Is it a Sin to kill small insects knowingly or unknowingly as per Hinduism?

[P.J.]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Shri sangom Sir

“Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah” —
“Non – Violence is the
greatest Dharma.”
and also ‘Dharma himsaa tathaiva cha.’

“So too is all righteous violence.”


To every humans, Dharma is to save his wife, children, fellow humans from every sort of attack including harmful disease spreading mosquitoes, insects etc.
You know very well that this is not a new Karma Theory; when you say in the last line you “rest my case here’, proves that you want to continue your debate!!

 

[sravna]

It is spin all right. It is psychological and not Karmic logic. Do it as long as your want to do it, do what ever, and have the most crooked lawyer to get you the amnesty, show up in court (OJ SIMPSON case) and put up a good show, sell it to your peer. That is it, that is not karma theory.
But if it gives you the licence to do the crime go ahead, others have been doing it so. But do not call it Karmic or even moral.

I think I am not wrong in saying that no one here or anywhere can claim access to perfect knowledge. Then I wonder how certain people take the role of "knowledge police" and are quick to point out that something is wrong with someone's view. I would be more than happy to know what the correct version is or at least some rational explanation of why they think the others' point of view is wrong.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Sangom,

I am not trying to score a point now but see if we can have a better understanding of the karma theory through a fruitful discussion. So I request very knowledgeable people like you and others to participate in the discussion.

There should be little disagreement among members here whether karma is about action and reaction. So the debatable point is how much are we in control over the action and the reaction?

1) If we have no control over action at all there is absolutely no freewill. If we have limited control there is some freewill. And everyone would agree that only the ultimate reality has absolute freewill

2) If we have no control over the reaction , pariharams would not work. Otherwise it would, at least to the extent we have control over them.

Dear Shri Sravna,

I have no doubts regarding your posts and I do not think that you are trying to score a point in such debates. But my stand on Karma is that we have control only on Karmas and not at all over their consequences, results or the karmaphala - under any circumstances, whether we are fully realized souls or ordinary humans. Since we have no control over karmaphala, it follows that parihārams are useless as devices for nullifying/reducing/turning into our favour any adverse karmaphalas which we are slated to experience. I am reminded of a line தொழுதாலும் அழுதாலும் வினையாகினாய் in a Tamil prayer we used to recite years back, which has now been changed to தொழுதாலும் அழுதாலும் வடிவாகினாய் so as to please the mass sentiment, I think.

So my thesis is that on the actions on which we have no control over, we have reactions also which are out of our control. This set of actions and reactions happen when we are under the spell of maya or in ignorance. The purpose is to ensure that every soul gets all the right actions and reactions and therefore the experiences that are essential for the final self realization.

I do not subscribe to the view that the purpose of human birth is for some external agency or power to "ripen" us into delicious fruit-like self-realized souls. Therefore, I will reject the above argument that all types of right actions and reactions are a pre-condition for self-realization. And, any way if the requirement is of right actions, then the reactions will also be favourable and thus not needing any parihāram, imo.

But we also gradually come out of maya. This is when I think we acquire free will. This is akin to an infant which is initially totally under the care of its parents but slowly begins to be on its own. When using freewill we can use it rightly or wrongly. But I think there is a way to escape the reactions based on this kind of karma just as a very young person, someone as an adolescent is not held totally responsible for his wrong actions but given consideration for his still not totally developed maturity.

Thus freewill based actions and pariharams signify that we indeed have control over some actions and the corresponding reactions.

My notion of māyā is not one of some kind of infction out of which one comes out gradually; to me māyā is some type of coloured goggles and the moment it goes away from the front of your eyes, you are able to experience the world without māyā's obfuscation. Since karmaphala for everyone is out of his/her control, parihārams will not be of use to amybody.

 

[sangom]

Shri Saigom Sir

“Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah” —
“Non – Violence is the
greatest Dharma.”
and also ‘Dharma himsaa tathaiva cha.’

“So too is all righteous violence.”


To every humans, Dharma is to save his wife, children, fellow humans from every sort of attack including harmful disease spreading mosquitoes, insects etc.
You know very well that this is not a new Karma Theory; when you say in the last line you “rest my case here’, proves that you want to continue your debate!!

Shri PJ,

Before I write about the matter may I request you to be a little more careful in spelling my name? It is SANGOM (sankar - myself and Gomathy - my wife). You have been using different spellings like soigom, sangam, saigam, etc.

What is Dharma? will probably make a separate and perhaps eternal thread by itself, imo. Dharmaputra himself is seen saying in the Mahabharata —

तर्कॊऽप्रतिष्ठः श्रुतयॊ विभिन्नाः
नैको मुनिर्यस्य वचः प्रमाणम् ॥
धर्मस्य तत्वं निहितं गुहायाम्
महाजनॊ येन गतः स पन्थाः ॥

(tarko:'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnāḥ
naiko muniryasya vacaḥ pramāṇam ||
dharmasya tatvaṃ nihitaṃ guhāyām
mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ ||)

Hence, ordinary mortals like me cannot say anything definite about what is Dharma and what is not. I really do not intend to continue this dialogue, but if as you say, righteous violence is also Himsaa, then I think what I say is correct; any action shall have its karmaphala and that karmaphala will have to be experienced.

 

[P.J.]

Sorry Sir,saigom
your name now corrected!!

 

[sravna]

But my stand on Karma is that we have control only on Karmas and not at all over their consequences, results or the karmaphala - under any circumstances, whether we are fully realized souls or ordinary humans. Since we have no control over karmaphala, it follows that parihārams are useless as devices for nullifying/reducing/turning into our favour any adverse karmaphalas which we are slated to experience. I am reminded of a line தொழுதாலும் அழுதாலும் வினையாகினாய் in a Tamil prayer we used to recite years back, which has now been changed to தொழுதாலும் அழுதாலும் வடிவாகினாய் so as to please the mass sentiment, I think.

Dear Shri Sangom,

By karma and karmaphala do you mean the actions and reactions respectively?

I assume you mean the above. I also assume your view that one comes out of maya instantly. When one comes out of maya he is self realized or ready for moksha. So the sojourn on the physical world ends. No problem with that. The problem is, a person under the influence of maya, is not in self control. So IMO it is not correct to say we are in control of the karma.

Shri Sangom, I need to put forth a finer argument here. When under the influence of maya, even though the self control is not there or in other words the actions during the birth are not driven by the real self, the jivatma assimilates the learning experiences of the births and benefits from them. If there is no role for jivatma, it doesn't make sense.

So it passively learns and after it progresses to a certain level, it is reasonable to postulate that the ego begins to shed. The beginning of the shedding of ego IMO is a milestone and constitutes the mindset of spiritually inclined people. The final destination though is transcending the ego or getting rid of its influence irreversibly.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Sangom,

By karma and karmaphala do you mean the actions and reactions respectively?

I assume you mean the above. I also assume your view that one comes out of maya instantly. When one comes out of maya he is self realized or ready for moksha. So the sojourn on the physical world ends. No problem with that. The problem is, a person under the influence of maya, is not in self control. So IMO it is not correct to say we are in control of the karma.

Shri Sangom, I need to put forth a finer argument here. When under the influence of maya, even though the self control is not there or in other words the actions during the birth are not driven by the real self, the jivatma assimilates the learning experiences of the births and benefits from them. If there is no role for jivatma, it doesn't make sense.

So it passively learns and after it progresses to a certain level, it is reasonable to postulate that the ego begins to shed. The beginning of the shedding of ego IMO is a milestone and constitutes the mindset of spiritually inclined people. The final destination though is transcending the ego or getting rid of its influence irreversibly.

Dear Shri Sravna,

We have known each other's views on such topics as also advaita, since more than the last two years. And you know that my views border on the Agnostic. IMO, the jīvātmā is not something as you seem to imagine and subscribe to. Advaita texts clearly state that जीवो ब्रह्मैव नापरः (jīvo brahmaiva nāparaḥ) and I do not find anywhere in the usual advaitic texts the theory that "When under the influence of maya, even though the self control is not there or in other words the actions during the birth are not driven by the real self, the jivatma assimilates the learning experiences of the births and benefits from them. If there is no role for jivatma, it doesn't make sense." In my imagination (because none of us can vouchsafe any of these things from personal experiences nor through demonstrable experiments) there is no separate jīvātmā. Only the Paramātmā functions within the body but it is simply made incapable of "knowing itself" while working in the human body. It is something like looking at our own face (without a mirror). And, even when the māyā is very much operative, there is self-control possible because all talk about karma, karmaphala, etc., are relevant only to this world.

Nor do I subscribe to the view that all the jīvātmās are undergoing some school-type of education here in this world, that they "passively learn" and steadily progress from LKG class to XII and so on. Since both of us are free to hold our own views, however ludicrous these may be, why not we agree to disagree?

 

[prasad1]

Gita Concept of Niskama Karma (Nivrtta Karma)


Gita focuses more on the right approach to the performance of karma
rather than running away from karma. The right approach consists of
two key aspects:


1. Sankalpa sannyasa or abdication of motives.


2. Tyaga or offering of the results at the feet of God.


This way of performing karma is known as niskamakarma or nivrttakarma.
Gita suggests that we should be only concerned on the nature of the
duties to be performed and not with the results that may accrue. The
message of Gita is : "Do not permit the result of the activity to
determine the efforts for the activity.' We play many roles from
childhood to adulthood and we are left with no choice but to complete
our obligations. Whether at home or in the office or on the road we
have roles to play. Eligibility should not be determined by the
person undertaking the responsibility. A teacher has to teach, a
student has to learn, a warrior has to fight and there are no options
given to the person undertaking the responsibility. If we look at the
nature, we can see that the duty of the apple tree to yield the apples
and the apple tree is left with no choice! This approach is expressed
in Gita by the expressions like `sangam tyaktva', `asaktah',
`kamasankalpavarjita' etc. Activity undertaken with such a frame of
mind is known as riskamakarma or nivrttakarma.


Such an attitude is possible only, if we understand our role in the
activity correctly, Agent alone does not execute an activity: Most of
us are under the wrong impression that it is only the karta or the
agent who is solely responsible for the activity undertaken. But there
are five factors underlying each activity. These are:


1. Adhisthana - Exact point of reference of the undertaken activity
2. Karta - the agent or the person designated for the activity.
3. Karana - the instruments i.e. Indriyas etc.
4. Vividha - associated actions and actors necessary to complete the
action.
5. Daiva - the supreme God who supervises as the director and
regulator.


Those who have clear understanding of these factors know that their
action alone doesn't determine the result and they have a limited role
and consequently will prepare to accept the results with equanimity.
They will treat all activities that they undertake as niskamakarma.

Gita Concept of Niskama Karma (Nivrtta Karma)


I did not see any room for pariharms.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sravna,

We have known each other's views on such topics as also advaita, since more than the last two years. And you know that my views border on the Agnostic. IMO, the jīvātmā is not something as you seem to imagine and subscribe to. Advaita texts clearly state that जीवो ब्रह्मैव नापरः (jīvo brahmaiva nāparaḥ) and I do not find anywhere in the usual advaitic texts the theory that "When under the influence of maya, even though the self control is not there or in other words the actions during the birth are not driven by the real self, the jivatma assimilates the learning experiences of the births and benefits from them. If there is no role for jivatma, it doesn't make sense." In my imagination (because none of us can vouchsafe any of these things from personal experiences nor through demonstrable experiments) there is no separate jīvātmā. Only the Paramātmā functions within the body but it is simply made incapable of "knowing itself" while working in the human body. It is something like looking at our own face (without a mirror). And, even when the māyā is very much operative, there is self-control possible because all talk about karma, karmaphala, etc., are relevant only to this world.

Nor do I subscribe to the view that all the jīvātmās are undergoing some school-type of education here in this world, that they "passively learn" and steadily progress from LKG class to XII and so on. Since both of us are free to hold our own views, however ludicrous these may be, why not we agree to disagree?

OK, let us agree to disagree

 

[tks]

Nor do I subscribe to the view that all the jīvātmās are undergoing some school-type of education here in this world, that they "passively learn" and steadily progress from LKG class to XII and so on.

Truly a Laughing out Loud moment for me

 

[sravna]

Truly a Laughing out Loud moment for me

Yet another self realized soul brimming with knowledge

 

[sravna]

Basically I see two kinds of people in the world, the ones who go by form and the ones who go by content. The power of discrimination separates the both. The ones who lack discrimination compensate that by being forceful and it works most of the time since most react adversely to such tactics.

But that's what makes life meaningful and helps in the spiritual progress. You first succumb to the force and start to think that all talk of dharma is only empty and you too begin to think in adharmic ways.But you are made to realize that being adharmic is self destructive.

Since the adharmic people only understand what they see, they are unable fathom the destructive nature of adharma. Only when they are actually hit by the laws of karma, reality begins to dawn upon them.

Regarding, spiritual evolution being a school like learning, I think progress in the physical world models on the spiritual progress. Learning can only be gradual. How else can it be? Just like you do not do a Ph.D after standard 1 and then come back to standard 2.

The main theme of maya initially is to let you to be influenced by forms because your mind sees only the surface. Once you get disillusioned and seek true knowledge you understand that there is more to reality than you imagined.

 

[P.J.]

Pariharam is like applying for Grace of God; God's Grace can change the effect of Karma. It is like a
medicine which is labeled, `good until 1968'. If used in 1973, the
medicine is entirely ineffective. The body is the bottle, the karma
in the body is the medicine, God puts a date on the `medicine'; so
it is not effective.
(From Sai Discourses)

Confession of sin
The Mahabharata
Anusasana Parva, Section CLXII
Translated by Sri Kisari Mohan Ganguli
Addressing King Yudhishthira, Bhishma said:
The heart of the sinful man always proclaims the sins he has committed. Those men who have deliberately committed sins meet with destruction by seeking to conceal them from the good. Indeed, they that are confirmed sinners seek to conceal their sinful acts from others. Such persons think that their sins are witnessed by neither men nor the deities. The sinful man, overwhelmed by his sins, takes birth in a miserable order of being. The sins of such a man continually grow, even as the interests the usurer charges (on the loan he grants) increase from day to day.
If, having committed a sin, one seeks to have it covered by righteousness, that sin becomes destroyed and leads to righteousness instead of other sins. If a quantity of water be poured upon salt, the salt immediately dissolves away. Even so, when expiation is performed, sin dissolves away. For these reasons, one should never conceal a sin. Concealed, it is certain to increase. Having committed a sin, one should confess it in the presence of those that are good. They would destroy it immediately.
Sin

 

[Raghy]

Dearsri.Sravna,Greetings.

Since the adharmic people only understand what they see, they are unable fathom the destructive nature of adharma. Only when they are actually hit by the laws of karma, reality begins to dawn upon them.

Personally I don't belive in 'adharmic people'. Only few persons fitted such descriptions. They killed thousands or even millions of persons to fulfill their selfish desires. some of the person's teachings cause ill effects amoung us even today.

how do we know when we get hit by law of karma? How can we identify it was the law of karma? For example, I am going through discomfort right now due to fracture of metacarpal. Is this due to law of karma? If that is, what should I consider this? A payment for any of my aharmic action? It is okay to discuss my personal incident. The reason for my question is, I am not considering this as any 'karmic payback'. My point is, unless we know we are getting paid for one of our specific karma, how can we know about that? If we don't know about that, how can we act diffeently in the next time to avoid gathering ill karmas?

Cheers!

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Raghy,

My opinion is that you do not realize it when you live your life. But the jivatma with the various experiences of several births can correlate them and come to that conclusion.

 

[P.J.]

Many thought provoking views have been expressed about "knowingly or unknowingly killing harmful insects, Mosquitoes etc,
; the best way to avoid killing these insects is to keep the area clean, which is going to very hard in Indian conditions. the way Indian society is made up.We hardly commit any nuisance on the sideways of roads when we go to any foreign country, but once we land in India we start doing it; Ever since we are young we have seen women clean our home and throw all the filth on the road, it is slowly changing now, with Sanitary workers collecting the waste from each home.
Same is the case with plastics, the use of the same is prohibited in many parts of India.
Unless people wake up to this ills of keeping the place unclean and curtail the breeding of harmful insects, there is no other way except to exterminate these disease spreading insects and save oneself and others.

 

[Raghy]

Dear Shri Raghy,

My opinion is that you do not realize it when you live your life. But the jivatma with the various experiences of several births can correlate them and come to that conclusion.

Dear Sri. Sravna,

Personally I don't subscribe to several births or reincarnation. I could be very wrong though. However, I do subscribe, we pay for our actions. I know I am paying the price for being too animated in my conversation. I can't think I am paying the penalty. I do believe we should know why we get into any discomfort, so that we may avoid any repeatition.

Cheers!

 

[sravna]

Dear Sri. Sravna,

Personally I don't subscribe to several births or reincarnation. I could be very wrong though. However, I do subscribe, we pay for our actions. I know I am paying the price for being too animated in my conversation. I can't think I am paying the penalty. I do believe we should know why we get into any discomfort, so that we may avoid any repeatition.

Cheers!

Dear Shri Raghy,

To those who subscribe to the existence of soul and several births, the problem of knowing about the cause of sufferings is solved as the real self is the soul and it does know why there are sufferings and it does evolve and 'correct" the wrong in the ensuing births.

 

[renuka]

We hardly commit any nuisance on the sideways of roads when we go to any foreign country, but once we land in India we start doing it.

Dear Sir,

I am reminded of this..each time when I land in India and take a cab..I wear my seat belt even while seated at the back seat cos I am so used to it out here in Malaysia where it's compulsory.

Each and every time I wear the seat belt in India the cab drivers tell me "Madam in India you do not need to wear seat belt at the back seat"

I tell them.."I know but it is for safety reasons too that I am wearing it and why don't you yourself wear a seat belt while driving?"

They just laughed it off and still do not wear their seat belts.

It is not easy to make people adhere to good habits even for safety reasons.

 

[renuka]

Dear Shri Raghy,

To those who subscribe to the existence of soul and several births, the problem of knowing about the cause of sufferings is solved as the real self is the soul and it does know why there are sufferings and it does evolve and 'correct" the wrong in the ensuing births.

Dear Sravna,

There is no way we can actually know the cause of our suffering.
All we know is that we are experiencing suffering.

There is no auto corrective method too cos people handle suffering differently.
Some people learn from their suffering but some turn aggressive/bitter and do on to others what they had been through.

Best example of people not learning from their suffering is the Indian Mother In Law Syndrome.

A young bride that undergoes torture at the hands of her MIL would most likely do the same when she becomes a MIL.

Very few women will think "Let not this happen to someone else" and treat her DIL nicely.

Even when we were trainee docs some of us were really treated badly by senior docs.
Only a few of us resolved that we will never treat our juniors like how we were treated and devised plans to help out junior doctors when we became seniors.

Many other docs started treating junior docs badly when they became seniors and asked us "how dumb can you guys be..why are you letting the juniors enjoy when you yourself underwent suffering in the hands of senior docs"

So you see suffering can go either way..either we resolve not to let anyone else undergo the same or we become the torturer ourselves.

 

[P.J.]

"It is not easy to make people adhere to good habits even for safety reasons", you are talking about ordinary cab driver, but safety violations happen even when knowledgeable people are around.

We often see spectators are allowed to sit on path ways, etc during Pattimandram Debates which can never happen in any foreign country.

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

We go through experiences every birth. We have good and bad experiences. Only very few learn from them. The reason in my opinion is that you need a spiritual inclination to do that. However, finally everyone do correct ourselves at least in the future births. This is also for the same reason that the soul which is essentially spiritual in nature learns based on the experiences of the various births.

Thus I understand how only certain people learn the right lessons during their lifetime itself whereas others don't.

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka,

We go through experiences every birth. We have good and bad experiences. Only very few learn from them. The reason in my opinion is that you need a spiritual inclination to do that. However, finally everyone do correct ourselves at least in the future births. This is also for the same reason that the soul which is essentially spiritual in nature learns based on the experiences of the various births.

Thus I understand how only certain people learn the right lessons during their lifetime itself whereas others don't.

Dear Sravna,

The soul does not really learn cos it is ever pure to start with.
The soul is merely a witness.

 

[P.J.]

The Soul is not a mere witness.

At the moment of physical death, the soul withdraws its energy from the organs of the body and vacates its seat in the middle of the forehead. It takes with it the impressions accumulated in that life and enters into the body of an unborn baby, while that new body is still being formed in its mother’s womb. This normally happens between the fourth and fifth month of pregnancy. A human soul only enters a human body. The type of body the soul enters and the conditions of birth are determined by the past actions of the soul in its previous life or lives, and the cumulative account of give and take that it has built up with other souls. Without proper understanding of this process, the leaving of one body and the taking of another is often an experience of great fear and anguish; but the details of the old life are soon obliterated by new experiences so that the soul is not overwhelmed and confused by past memories.

By the time the baby’s body and brain are developed, the soul has all but forgotten the past and become accustomed to its new conditions and to the parents of its new body. However, although the soul cannot usually remember details of its past life or lives, it carries with it—in the form of attitudes, tendencies and personality—the cumulative effect of all that it has experienced and learned.



Brahma Kumaris Official Website - Reincarnation

 

[renuka]

Dear PJ sir,

The soul in encased in the subtle body which also houses the Antahkarana.(Manas,Buddhi,Chitta and Ahankara)
The Antahkarana bears all the imprints and are carried from birth to birth.
The soul verily remains a witness.

BTW Paramahansa Yogananda had said that the soul enters at the time of conception.

The fourth and fifth month is often confused as soul entering body cos that's the time the mother feels movement of the fetus.

On Ultrasound we can see a heart beat as early as 7 weeks of gestation and movement of fetus as early as 9-10 weeks.
So if there was no soul at 7 weeks what made the heart beat and the fetus move(at 9-10 weeks)?

At 4th and 5th month of pregnancy the uterus is big enough for the fetal movement to be felt at the abdominal wall hence often confused as soul entering the fetus.

Soul is a power house...it is needed to kick start cell division.

In fact it is Biblical to say that soul enters at 4-5 months cos only they use the term the Quick and the Dead to denote the phenomenon of quickening(feeling movement of fetus at 4-5 months)

Ultrasound has proved Christians wrong.