Times are such that taking care of the elderly parents has become an issue. While State spending on the elders has become a norm in the West, the Chinese Government has asked the people to visit the elderly parents and take care of them. In India this was not an issue until a generation ago. It was because of the kind of family system we had from times of yore. But things are changing with friction developing between the elderly generation and their off springs. The causes are largely attributed to 'domination' and 'interference' in the life of their grown-up wards.
Speaking on this "Cho" Ramasamy made a significant observation that elders in olden days used to take up 'vanaprastha' once their kids were settled into a family of their own and started taking up the responsibilities. Vanaprastha demanded that they give up their material and worldly desires and live in seclusion on spiritual thoughts and minimum subsistence. Perhaps this was the cause for less friction among the parents and their children who also were advanced in age. But today those who think of such Vanaprastha life are less in number as the materialistic mindset had lured the elderly too. There are adjustment problems too. Finally what we are witnessing is a state where the elderly parents are left to fend for themselves.
Thinking of this situation, what kind of karma is accrued or manifest as the cause of suffering came up for discussion in one of the old posts in this blogspot. Since the views expressed in that connection would be missed by many other readers, I thought I can post them here as a separate article.
The article where this is discussed is Karma and responsibility - article by Yildiz Sethi
The question from a reader is as follows:-
//I have a question on free will and destiny. I also perused your postings on Bhakti-list archives before posting this question. There is still some confusion in my mind. Let us consider a scenario like this:
A person X does not take care of his parents in their old age. As a result, the parents are undergoing suffering. Now one can cite 2 reasons for their suffering:
a) It was in the parents' destiny to suffer. Perhaps they committed some paapa in their previous birth and are repaying for it. There is no scope for free will here
b) The parents may not have given good values to the child while bringing him up and as a result they are suffering for their own negligence.
If we consider option a) the parents were bound to suffer and son is just an instrument. But, the son is also sinning here because he is not practicing his putra dharma. How do we reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable things? If it was destined for the parents to suffer and son is an instrument, why should the son pay for the sin? Is the son being made to sin because as part of his evolution towards Moksha, destiny decided that he has to go through this experience. When does this seemingly never ending cycle break? If I were to take liberty to express karma theory in equations, would this make sense?
Moksha means: sanchita + prarabdha + agami = 0
prarabdha is a non-linear function of satva, rajas and tamas
sanchita = f (prarabdha, agami)
agami = f(sanchita, prarabdha)
Please advise. //
//I have a question on free will and destiny. I also perused your postings on Bhakti-list archives before posting this question. There is still some confusion in my mind. Let us consider a scenario like this:
A person X does not take care of his parents in their old age. As a result, the parents are undergoing suffering. Now one can cite 2 reasons for their suffering:
a) It was in the parents' destiny to suffer. Perhaps they committed some paapa in their previous birth and are repaying for it. There is no scope for free will here
b) The parents may not have given good values to the child while bringing him up and as a result they are suffering for their own negligence.
If we consider option a) the parents were bound to suffer and son is just an instrument. But, the son is also sinning here because he is not practicing his putra dharma. How do we reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable things? If it was destined for the parents to suffer and son is an instrument, why should the son pay for the sin? Is the son being made to sin because as part of his evolution towards Moksha, destiny decided that he has to go through this experience. When does this seemingly never ending cycle break? If I were to take liberty to express karma theory in equations, would this make sense?
Moksha means: sanchita + prarabdha + agami = 0
prarabdha is a non-linear function of satva, rajas and tamas
sanchita = f (prarabdha, agami)
agami = f(sanchita, prarabdha)
Please advise. //
My reply:-
First question.
//A person X does not take care of his parents in their old age. As a result, the parents are undergoing suffering. Now one can cite 2 reasons for their suffering:
a) It was in the parents' destiny to suffer. Perhaps they committed some paapa in their previous birth and are repaying for it. There is no scope for free will here
b) The parents may not have given good values to the child while bringing him up and as a result they are suffering for their own negligence.
If we consider option a) the parents were bound to suffer and son is just an instrument. But, the son is also sinning here because he is not practicing his putra dharma. How do we reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable things?//
There are 3 ways by which not taking care of one's parents happen.
(1) Not taking care of the parents deliberately. That is, the person will be in a position to take care of his parents in some way, but he ignores and does not care to help them in times of need and does not bother at all.
(2) Taking care of parents some times and not taking care at some other times, though it could have been possible to take care at those times too.
(3) Wishing to take care of the parents but not able to do due to circumstances for which he is not responsible. Like monetary help, physical help and just spending time with them to satisfy them are some of the happenings which a person would like to do, try his best to do but then could not do due to inability to get money, do physical service and spare time. The willingness and earnestness will be there, but prevented from doing by causes beyond his control.
In all these circumstances, the parents do continue to suffer. Any suffering is the result of past karma, there is no difference of opinion on that in Hindu Thought.
As per scenario (a) you have mentioned, they suffer due to some past karma , but there is no talk or scope for free will here.
In scenario (b) whether they have inculcated values in their children or not, the suffering is there and that is traced to a past karma, not necessarily connected with their upbringing. Whether they have inculcated values in their children or not, the child now grown into an adult must know by himself that he must rise to the occasion and be of help to them. If the son or daughter (child now grown up) thinks that the parents deserve the suffering for not having brought them up well or not having inculcated values in them, he is incurring a sin, for, he is deliberately avoiding to help them in their times of distress.
In this scenario, the son is the instrument causing the distress. In this situation the sin is all the more severe. May be the astrological combinations for people coming under the 3 categories might give an idea about the karmic effect of this behaviour.
The person coming under category 1 will be born in Adhama yoga (with sun and Moon in mutual Kendra {1,4,7 or 10 places to each other} in his birth time chart in the next birth and be bereft of all material happiness, education and mental faculties and lead a life of distress in poverty.
If the person in this first category had at times indirectly helped his parents through some other persons, the severity of this karma would come down.
Speaking on this Lord Brahma recommends Amavasya vratha and Thila homa to be done by the person in the current birth.
//A person X does not take care of his parents in their old age. As a result, the parents are undergoing suffering. Now one can cite 2 reasons for their suffering:
a) It was in the parents' destiny to suffer. Perhaps they committed some paapa in their previous birth and are repaying for it. There is no scope for free will here
b) The parents may not have given good values to the child while bringing him up and as a result they are suffering for their own negligence.
If we consider option a) the parents were bound to suffer and son is just an instrument. But, the son is also sinning here because he is not practicing his putra dharma. How do we reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable things?//
There are 3 ways by which not taking care of one's parents happen.
(1) Not taking care of the parents deliberately. That is, the person will be in a position to take care of his parents in some way, but he ignores and does not care to help them in times of need and does not bother at all.
(2) Taking care of parents some times and not taking care at some other times, though it could have been possible to take care at those times too.
(3) Wishing to take care of the parents but not able to do due to circumstances for which he is not responsible. Like monetary help, physical help and just spending time with them to satisfy them are some of the happenings which a person would like to do, try his best to do but then could not do due to inability to get money, do physical service and spare time. The willingness and earnestness will be there, but prevented from doing by causes beyond his control.
In all these circumstances, the parents do continue to suffer. Any suffering is the result of past karma, there is no difference of opinion on that in Hindu Thought.
As per scenario (a) you have mentioned, they suffer due to some past karma , but there is no talk or scope for free will here.
In scenario (b) whether they have inculcated values in their children or not, the suffering is there and that is traced to a past karma, not necessarily connected with their upbringing. Whether they have inculcated values in their children or not, the child now grown into an adult must know by himself that he must rise to the occasion and be of help to them. If the son or daughter (child now grown up) thinks that the parents deserve the suffering for not having brought them up well or not having inculcated values in them, he is incurring a sin, for, he is deliberately avoiding to help them in their times of distress.
In this scenario, the son is the instrument causing the distress. In this situation the sin is all the more severe. May be the astrological combinations for people coming under the 3 categories might give an idea about the karmic effect of this behaviour.
The person coming under category 1 will be born in Adhama yoga (with sun and Moon in mutual Kendra {1,4,7 or 10 places to each other} in his birth time chart in the next birth and be bereft of all material happiness, education and mental faculties and lead a life of distress in poverty.
If the person in this first category had at times indirectly helped his parents through some other persons, the severity of this karma would come down.
Speaking on this Lord Brahma recommends Amavasya vratha and Thila homa to be done by the person in the current birth.
The person coming under category 2 will be born in Sama yoga (with Moon in 2nd place to a Kendra to Sun) in his birth time chart in the next birth and will experience half of what is told for category 1. He must also undertake Amavasya vratha throughout his life to tide over this karma.
The person coming under category 3 will be born in Varishta yoga (with Moon in 3rd place to a Kendra to Sun) in his birth time chart in the next birth and would not experience any of the distress told for category 1.
The rationale is that come whatever be the position of parents – they may be horrible ones in behaviour, the son / daughter is not supposed to abandon them or refuses to take care of their need. In other words, they must not become an 'instrument' for their suffering.
I have already written something on this in an article in this link.
http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.in/2008/11/parents-as-god.html
By not becoming an "instrument " for the suffering of the parents they are not incurring any fresh karma. But then the parents might continue to suffer, which is because of their karma.
2nd question:-
//If it was destined for the parents to suffer and son is an instrument, why should the son pay for the sin?//
From the above explanations, it will be seen that a person can become instrumental for the sufferings of the parents either deliberately or unintentionally. When he does deliberately – irrespective of the reason – he incurs counter karma. When he genuinely wants to help his parents, and he is not able to do so, due to circumstances or unavoidable reasons, he does not incur any karma. What is important is the genuine concern and attempt to help. What matters is the attitude. This is applicable to any situation where there is someone suffering and you are in a position to reduce that suffering but you are not rising to the occasion. In the case of parents, such a deliberate attitude would go as Prarabhdha karma. The result had to be experienced later.
3rd question:-
//Is the son being made to sin because as part of his evolution towards Moksha, destiny decided that he has to go through this experience. When does this seemingly never ending cycle break?//
The son is made to sin due to the Guna –mix in him, but that is not a justification for doing the act of not taking care of parents or making them suffer. It is not philologically correct to say that this is part of his evolution to Moksha but correct to say if we consider this as a necessary process. But then one could skip this process (of sinning) in this particular example of causing sufferings to the parents, because the scriptural injunctions are such that 'Matru devo bhava, pithru devo bhava' and therefore cause no harm to them. How could one say that this sin (in the above case) is part of evolution to Moksha when the scriptures make it clear that one must not make the parents suffer?
Going against the do's and don'ts of the scriptures is where the sages have discussed about Free will!
Sages have argued this part by saying that since the scriptures have laid down do's and don'ts for people, it shows that a person is expected to follow do's or don'ts. That means he has to exercise his ' will' to follow the do's and don'ts. Or else why should the scriptures make those injunctions?
This is countered by the reply that even though scriptures have laid down the do's and don'ts and the person knows them very well, how many of them follow those injunctions? If we say that the person has the freewill he could have easily followed the injunctions and attained better level. But that he doesn't do as per scriptures show that there is something else that is pulling him away from doing them. The pulling one is the Guna-mix.
So when doing or not doing as per injunctions, it is the Guna mix that controls. But then what use for those injunctions?
The use of the injunctions is that by constantly hearing those do's and don'ts, the Jiva attains a level of Guna mix that picks up the rationale of the injunctions. This happens by the Lord giving them the Buddhi! "To them ever steadfast and serving Me with affection, I give that 'Buddhi-yoga' by which they come unto Me". This verse placed at 10-10 in Bhagawad Gita is of utmost importance that shows when the connect with the lord happens and how a person learns and then acts due to the Buddhi Yoga given by Him and not by his own efforts or capability.
Bhagavan says unmincingly in 10-10 that he will give buddhi yoga (dadaami buddhi yogam) to the one who meditates s on Him. This can further be elaborated from Daivasura sampath vibhaga yogam, whereby the Lord lists the auspicious qualities. The one steeped on these qualities at some time strikes the threshold limit, whereby the Lord steps in to give 'dadaami yogam'. But what is this threshold limit is not known to us.
But He as the kshethragjyan in the kshethra called individual self, is the Ruler of the self giving it smrithi (remembrance ) and gyanam (15-15). The entire Purushotthama yogam clarifies the relationship between Him and him.
But when the self realizes Him as Yogeshwaran who as inner Ruler does everything and that he is discharging his orders as His instrument (nimitthani bhava), the last verse of BG gets into place (yathra yogeshwara krishno, yathra paartho dhanur dharah..). For this to happen the self has to do karma phala tyaagam. (verses 12-10, 12-11, 12-12 and the ever famous sarva dharmaan parithyajya) but still be in battle-preparedness, like Paartha as dhanur-dhari.
In other words, the self must be ever zealous in action, with awareness that it is Him who as inner Ruler, Yogeshwaran, is doing action through Him. When such realization comes, whatever be the karmic balance, whatever be the Guna balance all of them are waived by Him. Brahma sutras go farther to tell that the punya balance of the self in Release goes to his well-wishers and friends and the papa balance to his detractors. This is the process of evolution to Moksha.
Bhagavan says unmincingly in 10-10 that he will give buddhi yoga (dadaami buddhi yogam) to the one who meditates s on Him. This can further be elaborated from Daivasura sampath vibhaga yogam, whereby the Lord lists the auspicious qualities. The one steeped on these qualities at some time strikes the threshold limit, whereby the Lord steps in to give 'dadaami yogam'. But what is this threshold limit is not known to us.
But He as the kshethragjyan in the kshethra called individual self, is the Ruler of the self giving it smrithi (remembrance ) and gyanam (15-15). The entire Purushotthama yogam clarifies the relationship between Him and him.
But when the self realizes Him as Yogeshwaran who as inner Ruler does everything and that he is discharging his orders as His instrument (nimitthani bhava), the last verse of BG gets into place (yathra yogeshwara krishno, yathra paartho dhanur dharah..). For this to happen the self has to do karma phala tyaagam. (verses 12-10, 12-11, 12-12 and the ever famous sarva dharmaan parithyajya) but still be in battle-preparedness, like Paartha as dhanur-dhari.
In other words, the self must be ever zealous in action, with awareness that it is Him who as inner Ruler, Yogeshwaran, is doing action through Him. When such realization comes, whatever be the karmic balance, whatever be the Guna balance all of them are waived by Him. Brahma sutras go farther to tell that the punya balance of the self in Release goes to his well-wishers and friends and the papa balance to his detractors. This is the process of evolution to Moksha.
In this process, the jiva becoming his instrument can happen only when the jiva follows the injunctions of Do's and don'ts. By making the parents suffer and not attempting to do anything to mitigate that suffering, the jiva does not come in the line of Paramatman's grant of Buddhi yogam. Such persons, as the Lord has told in BG would go in to degraded states. "Those malicious and cruel evil doers, most degraded of men, I hurl perpetually into the wombs of auras only in these worlds" (BG 16-19)
Taking up what I said in
the above comment let me explain further.
//The use of the injunctions is that by constantly hearing those do’s and don’ts, the Jiva attains a level of Guna mix that picks up the rationale of the injunctions. This happens by the Lord giving them the Buddhi!//
This can be understood from the example of following traffic rules. There are do's and don'ts of traffic rules. More often than not we don't follow traffic rules, unless a police man stands guard or if there is a mechanism to catch you if we err. When we know that we will be punished if we don't follow the rules, we will become habituated to following the rules - say applying the brakes even as we see the orange light. It becomes a kind of automatic and involuntary action to heed to the traffic rules. This is similar to following the scriptural injunctions which in course of time becomes a habit. Once you have that as a habit, you don't err, as you won't err to attract retribution from the traffic police. Adherence to do's and don'ts is not connected with free will but discharging the will of God (traffic rules).
But when you don't follow the traffic rules, you end up in accidents which are of your making. You are so sure that you wont be caught and therefore ignore the rules. If you find yourself in a mess, then you only are responsible. In the karmic cycle, this happens when you are propelled by your Guna mix that is manifest as your thought, word and action.
Taking cue from the traffic rule example, unless the fear of retribution is there the person can not behave well - or in other words can not have his guna-mix tamed.
This is explained in the Ramanuja's commentary to Brahma Sutra 2-4-41 as follows. Though it is said (in Kausheetaki upanishad 3-8) that "He makes those whom He will raise do good deeds", it does not mean that God Himself makes man to do good or evil deeds. It means that He rewards or favours those who are resolved to be virtuous by aiding them in their resolve and vice versa. This is the background idea of BG verse that He will hurl the evil doers into asuric wombs. (16-19)
//The use of the injunctions is that by constantly hearing those do’s and don’ts, the Jiva attains a level of Guna mix that picks up the rationale of the injunctions. This happens by the Lord giving them the Buddhi!//
This can be understood from the example of following traffic rules. There are do's and don'ts of traffic rules. More often than not we don't follow traffic rules, unless a police man stands guard or if there is a mechanism to catch you if we err. When we know that we will be punished if we don't follow the rules, we will become habituated to following the rules - say applying the brakes even as we see the orange light. It becomes a kind of automatic and involuntary action to heed to the traffic rules. This is similar to following the scriptural injunctions which in course of time becomes a habit. Once you have that as a habit, you don't err, as you won't err to attract retribution from the traffic police. Adherence to do's and don'ts is not connected with free will but discharging the will of God (traffic rules).
But when you don't follow the traffic rules, you end up in accidents which are of your making. You are so sure that you wont be caught and therefore ignore the rules. If you find yourself in a mess, then you only are responsible. In the karmic cycle, this happens when you are propelled by your Guna mix that is manifest as your thought, word and action.
Taking cue from the traffic rule example, unless the fear of retribution is there the person can not behave well - or in other words can not have his guna-mix tamed.
This is explained in the Ramanuja's commentary to Brahma Sutra 2-4-41 as follows. Though it is said (in Kausheetaki upanishad 3-8) that "He makes those whom He will raise do good deeds", it does not mean that God Himself makes man to do good or evil deeds. It means that He rewards or favours those who are resolved to be virtuous by aiding them in their resolve and vice versa. This is the background idea of BG verse that He will hurl the evil doers into asuric wombs. (16-19)
4th question:-
//If I were
to take liberty to express karma theory in equations, would this make sense?
Moksha means: sanchita + prarabdha + agami = 0
prarabdha is a non-linear function of satva, rajas and tamas
sanchita = f (prarabdha, agami)
agami = f(sanchita, prarabdha)//
No one can cancel off Karma. Moksha does not mean cancelling out karma. As told above it means adjusting the Guna-mix in such a way that one is all sattwa.
Paramatman is All sattwa , therefore by becoming all-sattwa one attains Brahmanhood.
Looking at your equations, it is
Agami = sanchita + Prarabhdha
Yes, it can be said that Prarabhdha is a non linear function of Sattwa, rajas and tamas.
For that matter, even sanchita and Agami are also functions of Sattwa, rajas and tamas and not as you have written.
Agami is hypothetical, Sanchitha is unmanifest whereas Prarabhdha is manifest.
But what we have to be concerned is not these karmas but the Gunas. The Chapter, Daivasura sampath vibhaga yogam helps in knowing the auspicious qualities to rise in sattwa.
The gunas also do not cancel each other.
The guna-mix at the time of birth becomes the basis for our personality, for how we behave. At any one time one guna takes precedence over the others and deluded by stimulus, one ‘catches’ the appropriate emotion of that guna, at a time. Yes, one catches the emotion like magnet attracting iron fillings. For example, we say we ‘get’ angry, while one can not be anger personified all the time. It is a perplexing notion how and where these gunas have their adhishtaanam!! But that they are there as signature of a person and are crucial instruments in karmic bondage are what sruti and BG make out.
Moksha means: sanchita + prarabdha + agami = 0
prarabdha is a non-linear function of satva, rajas and tamas
sanchita = f (prarabdha, agami)
agami = f(sanchita, prarabdha)//
No one can cancel off Karma. Moksha does not mean cancelling out karma. As told above it means adjusting the Guna-mix in such a way that one is all sattwa.
Paramatman is All sattwa , therefore by becoming all-sattwa one attains Brahmanhood.
Looking at your equations, it is
Agami = sanchita + Prarabhdha
Yes, it can be said that Prarabhdha is a non linear function of Sattwa, rajas and tamas.
For that matter, even sanchita and Agami are also functions of Sattwa, rajas and tamas and not as you have written.
Agami is hypothetical, Sanchitha is unmanifest whereas Prarabhdha is manifest.
But what we have to be concerned is not these karmas but the Gunas. The Chapter, Daivasura sampath vibhaga yogam helps in knowing the auspicious qualities to rise in sattwa.
The gunas also do not cancel each other.
The guna-mix at the time of birth becomes the basis for our personality, for how we behave. At any one time one guna takes precedence over the others and deluded by stimulus, one ‘catches’ the appropriate emotion of that guna, at a time. Yes, one catches the emotion like magnet attracting iron fillings. For example, we say we ‘get’ angry, while one can not be anger personified all the time. It is a perplexing notion how and where these gunas have their adhishtaanam!! But that they are there as signature of a person and are crucial instruments in karmic bondage are what sruti and BG make out.
Why buddhi
yogam dadaami?
At my present level of understanding I can say that God has a role at 2 levels in this context. He as the in-dweller is with us always. He is also the 5 th cause in bringing out the results of action. (18-14){The first 4, namely the adhishtaanam (sharira here), kartha (self), the indriyas (influenced by the guna-mix) and the actions are about the self as Kshethragjyan and prakrithi as kshethra. The 5th cause is ‘daivam’, the Self, the Inner ruler. }
But hardly we realize His presence in us and keep doing karma thinking ourselves as the doers. Once the knowledge of the Brahman increases due to (10-4 &5) the seeker is engrossed in talks of Brahman (10 –9) It is at this moment, He gives Buddhi yogam (10-10)
This has several implications. Until then He is inside as the In-dweller. He is also the 5th cause for giving the results of karma. But when the seeker realizes Him in His greatness, a kind of attraction takes place.
It is like how I keep telling to keep our mind free of scripts. He can not enter the mind already scripted differently.
But if the mind is scripted only about Him, He is able to flow more into the mind – now that the mind is already receptive to Him. For this receptivity to happen, the mind must be having scripts of Him and not of nature different from Him.
This is where the IMPORTANCE of having RIGHT knowledge about Him comes.
This buddhi yogam dadaami also denotes that He indeed has His say in our devotion. It is not that I am devoted, I have bhakti etc. Bhagavan does have a say / does influence our thoughts is being made out by this line.
This is supported by sruti vachan that He is attained by one WHOM HE CHOOSES. (Mundaka).
The choice is not ours.
To think of Him is our ONLY choice.
To attain Him is not our choice too (renounce this phala too, says He)
It is here the Lila comes in place –which is something personal happening between the seeker and the sought, - a lila where the two players enjoy the game and not that, one is in karmic bond and the other as Lord overseeing - till the equation becomes knower = the known.
At my present level of understanding I can say that God has a role at 2 levels in this context. He as the in-dweller is with us always. He is also the 5 th cause in bringing out the results of action. (18-14){The first 4, namely the adhishtaanam (sharira here), kartha (self), the indriyas (influenced by the guna-mix) and the actions are about the self as Kshethragjyan and prakrithi as kshethra. The 5th cause is ‘daivam’, the Self, the Inner ruler. }
But hardly we realize His presence in us and keep doing karma thinking ourselves as the doers. Once the knowledge of the Brahman increases due to (10-4 &5) the seeker is engrossed in talks of Brahman (10 –9) It is at this moment, He gives Buddhi yogam (10-10)
This has several implications. Until then He is inside as the In-dweller. He is also the 5th cause for giving the results of karma. But when the seeker realizes Him in His greatness, a kind of attraction takes place.
It is like how I keep telling to keep our mind free of scripts. He can not enter the mind already scripted differently.
But if the mind is scripted only about Him, He is able to flow more into the mind – now that the mind is already receptive to Him. For this receptivity to happen, the mind must be having scripts of Him and not of nature different from Him.
This is where the IMPORTANCE of having RIGHT knowledge about Him comes.
This buddhi yogam dadaami also denotes that He indeed has His say in our devotion. It is not that I am devoted, I have bhakti etc. Bhagavan does have a say / does influence our thoughts is being made out by this line.
This is supported by sruti vachan that He is attained by one WHOM HE CHOOSES. (Mundaka).
The choice is not ours.
To think of Him is our ONLY choice.
To attain Him is not our choice too (renounce this phala too, says He)
It is here the Lila comes in place –which is something personal happening between the seeker and the sought, - a lila where the two players enjoy the game and not that, one is in karmic bond and the other as Lord overseeing - till the equation becomes knower = the known.
