________________
and papa, there can be no papa at all that one may commit. There is punya and punya only.
To maintain this, the holders of such an opinion argue that nobody commits a sin knowing it to be as such. Man plunged as he is into this world of nature, is always found to be in want of something or other which he believes in and struggles for This end or object of his endeavour is what is called Good in ethical language; and when he knows this object, the nature of this good, the realisation, the attainment of which he believes will satisfy his want, he pursues it choosing a particular line of action or conduct that will ultimately connect him with the good, the object of his desire and actions; and it is in this his free choice of the line of conduct that his liberty manifests itself, there being various alternative lines of conduct to select from. Where is Papa then?
But this is talking like the Charvákas— the uncompromising exponent of the philosophy of pleasure in antiquity. The whole question turns upon the idea of the good as
500
Denial of Pápa
