Law of Karma

Author(s): Nirmala Jha
Publisher: Capital Pubishing House Delhi

Page 54

Law of Karma
All religions admit that apart from the body which perishes, there is something which does not change like the body. But, according to some of the later religions, although there is a part of us which never dies, it has a beginning. But anything that has a beginning must necessarily have an end. This objection has been very ably solved. The word 'beginning' simply means the beginning of the cycle. It never means the beginning of the cosmos. Nobody can imagine a time of beginning. To quote Bhagavadgīta:
44
Never did I not exist, nor you, nor will any of us hereafter cease to be. Your body will meet the death, but your soul never.11
Regarding the nature of the soul, most of the philosophers admit that Atman, whatever it be, has neither form, nor shape. And that which has neither form nor shape, must be omnipresent. It is beyond time, space and causation. Now, if it is beyond space and time, it must be infinite and the infinite cannot be two. If the soul is infinite, it must be only one in number. The doctrine of the manyness of soul which has been propounded by our ancient thinkers such as Jainas and Sankhya is not without objection. They admit that the soul is infinite in nature and, at the same time, they take it as many, which is illogical. According to Jain Philosophy, souls are many in number, which has innumerable qualities, of which we can know only some qualities. On the basis of above explanation, they establish their Pluralism or Anckantvāda as well as Syadvāda, which are known as the metaphysical and epistemological ground of Jainas respectively. Sankhya Philosophy also believes in the plurality of the selves. It explains this principle on the basis of the birth and death. Moreover, due to difference in human nature, they regard pluralism of the selves.
Jan mamarankarṇānāń Pratiniyamatyugpatprvteśch Puruşa Vahutva Sidha. Traigunyaviparyayachhaiva. 12
But the inconsistency is that on the one hand, they believe in the plurality of selves, but on the other, they regard it as