by Laura Ellen Shulman - Dec. '85
"Why do bad things happen to good people?" is a
common question asked by Westerners. This situation is cause for much
religious doubt in traditions based on a concept of an all good and just God.
"If God is good why is there evil in the world which God created?"
It is not justice when good people suffer. Job asks the same question and
discovers that "his is not to reason why, his is but to do or die"
without questioning what he cannot comprehend. The question is asked by all
people in all times and places. Our solutions to the problem are diverse. When
the philosophers of ancient India asked the question they came up with a much
more psychologically satisfying answer. The Indian answer to the question is
the basis of all later Indian religious development (including Jain and
Buddhist as well as Hindu) while the Western "answer" continues to
make religion very hard for many people to hold on to.
Indian Worldview:
India does not blame a good (or bad) God for what happens
to us. God does not make these things happen, we do. It is a natural law of
the way things work. If we are bad, this badness will flow back to us; if we
are good, good things will result. Any modern Westerner can comprehend this
for one can see these effects in one’s own life. Indian philosophy, however,
adds one more element to the picture which Western religion does not consider
- the concept of rebirth.
In Western thought, we have but one life to live; in Indian
thought, this life is but one of many. While deeply religious Westerners cling
to their traditional conception of a single life on this earth, giving them
but one chance "to get it right or burn in Hell for all eternity
thereafter," those Westerners who don't consider themselves especially
religious, who have rejected the traditional doctrine, are often attracted to
the concept of reincarnation. Life is precious; life is all they know; they
can't conceive of anything else and either whole heartedly believe in
reincarnation or hold to it as a wishful thought, a nice possibility. It is an
appealing concept. It is not clear how the idea came to the ancient Indian
thinkers. It developed during the time of Upanishadic speculative thought
(around 8th - 4th century B.C.E.) as one of many ideas
being tossed around and considered and built on.
One life parallels the whole collection of lives. What we
do earlier in one life affects what happens later on in that same life. In a
philosophy built on the concept of rebirth the theory is expanded: what we do
in an earlier life affects what happens in a later life. The effect may come
sooner or later, as an immediate or delayed reaction (a natural
reaction) - this is paralleled in one life also. The effect might come in the
very next life or in one further on or it may be so major as to extend over a
longer period of time, over several lives (just as bad effects in one life may
extend over some time having major ramifications).
In India this natural law of cause and effect is called karma.
It is not fate or "kismet," for these are things "dealt out by
the gods." The effects of karma are dealt out by us; we "bring it
upon ourselves." Karma is the intermediate stage between our actions and
what happens to us as the ultimate results of these actions. Karma is the
direct cause of these results. Karma is internal: we carry it in us through
time. Actions and effects are external: things that happen in the world. Karma
is caused (built up) by our actions. Good actions result in good karma with
good effects; bad actions result in bad karma with bad effects. Some karma may
be used up (affect us) within the one life in which it was built up. Most
karma, though, will not be affective for a much longer time; these effects are
felt in our next life. Thus, one might be good in this life but is feeling the
effects of bad karma built up in a previous life.
The mechanics of karma may be understood by analogy to
bicycle riding. When pedaling a bicycle we are performing an action. We are
building up energy which, when we stop working, will continue to have an
effect upon the bicycle. The bicycle will continue to move, now under the
effect of inertia rather than work (action on our part). Work builds up energy
which results in inertia that keeps the bicycle going even after the work is
ended. When the inertia runs out the bicycle will come to a stop; but if we do
more work (the action of pedaling) we build up more energy to produce more
inertia to keep the bicycle going. Karma is the energy built up by action and
it is the inertia which keeps life going until it runs out.
Action à Karma à
Effect
As a matter of fact, we have a next life solely because we
have built up karma which has not been used up by the time we die. Karma, good
or bad, results in another life through which it may show its effects. But in
another life we will do more good and bad actions which will result in more
karma which will result in yet another life. This repetitive cycle of birth,
life, death and rebirth is called samsara.
Samsara is seen as a prison; life is imprisoning. The soul
or self, referred to in Indian philosophy as Atman, is imprisoned in a
body - in matter. As long as there is karma we (the soul) are doomed to
continued imprisonment. Samsara is bad; it is something we want to get out of.
This imprisonment is not our natural state (it is not the ultimate reality of
what existence is). In Western terminology, the soul's goal (our goal) is to
be as one with God (to "go to heaven when we die"). We think of it
in terms of reuniting with the God we came from. Indians think of samsara as
having no beginning; it has been going on since the dawn of creation; we have
always been imprisoned. In Indian terminology, The goal is to achieve union
with Brahman, the impersonal Ultimate Reality, which is the only thing
outside of samsara. Thus samsara is bad and something to get out of because it
separates us from the Ultimate Reality (be it called "Brahman" or
"God"). Our real essence - Atman - is one with Brahman
Samsara is also bad because bad things happen in it. Good
things happen too, but as long as there is life there is some suffering. As
long as there is life there is death, sickness, pain, sorrow. Life is not
eternal; it is not steady (like existence in Brahman is). There may be many
lives, an eternity of lives, but, in and of themselves, they are impermanent
states of being and all bring suffering and death (death is a devastating
thing to go through). No matter how good life may be it is ultimately not
worth it because there will always be pain and in life we (Atman) are
separated from the Ultimate Reality (Brahman) (In Western thought such
separation from God is sin). Thus samsara is bad and getting out of it is the
ultimate way of escaping evil.
Indian Salvation:
Getting out of samsara is the Indian concept of salvation
or liberation. The Indian religions were built around the question of how to
do this. If karma causes samsara then, logically, the way to escape samsara is
to eliminate karma, to use up what we have and not build up more. If actions
cause karma then, logically, we need to eliminate actions. When this whole
philosophy was first developed this is how the Indians attempted to solve the
problem, by giving up actions. Those who desired salvation from samsara (what,
in India, is called moksha) became renouncers and ascetics. They
renounced society, which demands actions, and they renounced action and often
sat for days, weeks, months at a time trying to live out their lives without
acting. Pretty soon it was realized that as long as we live we cannot
eliminate all action. Maybe there was another way to eliminate karma.
What is it about action that causes karma?
With more thought it was determined that action is but an
indirect cause of karma. The direct cause is our attachment to the
results of our action. As a psychological problem it is within the realm of
human possibility to solve. (This approach to the problem is what the most
popular Indian religious work, the Bhagavad-Gita, is about). By acting without
desire for the fruits of our actions, by being nonchalant about life, by
placing no value judgments on things but taking it as it comes ("que
sera, sera") we will not build up karma. But how do we achieve such
non-attachment? Why do we have attachments in the first place? The answer they
came up with to this question was: ignorance.
Because we think this life in samsara is all there is,
things in this life - what we do and the results of our achievements - seem to
be important. We think this life is ultimate; we think things in this life are
of supreme importance and significance. In the West we say "you can't
take it with you." This is to imply that "it" is not of supreme
importance. Our desire for things is due to ignorance, ignorance of the fact
that there is something more. Desire for things, attachment to actions and
their results, these are things to eliminate in order to avoid a build up of
karma. Eliminating ignorance is the way to eliminate desire and attachment.
Thus, the ultimate cause of karma and therefore of rebirth and samsara is
ignorance.
Action + Ignorance à
Attachment à Karma à
Rebirth (effect)
So how do we eliminate ignorance? By coming to know the
truth about the way things are. By coming to know who we really are as
Atamn (soul), not body; that we are not physical beings, but spiritual beings.
By coming to know that this life is not the supreme state of being. By
realizing that things in this life are but temporary and thus not worthy of
the importance (of the desire and attachment) we put on them. Such saving
knowledge is called Jnana ("Gnosis" in the West). This is
knowledge about Brahman and our only goal is to unite with this Ultimate
Reality, the only true supreme reality. In Western terms: true satisfaction is
gained only by approaching God; this is the ultimate satisfaction in this life
and beyond, the only thing that lasts an eternity even after death.