Title : Reincarnation A scientific explanation |
Author : Dr S.J.Divakar |
|
Reincarnation is a major subject of discussion in Indian philosophy. A number of great spiritualists, philosophers, experts have thought about it with great sincerity. There have been so many great personalities in this sacred land, who have described personally their experiences in the earlier life.
The story of Maharshi Vamdev appears in the RigVed. He was a great Rishi from the Ramayan period, and was one of the members in the ministry of Emperor Dashrath. There were eight ministers. Needless to say, King Shivaji too based his ministry on this idea of governance.
Maharshi Vamdev wanted never to come out of his mother��s womb, and his mother had to carry him like that for almost 12 years. He did not want to get out through her female reproductive tract, saying that it was very unclean. His parents and other Rishis explained to him that that was the natural way to come out of the mother��s womb. But Vamdev was adamant. He described the great discomforts and unbearable systems of the fetus stage, and also described his experiences of the pre-birth stage as well as previous life. Finally, Vamdev opened his mother��s side and came out.
The great Goswami Tulsidasji has written in the Bal Kand of his famous Ram Charit Manas, explaining the importance of the company of saints that Narad, Valmiki and Maharshi Agasti personally described the stories of their earlier births. Maharshi Valmiki described his sinful earlier life as a hunter to Lord Ram in the Ramayan (Sarg 6, Ayodhya Kand).
Devarshi Narad described in Shrimad Bhagwat his earlier life story to Maharshi Vyas. He was born to a very learned Brahmin from his keep, and serving the Rishis during their Chaturmas period, earned his rightful place as a great devotee of the Almighty Maharshi Agasti has described in the Uttar Kand of Valmiki Ramayan how he was born out of a specially created utensil from the great powers of Mitra and Varun.
There are hundreds of such stories and descriptions concerning reincarnation found in the great MahaPurans and UpaPurans of the Aryans. The fall of Jay and Vijay following the curse by Rishis such as Sanak, their subsequent reincarnations together in the forms of Hiranyaksha-Hiranyakashipu, Ravan-Kumbhakarna, and Vakradant-Shishupal prove that they had had at least three reincarnations each.
It was on the basis of the great book Yogavasishthya that Goswami Tulsidas, in the Uttar Kand of Ram Charit Manas, describes the entire previous life story of Kak Bhushundi.
There are two schools of philosophy here: theist and atheist. In the theistic philosophy, the theory of reincarnation is almost taken for granted. Whatever differences there may be in the Buddhist philosophy, but in spite of that, there are stories of thousands of earlier lives of the Buddha in the Bouddha Jatak Tales.
In most of the Nyayvaisheshik books of philosophy, as well as in the Bhagwatgeeta, the most comprehensive and most universally accepted book too, frequent mentions of reincarnations and earlier lives are found. Lord Krishna Himself says in BhagwatGeeta, that life and death are intricately connected with each other. If there is a birth, then death is there, and when death is self-evident, so is the birth. Both are complementary to each other. One is incomplete without the other.
The word ‘Abhiniwesh’ appears in the Patanjal Yog philosophy. The word means fear of death. Fear of death cannot be there without the knowledge of grief of the death. Thus, the fear of death exists only because of the experience of grief of death from the earlier life. Thus, the fear of death proves the existence of previous life.
Patanjai vehemently objects to the unity between the soul and the Supreme Soul. Needless to say, it is a highly theistic philosophy. But in spite of such free criticism of the theism, it still accepts theism as the ultimate truth wholeheartedly.
Ramanujacharya describes the soul as infinitesimal, ignorant etc. Thus, the soul is ignorant, while the Almighty is knowledge incarnate. Patanjal fights with other philosophies, but says that when knowledge becomes supreme, it will certainly become all-pervasive. Thus, it is the Almighty.
The soul, grief, sufferings, Karma etc. are all connected with each other. They are not inseparable. All of them are caused by the earlier life, and our body is the home to all of them. It houses the good as well as the bad results of our Karma. Thus, the body is the reason behind reincarnation and previous life. By ‘reason’, I mean result of one’s deeds. The real meaning of the word ‘Sharir’, the body, itself is something which decays and gets destroyed with time. The intention behind having any type of body is repayment of the existing Karma and start of the new one. There are two types of the body. There is the Yonij, i.e., the one which gets generated as a result of the mating of the sperm and the ovum. Man, beasts, birds, trees etc. are this type of bodies. The other one is the Ayonij, i.e., bodies generated by other means such as from light, wind, the mind etc.
According to Yogarnav, there are four types of bodies: Udbhij, i.e., something that grows from the earth, i.e., all types of vegetation, Swedaj, i.e., those born out of perspiration, e.g., insects, Andaj, i.e., those born out of eggs, e.g., birds, and Jarayuj, i.e., those born out of the womb.
The Almighty is away from grief, sufferings etc. So, He does not have to bear or repay any results of the previous lives. Grief, sufferings, joy etc. are characteristics of the mind and the heart. Just as similarly, the soul is also not affected by grief or sufferings etc. But the mind and heart affect the soul and also depend on it. This is similar to the fact that when soldiers fight with each other, the king wins or loses and not the soldiers themselves, because they are fighting for the king who has to bear the results.
Karma is the one reason and purpose behind the previous life and reincarnation. There are four types of Karma. The Karma derived from Niravachchinna sin is Krishna-karma. The Karma derived from Bahisadhan is Shukla-Krishna. This is because some troubles for others and some help to others are bound to be there in rituals like Yajnas. Karma derived from contemplation, self-study etc. is Shukla. Karma derived from the studies and practices of Yoga by the Yogis is Ashuklakrishna, because there is no question of causing trouble to others. So, the results of the last type are directly surrendered to the God.
Needless to say, experts such as Gautam gave a fitting reply to the atheist people who do not believe in reincarnation. Their arguments are extremely logical, clear and unimpeachable. The Nyaysutra says in 3/1/19, what is the reason behind the fact that we always find emotions like happiness, grief, fear etc. on the face of a newborn baby?
Vachaspati Mishraji says in Nyayvartik Tatparya Teeka, happiness is the result of getting the thing one desires. When someone does not want something and is still unable to run away from it, it causes fear. Grief is caused by the loss of someone or something one loves or desires. The actual experience of all these is called ‘Sampratipatti’. Remembrance of past experience is called ‘Memory’ or ‘Smriti’. The reason behind Smriti is called ‘Anubandh’.
Evidently, there is always a reason behind happiness, grief, fear etc. The only reason why these emotions appear on the face of a newborn baby is the memories of the previous life. These memories and the emotions caused by them are the ones that cause them to be written on the newborn face.
Conceivably, the atheists might argue that the crying, laughing, screaming of newborn babies are natural, just as a lotus blooms at sunrise and closes its petals at sunset. Why should they not be considered circumstantial?
In reply, the Nyaysutra creators have put forth this: Even the example of the lotus flower blooming and shutting does not prove that these phenomena are circumstantial. Various features produced in all things created out of the five elements are caused by the summer, rains and winter. It is impossible that they would be created without reason. Thus, there has to be some reason behind the various emotions seen on the faces of newborn babies. And that reason is the experiences of the previous lives. This is also the reason why the baby has the natural instinct to suck milk out of the mother’s breasts.
The Nyaysutra says in 3/1/22: the experiences of the previous lives teach the baby to suck milk out of the mother’s breasts.
Commenting on this sutra, Vatsyayan says that the instinct in newborn babies of sucking milk out of the mother’s breasts for feeding themselves is not possible without previous experiences. This proves that after leaving one body and entering into the new one, the soul sucks milk out of the mother’s breasts, based on the experiences of the previous lives. The atheists have raised yet another objection, saying that just as iron gets attracted to a magnet, the baby is instinctively attracted to sucking milk, and not based on previous experiences.
The reply given by Gautam to this objection is thought provoking. In Nyaysutra 3/11/24, he says, this objection is baseless and there is no truth in it. This is because iron is attracted only to the magnet and nothing else. Thus, the cause and effect relation here is fixed and certain. The baby’s sucking the mother’s breasts is purposeful, not circumstantial. In Nyaysutra, Maharshi Gautam has mentioned 12 things in the theorems. They are: soul, body, organs, meaning, intellect, mind, tendencies, bad tendencies, Pretyabhav (reincarnation), results, grief and Apavarga. The meaning of Pretyabhav is to enter new life after death. Tarka Deepika also reaffirms this meaning, and so does Nyaysutra.
According to Vatsyayan, Pretyabhav is salvation from organs, mind, intellect and upbringing together with the change of bodies. Lord Krishna Himself has said in the 15th Chapter of BhagwatGeeta: when the soul bears the body and then leaves it, it carries it just like fragrance carried by the wind.
According to the Nyaysutra as well as other books on philosophy, the body does get separated from the soul after death and is destroyed, but the soul is not damaged or destroyed, although it gets separated from the old body. The bearing of the new body afterwards is called Pretyabhav. Gautam has given excellent examples in proof of reincarnation. In Nyaysutra 3/1/25, he says: a man who has got rid of all emotions or has them totally under control does not get born, meaning thereby that an emotional man gets born. And what are emotions? They are the contemplation of the experiences of the previous life. Emotions get generated because of these experiences and their contemplation.
A question arises, as to why is it that all of us do not remember our previous lives? The explanation for this question by Vachaspati Mishra in the Nyayvartik Tatparya Teeka is given below:
It is a proved theory that memory gets built on the basis of previous experiences. Any newborn child shows tendencies generated out of previous experiences, which proves the existence of his previous life. Then why do we not remember things from the previous life? The answer is that memory is awakened only as much as the unseen things are able to do so. It is not necessary that if one thing is etched in memory, then all things must get etched in it. When a new body is born, only the most indelible of the memories get carried forward. There are six features in man’s body: four are physical, i.e., happiness, grief, wish and hate; and the remaining two are natural, i.e., knowledge and effort. The first four being connected with the body, they get destroyed with it.
Knowledge and efforts are natural and they remain. These are indelible, and so get regenerated with a new life. Thus, Akshapad’s sutra proves that the being gets reincarnated after death. But the soul being immortal, is one and the same.
According to Vatsyayan, two problems occur by not recognizing reincarnation: 1. Kritahan: non-repayment of the results of deeds performed. 2. Akritabhyagam: Repayment of results of deeds not done.
The theory of the atheistic philosophy is that all the happiness and grief is the result of our own deeds. The results of our good deeds are good, and those of our bad deeds are bad. However, it is seen that we do not experience the results of deeds during the life, in the same life. Now the question is, if we do not believe in reincarnation, the results of the deeds are gone. Moreover, it would then seem that someone is enjoying his life without ever doing anything good, or suffering without doing anything sinful. If we remove the concept of reincarnation, then we would be repaying our deeds without doing any deeds.
Vachaspati Mishra in the Nyayvartik Tatparya Teeka says that if we do not believe in any results of good or bad things done in previous lives and say that the body is created because of only the physical mating of the sperm and ovum, we would have to admit that there does exist grief and happiness at random in life. Then it would mean that there is activity without reason or purpose, and the results do not depend on our deeds. Then the existence of results of deeds is meaningless. Also, ethics and morals become meaningless. If man can enjoy happiness without doing anything, why should he then live religiously and enjoy a life as a result of his efforts? In that case, all this becomes worthless. If we think that deed is without results and life is an accident, all the rules and philosophies and ethics and morals would be meaningless. For establishing the importance of Shastras, Lord Krishna Himself has instructed in the BhagwatGeeta that ---
Lord Almighty has instructed: It is only the Shastras that will decided what should be the duty and what should not be. So, the idea of reincarnation will have to be recognized for removing the faults for not doing one’s duties or neglecting them. (16/23-24).
Goswami Tulsidasji has said the same thing, that duty is all important in this world. One will have the fruits according to what one does.
Purans too say that the fruits of one’s deeds reach the doer at the proper time. If you let in the ground a thousand cows and set free the calf of one of them, the calf still finds her own mother out of the thousand cows unfailingly.
Now, the next question may be, why indeed birth is there? The logical and proper answer to this can be found in the Nyaydarshan(3/2/63). It says that the body takes birth only according to the results of one’s deeds in previous lives. The body is produced by the five elements with the inspiration of one’s good or bad deeds, and not independently. Those who do not believe in God or reincarnation argue here, saying that if the body is made of the five elements of water, light, earth, air and the sky, then why should the idea of reincarnation be recognized for this? If the body is made out of physically existing molecules and atoms like an earthen pot, why is any other reason necessary for it?
The answer to this is in this Sutra (Nyaydarshan 3/2/65). According to Maharshi Vatsyayan, it means: the genesis of sand, stones, etc. does not depend on the Karma, because these things are made of mixtures of physically existing molecules and atoms. But the life energy of a fetus is not made of such atoms and molecules. Here, one would have to recognize the idea of reincarnation. The stones and rocks are produced without sperms, so this comparison is unequal and unjustified. The foetus, however, is born from sperms and ovum. Vatsyayan says in a very forceful language here: Why are you reversing the flow of a river? A living body made from sperms and ovum cannot be compared with non-living things like earth and sand and stones. In order to be born, the body must live and grow inside the mother’s womb. It takes shape in the mother’s womb according to the deeds of its parents. The deeds performed in the previous lives get the body made from the five elements.
Maharshi Gautam says about the genesis of the body in his Nyaydarshan, that the food intake also influences the making of the body. Vatsyayan says that the same food intake when digested, is converted into juices in the mother’s body, and accordingly, the fetus inside the womb grows with the formation of flesh and blood. The foetus grows and becomes ready to be born because it uses these juices which it gets from the umbilical cord. But food items put in a plate do not have the same power. This proves that food in the mother’s body is not the only reason for the growth of the foetus. There has to be assistance from the deeds performed during previous lives for this.
Those who do not believe in God or reincarnation argue here, saying that if the reason for the birth is the coming together of the sperm and the ovum, why should we recognize the idea of rebirth? Maharshi Gautam has countered this in the Nyaysutra 3/2/69. Vatsyayan also has put his counter argument. Both of them suggest that not all the intercourses of man and wife can produce a baby. This proves that the meeting of sperm and ovum is not the only reason for the birth of the fetus. Something more is needed for it, and that is the Karma. Without the Karma, no meeting of the sperm and ovum is able to give birth to a fetus. So, the five elements cannot be taken to be the independent reason for generation of a body. The role of the Karma also has to be the reason. Thus, it is only because of the fate and Karma that a body is generated, and the soul enters it
Gautam has written in the Nyaysutra 3/2/70 that Karma is the reason why someone is born in the family of a king or a Brahmin, while another one is born a Shudra etc. Someone is having a complete body in all respects, while someone has a defective body. Someone is healthy, and someone is having diseases and health problems. Someone is born genius while someone is retarded at birth itself. These differences are only because of the fate and the Karma. If the existence of fate and Karma is not recognized, then one would have to consider all the beings as equal in all respects. Also, then there would be no controlling entity for the five elements, and if the controlling entity is absent, all bodies would equal and similar. But factually, this is not so. The living beings take all kinds of different body shapes and sizes at the time of birth. So, the Karma would have to be taken to be the only real reason for these differences. If the fate and Karma do not exist or their existence is denied, then it would be all chaos. So, according to Gautam in the Nyaysutra 3/2/71, when we consider the fate and Karma as the reason, the chaos is removed.
One more notable thing is that if we do not consider the role of fate and the Karma in the birth and just say that the fetus is born only because of the coming together of the sperm and ovum, what is the reason of the destruction or death of the foetus? Then another big problem of death without any specific reason would arise. In reply to this objection, Gautam has written the Nyaysutra 3/2/06.
Vatsyayan’s comment is that when the results of one’s deed are finished after he has repaid them by way of enduring whatever has come his way, the body is destroyed by death, and at the same time, another body is generated to repay the deeds performed in another life. If the five elements were the only reason for death, would the death be there? Is it because the five elements are perpetually existing that there would be another body generated after one body is destroyed? This proves that the generation and destruction of the body depend only on what is stored in the Karma. The body is born only to repay the deeds stored in the Karma, and when it is done, the soul leaves the body. So, birth, life and death are dependent on the Karma; they are not independent.
In fact, death is the entrance door between one life and the next. It is where justice is done.
****
dd
Reincarnation is a major subject of discussion in Indian philosophy. A number of great spiritualists, philosophers, experts have thought about it with great sincerity. There have been so many great personalities in this sacred land, who have described personally their experiences in the earlier life.
The story of Maharshi Vamdev appears in the RigVed. He was a great Rishi from the Ramayan period, and was one of the members in the ministry of Emperor Dashrath. There were eight ministers. Needless to say, King Shivaji too based his ministry on this idea of governance.
Maharshi Vamdev wanted never to come out of his mother��s womb, and his mother had to carry him like that for almost 12 years. He did not want to get out through her female reproductive tract, saying that it was very unclean. His parents and other Rishis explained to him that that was the natural way to come out of the mother��s womb. But Vamdev was adamant. He described the great discomforts and unbearable systems of the fetus stage, and also described his experiences of the pre-birth stage as well as previous life. Finally, Vamdev opened his mother��s side and came out.
The great Goswami Tulsidasji has written in the Bal Kand of his famous Ram Charit Manas, explaining the importance of the company of saints that Narad, Valmiki and Maharshi Agasti personally described the stories of their earlier births. Maharshi Valmiki described his sinful earlier life as a hunter to Lord Ram in the Ramayan (Sarg 6, Ayodhya Kand).
Devarshi Narad described in Shrimad Bhagwat his earlier life story to Maharshi Vyas. He was born to a very learned Brahmin from his keep, and serving the Rishis during their Chaturmas period, earned his rightful place as a great devotee of the Almighty Maharshi Agasti has described in the Uttar Kand of Valmiki Ramayan how he was born out of a specially created utensil from the great powers of Mitra and Varun.
There are hundreds of such stories and descriptions concerning reincarnation found in the great MahaPurans and UpaPurans of the Aryans. The fall of Jay and Vijay following the curse by Rishis such as Sanak, their subsequent reincarnations together in the forms of Hiranyaksha-Hiranyakashipu, Ravan-Kumbhakarna, and Vakradant-Shishupal prove that they had had at least three reincarnations each.
It was on the basis of the great book Yogavasishthya that Goswami Tulsidas, in the Uttar Kand of Ram Charit Manas, describes the entire previous life story of Kak Bhushundi.
There are two schools of philosophy here: theist and atheist. In the theistic philosophy, the theory of reincarnation is almost taken for granted. Whatever differences there may be in the Buddhist philosophy, but in spite of that, there are stories of thousands of earlier lives of the Buddha in the Bouddha Jatak Tales.
In most of the Nyayvaisheshik books of philosophy, as well as in the Bhagwatgeeta, the most comprehensive and most universally accepted book too, frequent mentions of reincarnations and earlier lives are found. Lord Krishna Himself says in BhagwatGeeta, that life and death are intricately connected with each other. If there is a birth, then death is there, and when death is self-evident, so is the birth. Both are complementary to each other. One is incomplete without the other.
The word ‘Abhiniwesh’ appears in the Patanjal Yog philosophy. The word means fear of death. Fear of death cannot be there without the knowledge of grief of the death. Thus, the fear of death exists only because of the experience of grief of death from the earlier life. Thus, the fear of death proves the existence of previous life.
Patanjai vehemently objects to the unity between the soul and the Supreme Soul. Needless to say, it is a highly theistic philosophy. But in spite of such free criticism of the theism, it still accepts theism as the ultimate truth wholeheartedly.
Ramanujacharya describes the soul as infinitesimal, ignorant etc. Thus, the soul is ignorant, while the Almighty is knowledge incarnate. Patanjal fights with other philosophies, but says that when knowledge becomes supreme, it will certainly become all-pervasive. Thus, it is the Almighty.
The soul, grief, sufferings, Karma etc. are all connected with each other. They are not inseparable. All of them are caused by the earlier life, and our body is the home to all of them. It houses the good as well as the bad results of our Karma. Thus, the body is the reason behind reincarnation and previous life. By ‘reason’, I mean result of one’s deeds. The real meaning of the word ‘Sharir’, the body, itself is something which decays and gets destroyed with time. The intention behind having any type of body is repayment of the existing Karma and start of the new one. There are two types of the body. There is the Yonij, i.e., the one which gets generated as a result of the mating of the sperm and the ovum. Man, beasts, birds, trees etc. are this type of bodies. The other one is the Ayonij, i.e., bodies generated by other means such as from light, wind, the mind etc.
According to Yogarnav, there are four types of bodies: Udbhij, i.e., something that grows from the earth, i.e., all types of vegetation, Swedaj, i.e., those born out of perspiration, e.g., insects, Andaj, i.e., those born out of eggs, e.g., birds, and Jarayuj, i.e., those born out of the womb.
The Almighty is away from grief, sufferings etc. So, He does not have to bear or repay any results of the previous lives. Grief, sufferings, joy etc. are characteristics of the mind and the heart. Just as similarly, the soul is also not affected by grief or sufferings etc. But the mind and heart affect the soul and also depend on it. This is similar to the fact that when soldiers fight with each other, the king wins or loses and not the soldiers themselves, because they are fighting for the king who has to bear the results.
Karma is the one reason and purpose behind the previous life and reincarnation. There are four types of Karma. The Karma derived from Niravachchinna sin is Krishna-karma. The Karma derived from Bahisadhan is Shukla-Krishna. This is because some troubles for others and some help to others are bound to be there in rituals like Yajnas. Karma derived from contemplation, self-study etc. is Shukla. Karma derived from the studies and practices of Yoga by the Yogis is Ashuklakrishna, because there is no question of causing trouble to others. So, the results of the last type are directly surrendered to the God.
Needless to say, experts such as Gautam gave a fitting reply to the atheist people who do not believe in reincarnation. Their arguments are extremely logical, clear and unimpeachable. The Nyaysutra says in 3/1/19, what is the reason behind the fact that we always find emotions like happiness, grief, fear etc. on the face of a newborn baby?
Vachaspati Mishraji says in Nyayvartik Tatparya Teeka, happiness is the result of getting the thing one desires. When someone does not want something and is still unable to run away from it, it causes fear. Grief is caused by the loss of someone or something one loves or desires. The actual experience of all these is called ‘Sampratipatti’. Remembrance of past experience is called ‘Memory’ or ‘Smriti’. The reason behind Smriti is called ‘Anubandh’.
Evidently, there is always a reason behind happiness, grief, fear etc. The only reason why these emotions appear on the face of a newborn baby is the memories of the previous life. These memories and the emotions caused by them are the ones that cause them to be written on the newborn face.
Conceivably, the atheists might argue that the crying, laughing, screaming of newborn babies are natural, just as a lotus blooms at sunrise and closes its petals at sunset. Why should they not be considered circumstantial?
In reply, the Nyaysutra creators have put forth this: Even the example of the lotus flower blooming and shutting does not prove that these phenomena are circumstantial. Various features produced in all things created out of the five elements are caused by the summer, rains and winter. It is impossible that they would be created without reason. Thus, there has to be some reason behind the various emotions seen on the faces of newborn babies. And that reason is the experiences of the previous lives. This is also the reason why the baby has the natural instinct to suck milk out of the mother’s breasts.
The Nyaysutra says in 3/1/22: the experiences of the previous lives teach the baby to suck milk out of the mother’s breasts.
Commenting on this sutra, Vatsyayan says that the instinct in newborn babies of sucking milk out of the mother’s breasts for feeding themselves is not possible without previous experiences. This proves that after leaving one body and entering into the new one, the soul sucks milk out of the mother’s breasts, based on the experiences of the previous lives. The atheists have raised yet another objection, saying that just as iron gets attracted to a magnet, the baby is instinctively attracted to sucking milk, and not based on previous experiences.
The reply given by Gautam to this objection is thought provoking. In Nyaysutra 3/11/24, he says, this objection is baseless and there is no truth in it. This is because iron is attracted only to the magnet and nothing else. Thus, the cause and effect relation here is fixed and certain. The baby’s sucking the mother’s breasts is purposeful, not circumstantial. In Nyaysutra, Maharshi Gautam has mentioned 12 things in the theorems. They are: soul, body, organs, meaning, intellect, mind, tendencies, bad tendencies, Pretyabhav (reincarnation), results, grief and Apavarga. The meaning of Pretyabhav is to enter new life after death. Tarka Deepika also reaffirms this meaning, and so does Nyaysutra.
According to Vatsyayan, Pretyabhav is salvation from organs, mind, intellect and upbringing together with the change of bodies. Lord Krishna Himself has said in the 15th Chapter of BhagwatGeeta: when the soul bears the body and then leaves it, it carries it just like fragrance carried by the wind.
According to the Nyaysutra as well as other books on philosophy, the body does get separated from the soul after death and is destroyed, but the soul is not damaged or destroyed, although it gets separated from the old body. The bearing of the new body afterwards is called Pretyabhav. Gautam has given excellent examples in proof of reincarnation. In Nyaysutra 3/1/25, he says: a man who has got rid of all emotions or has them totally under control does not get born, meaning thereby that an emotional man gets born. And what are emotions? They are the contemplation of the experiences of the previous life. Emotions get generated because of these experiences and their contemplation.
A question arises, as to why is it that all of us do not remember our previous lives? The explanation for this question by Vachaspati Mishra in the Nyayvartik Tatparya Teeka is given below:
It is a proved theory that memory gets built on the basis of previous experiences. Any newborn child shows tendencies generated out of previous experiences, which proves the existence of his previous life. Then why do we not remember things from the previous life? The answer is that memory is awakened only as much as the unseen things are able to do so. It is not necessary that if one thing is etched in memory, then all things must get etched in it. When a new body is born, only the most indelible of the memories get carried forward. There are six features in man’s body: four are physical, i.e., happiness, grief, wish and hate; and the remaining two are natural, i.e., knowledge and effort. The first four being connected with the body, they get destroyed with it.
Knowledge and efforts are natural and they remain. These are indelible, and so get regenerated with a new life. Thus, Akshapad’s sutra proves that the being gets reincarnated after death. But the soul being immortal, is one and the same.
According to Vatsyayan, two problems occur by not recognizing reincarnation: 1. Kritahan: non-repayment of the results of deeds performed. 2. Akritabhyagam: Repayment of results of deeds not done.
The theory of the atheistic philosophy is that all the happiness and grief is the result of our own deeds. The results of our good deeds are good, and those of our bad deeds are bad. However, it is seen that we do not experience the results of deeds during the life, in the same life. Now the question is, if we do not believe in reincarnation, the results of the deeds are gone. Moreover, it would then seem that someone is enjoying his life without ever doing anything good, or suffering without doing anything sinful. If we remove the concept of reincarnation, then we would be repaying our deeds without doing any deeds.
Vachaspati Mishra in the Nyayvartik Tatparya Teeka says that if we do not believe in any results of good or bad things done in previous lives and say that the body is created because of only the physical mating of the sperm and ovum, we would have to admit that there does exist grief and happiness at random in life. Then it would mean that there is activity without reason or purpose, and the results do not depend on our deeds. Then the existence of results of deeds is meaningless. Also, ethics and morals become meaningless. If man can enjoy happiness without doing anything, why should he then live religiously and enjoy a life as a result of his efforts? In that case, all this becomes worthless. If we think that deed is without results and life is an accident, all the rules and philosophies and ethics and morals would be meaningless. For establishing the importance of Shastras, Lord Krishna Himself has instructed in the BhagwatGeeta that ---
Lord Almighty has instructed: It is only the Shastras that will decided what should be the duty and what should not be. So, the idea of reincarnation will have to be recognized for removing the faults for not doing one’s duties or neglecting them. (16/23-24).
Goswami Tulsidasji has said the same thing, that duty is all important in this world. One will have the fruits according to what one does.
Purans too say that the fruits of one’s deeds reach the doer at the proper time. If you let in the ground a thousand cows and set free the calf of one of them, the calf still finds her own mother out of the thousand cows unfailingly.
Now, the next question may be, why indeed birth is there? The logical and proper answer to this can be found in the Nyaydarshan(3/2/63). It says that the body takes birth only according to the results of one’s deeds in previous lives. The body is produced by the five elements with the inspiration of one’s good or bad deeds, and not independently. Those who do not believe in God or reincarnation argue here, saying that if the body is made of the five elements of water, light, earth, air and the sky, then why should the idea of reincarnation be recognized for this? If the body is made out of physically existing molecules and atoms like an earthen pot, why is any other reason necessary for it?
The answer to this is in this Sutra (Nyaydarshan 3/2/65). According to Maharshi Vatsyayan, it means: the genesis of sand, stones, etc. does not depend on the Karma, because these things are made of mixtures of physically existing molecules and atoms. But the life energy of a fetus is not made of such atoms and molecules. Here, one would have to recognize the idea of reincarnation. The stones and rocks are produced without sperms, so this comparison is unequal and unjustified. The foetus, however, is born from sperms and ovum. Vatsyayan says in a very forceful language here: Why are you reversing the flow of a river? A living body made from sperms and ovum cannot be compared with non-living things like earth and sand and stones. In order to be born, the body must live and grow inside the mother’s womb. It takes shape in the mother’s womb according to the deeds of its parents. The deeds performed in the previous lives get the body made from the five elements.
Maharshi Gautam says about the genesis of the body in his Nyaydarshan, that the food intake also influences the making of the body. Vatsyayan says that the same food intake when digested, is converted into juices in the mother’s body, and accordingly, the fetus inside the womb grows with the formation of flesh and blood. The foetus grows and becomes ready to be born because it uses these juices which it gets from the umbilical cord. But food items put in a plate do not have the same power. This proves that food in the mother’s body is not the only reason for the growth of the foetus. There has to be assistance from the deeds performed during previous lives for this.
Those who do not believe in God or reincarnation argue here, saying that if the reason for the birth is the coming together of the sperm and the ovum, why should we recognize the idea of rebirth? Maharshi Gautam has countered this in the Nyaysutra 3/2/69. Vatsyayan also has put his counter argument. Both of them suggest that not all the intercourses of man and wife can produce a baby. This proves that the meeting of sperm and ovum is not the only reason for the birth of the fetus. Something more is needed for it, and that is the Karma. Without the Karma, no meeting of the sperm and ovum is able to give birth to a fetus. So, the five elements cannot be taken to be the independent reason for generation of a body. The role of the Karma also has to be the reason. Thus, it is only because of the fate and Karma that a body is generated, and the soul enters it
Gautam has written in the Nyaysutra 3/2/70 that Karma is the reason why someone is born in the family of a king or a Brahmin, while another one is born a Shudra etc. Someone is having a complete body in all respects, while someone has a defective body. Someone is healthy, and someone is having diseases and health problems. Someone is born genius while someone is retarded at birth itself. These differences are only because of the fate and the Karma. If the existence of fate and Karma is not recognized, then one would have to consider all the beings as equal in all respects. Also, then there would be no controlling entity for the five elements, and if the controlling entity is absent, all bodies would equal and similar. But factually, this is not so. The living beings take all kinds of different body shapes and sizes at the time of birth. So, the Karma would have to be taken to be the only real reason for these differences. If the fate and Karma do not exist or their existence is denied, then it would be all chaos. So, according to Gautam in the Nyaysutra 3/2/71, when we consider the fate and Karma as the reason, the chaos is removed.
One more notable thing is that if we do not consider the role of fate and the Karma in the birth and just say that the fetus is born only because of the coming together of the sperm and ovum, what is the reason of the destruction or death of the foetus? Then another big problem of death without any specific reason would arise. In reply to this objection, Gautam has written the Nyaysutra 3/2/06.
Vatsyayan’s comment is that when the results of one’s deed are finished after he has repaid them by way of enduring whatever has come his way, the body is destroyed by death, and at the same time, another body is generated to repay the deeds performed in another life. If the five elements were the only reason for death, would the death be there? Is it because the five elements are perpetually existing that there would be another body generated after one body is destroyed? This proves that the generation and destruction of the body depend only on what is stored in the Karma. The body is born only to repay the deeds stored in the Karma, and when it is done, the soul leaves the body. So, birth, life and death are dependent on the Karma; they are not independent.
In fact, death is the entrance door between one life and the next. It is where justice is done.
****
|
Tag Names : Rugveda,Ved |