and unconscious law, Sankara argues there must
be a conscious God who knows the merits and demerits which persons have
earned by their actions, and who functions as an instrumental cause [a
"judge and police-force" working for "the law"] in helping individuals reap
their appropriate fruits. Thus, God affects the person's environment, even
to its atoms, and for those souls who reincarnate, produces the appropriate
rebirth body, all in order that the person might have the karmically
appropriate experiences. Since a data-system (or computer) is needed to
discern different "just" consequences for actions, there is suggested to be
a sentient theistic administrator or supervisor for karma (Ishvara).

Ramanuja of the Vishishtadvaita school, another sub-school of
Vedanta, addresses the problem of evil by attributing all evil things in
life to the accumulation of evil karma of jivas (souls in bondage to a
corporeal form) and maintains that God is "amala," or without any stain of
evil. In his Sri Bhasya, Ramanuja's interpretation of the Brahma sutras
from a Vaishnavite theistic view, Brahman, whom he conceives as Vishnu,
arranges the diversity of creation in accordance with the different karma
of individual souls. Ramanuja reiterates that inequality and diversity in
the world are due to the fruits of karma of different souls and the
omnipresent energy of the soul suffers pain or pleasure due to its
karma.[29] Unlike the Semitic religions, e.g., Abrahamic religions, which
believe that God created the soul and the world out of 'nothing,’ Ramanuja
believed that creation is an eternally recurring cyclic process; hence, God
is free from the responsibility of starting it and causing the evils
accruing from it. Instead he believed that karma, the result of the actions
of Jivas (souls) in previous embodiments, causes the good and evil,
enjoyments and sufferings of karma which have to be necessary to be enjoyed
or suffered by the Jivas themselves who are responsible for the fruits.
Although souls alone have the freedom and responsibility for their acts and
thus reap the fruits of karma, i.e., good and evil karma, God as Vishnu, is
the supreme Enforcer of karma, by acting as the Sanctioner (Anumanta) and
the Overseer (Upadrasta). According to Ramanuja, all jivas are burdened
with their load of Karma, which gives them only enjoyments and sufferings,
but also desires and tendencies to act in particular ways; although the
moral responsibility accrues only to the Jiva, as he acts according to the
tendencies and deserts he has acquired by his karma, Ramanuja believes that
God wills only their fructification According to the foregoing concept, God
is "compared to light which may be used for forging or for reading
scriptures," but the merits or demerit "devolves entirely on the persons
concerned and not on the darkness." Furthermore, Ramanuja believes that
Vishnu wishing to do a favor to those who are resolved on acting so as
fully to please Her, engenders in their minds a tendency towards highly
virtuous actions, such as means to attain to Him; while on the other hand,
in order to punish those who are resolved on lines of action altogether
displeasing to Him, He engenders in their minds a delight in such actions
as have a downward tendency and are obstacles in the way of the attainment
of God.

Madhva (Dvaita) Madhva, the founder of the Dvaita school, another
sub-school of Vedanta, on the other hand, believes that there must be a
root cause for variations in karma even if karma is accepted as having no
beginning and being the cause of the problem of evil. Since jivas have
different kinds of karma, from good to bad, all must not have started with
the same type of karma from the beginning of time. Thus, Madhva concludes
that the jivas (souls) are not God's creation as in the Christian doctrine,
but are rather entities co-existent with Vishnu, although under His
absolute control. Souls are thus dependent on Him in their pristine nature
and in all transformations that they may undergo. According to Madhva, God,
although He has control, does not interfere with Man's free will; although
He is omnipotent, that does not mean that He engages in extraordinary
feats. Rather, God enforces a rule of law and, in accordance with the just
deserts of jivas, gives them the freedom to follow their own nature. Thus,
God functions as the sanctioner or as the divine accountant, and
accordingly Jivas are free to work according to their innate nature and
their accumulated karma, good and bad. Since God acts as the sanctioner,
the ultimate power for everything comes from God and the Jiva only utilizes
that power, according to his/her innate nature. However, like Shankara's
interpretation of the Brahma Sutras as mentioned earlier, Madhva, agrees
that the rewards and punishments bestowed by God are regulated by Him in
accordance with the good and sinful deeds performed by them, and He does so
of out of His own will to keep himself firm in justice and he cannot be
controlled in His actions by karma of human beings nor can He be accused of
partiality or cruelty to anyone. Swami Tapasyananda further explains the
Madhva view by illustrating the doctrine with this analogy: the power in a
factory comes from the powerhouse (God), but the various cogs (Jivas) move
in a direction in which they are set. Thus he concludes that no charge of
partiality and cruelty can be brought against God. The Jiva is the actor
and also the enjoyer of the fruits of his/her own actions. Madhva differed
significantly from traditional Hindu beliefs, owing to his concept of
eternal damnation. For example, he divides souls into three classes: one
class of souls which qualify for liberation (Mukti-yogyas), another subject
to eternal rebirth or eternal transmigration (Nitya-samsarins), and a third
class that is eventually condemned to eternal hell or Andhatamas.

There is a passage from Swami Sivananda's translation of the
Svetasvatara
Upanishad (4:6) illustrating this concept: Two birds of beautiful plumage
– inseparable friends – live on the same tree. Of these two one eats the
sweet fruit while the other looks on without eating.

Rig Veda 1.164.20

“Two birds associated together, and mutual friends, take refuge in the same
tree; one of them eats the sweet fig; the other abstaining from food,
merely looks on.”

Commentary by Sāyaṇa: Ṛgveda-bhāṣya

Two birds associated together: the vital and supreme spirit, jivātmā and
paramātmā, are here alluded to using the metaphor of the two birds; eats
the sweet fig: pippalam svādu atti: the vital spirit enjoys the rewards of
acts. dvau dvau pratiṣṭhitau sukṛtau dharmakartārau: two species of souls
to be intended as abiding in one body (Nirukta 14.30)

In his commentary, the first bird represents the individual soul, while the
second represents Brahman or God. The soul is essentially a reflection of
Brahman. The tree represents the body. The soul identifies itself with the
body, reaps the fruits of its actions, and undergoes rebirth. The Lord
alone stands as an eternal witness, ever contented, and does not eat, for
he is th द्वा । सुपर्णा । सयुजा । सखाया । समनम् । वृक्षम् । परि । सस्वजाते
इति । तयोः । अन्यः । पिप्पलम् । स्वादु । अत्ति । अनश्नन् । अन्यः । अभि ।
चाकशीति ॥

Swami Sivananda also notes that God is free from charges of partiality and
cruelty which are brought against him because of social inequality, fate,
and universal suffering in the world. According to the Brahma Sutras,
individual souls are responsible for their own fate; God is merely the
dispenser and witness with reference to the merit and demerit of souls. In
his commentary on Chapter 2 of the Brahma Sutras, Sivananda further notes
that the position of God with respect to karma can be explained through the
analogy of rain. Although rain can be said to bring about the growth of
rice, barley and other plants, the differences in various species is due to
the diverse potentialities lying hidden in the respective seeds. Thus,
Sivananda explains that differences between classes of beings are due to
different merits belonging to individual souls. He concludes that God metes
rewards and punishments only in consideration of the specific actions of
beings.

Sambandar of the Shaiva Siddhanta school (7th century C.E.)
discusses karma in his hymns on devotion and grace of Shiva. He explains
the concept of karma in Hinduism by distinguishing it from that of Buddhism
and Jainism, which do not require the existence of an external being like
God. Sambandar explains the concept with a metaphor: just as a calf among a
large number of cows can find its mother at suckling time, so also does
karma find the specific individual it needs to attach to and come to
fruition. Many names in the Vishnu Sahasranama, the thousand names of
Vishnu allude to the power of God in controlling karma. For example, the
135th name of Vishnu, Dharmadhyaksha, in the Advaita philosopher Sankara's
interpretation means, "One who directly sees the merits (Dharma) and
demerits (Adharma), of beings by bestowing their due rewards on them."
Other names of Vishnu alluding to this nature of God are Bhavanah, the 32nd
name, Vidhata, the 44th name, Apramattah, the 325th name, Sthanadah, the
387th name and Srivibhavanah, the 609th name. Bhavanah, according to
Sankara's interpretation, means "One who generates the fruits of Karmas of
all Jivas (souls) for them to enjoy." The Brahma Sutra (3.2.28) "Phalmatah
upapatteh" speaks of the Lord's function as the bestower of the fruits of
all actions of the jiva.

According to Swami Mukundananda's interpretation of Bhagavad Gita,
Chapter 18, verse 63: "[t]his free will to choose between available
alternatives has been given to the soul by God. The freedom of choice is
not infinite. One cannot decide, “I choose to be the most intelligent
person in the world.” Our choices are limited by our past and present
karmas. However, we do possess a certain amount of free will, for we are
not machines in the hands of God. Sometimes people question that if God had
not given us free will then we would not have done any evil. But then we
would not have done anything good either. The opportunity to do good always
comes with the danger of doing evil. More importantly, God wants us to love
him, and love is only possible when there is a choice. A machine cannot
love for it does not have any freedom of choice. God created us with free
will and provided us with choices so that we may choose him and thereby
exercise our love for him. Even the all-powerful God cannot force the soul
to love and surrender to him; this decision has to be made by the soul
itself. Here, Shree Krishna is calling Arjun’s attention to his free will
and asking him to choose." Karma is not the only factor for fate, and
therefore, the Hindu concept of fate is not deterministic or fatalistic.
Along with an individual's actions, gods, personalized time, death, or
nature can influence fate.

Theistic schools believe in cycles of creations where souls
gravitate to specific bodies in accordance with karma, which as an
unintelligent object depends on the will of God alone. For example,
Kaushitaki Upanishad 1.2 asserts that birth in different forms of existence
as a worm, insect, fish, bird, lion, boar, snake or a human, is determined
by a person's deeds and knowledge. Chandogya Upanishad 5.10.7
distinguishes between a good birth such as a birth in a spiritual family,
i.e., (brahmin caste) or an evil birth, such as birth as a dog or hog.)
Thus, the doctrine of karma comes to explain why different life forms
manifest, into widely various levels of biological development such as
characterization into different species from plants to various types of
animals, and even differences between members of the same species, such as
humans. Swami Nikilananda comments: As the rivers, following their
different courses, ultimately merge in the ocean and give up their names
and forms, so the devotees, losing their names and forms, become one with
the Supreme Reality.

The Navagraha and planetary deities, including Shani
(Saturn), are considered subordinate to Ishvara (i.e., the Supreme Being)
and are believed by many to assist in the administration of justice. Such
planetary influences are believed by many to be measurable using
astrological methods including Jyotiṣha, the Hindu system of astrology.

Krishnan, Yuvraj (1997). The Doctrine of Karma. New Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 81-208-1233-6.

IS THERE ANY THEORY IN THE WORLD BETTER EXPLAINING THE LIFE THAN IN
HINDUISM?

K RAJARAM IRS 12 825

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoqWkUXPCCOLh9mrsq%2BC792AR_6MW8wBe6g-Wcjkb-sv0A%40mail.gmail.com.

KARMA the unique concept

Reply via email to