________________
Conclusion
135
of morality. It is a hypothesis which explains most of the intricate phenomena of human life. It is, therefore, scientifically a good working hypothesis.
The other ground on which this law is shown to be based is the law of causation. Every event must have a cause and every cause an effect. Our actions, therefore, must produce an effect which should be equal to the cause. When effects do not appear to be so, there is a ground of our believing in unseen effects which manifest themselves later. This is the Law of Karma. One can very easily doubt about the validity of the law as the ground itself is improved. The law of causation itself is a presumption which has not been proved conclusively.
Moral arguments adduced in support of the Law can at best put in the category of a postulate of morality. It can, at least, be said that the Law of Karma is a fact or morality a misnomer. Not only morality but also the entire structure of Indian Philosophy rests on this presumption. We can conclude, therefore, that the Law of Karma is a necessary presumption of Indian Philosophy.
References
Rg Veda, 1.3.1; 1. 47.5. 2. Ibid., 1. 23.3 3. Nirukra, II. 13.20. On Rg Veda, II. 22.3. 4. Rg Veda, V. 6.3. 5. Nirukta, V. 24.1. On Rg Veda, I. 46. 4. 6. Rg Veda, 1. II. 4. 7. Rg Veda, III. 38.2. 8. Mahamahopadhyaya Umesh Mishra, History of Indian Philo
sophy, Vol. I, p. 154, Tirabhukti Publication. Max Muller and Oldenberg: The Vedic Hymns, S.B.E., Vols.
XXXII and XIVI. 10. Brh., iii, 2. 13. 11. Chặn., iii, 14.1. 12. Kausitaki Brahamana, XXV, I. 13. Abhidharmakosa, III. 21. 14. N.V. iii, 2.63. 15. N.B., IV, 1, 64. 16. Radhakrishnan, S., Indian Philolophy, Vol. II, p. 635. 17. Aurobindo, Sri, The Lije Divine, p. 720.
