How can the punishment, that God inflicts on the soul, reform it
Q. How can the punishment, that God inflicts on the soul, reform it..
… when it cannot remember its past; because the punishment could prevent it from committing any further sins only if it were to know that such and such a punishment was meted out to it for such and such a sin.
A.~ How many kinds of knowledge do you believe in?
Q. Eight kinds, such as knowledge through direct cognition, through Inference, through analogy, etc.
A.~ Why can you not then infer the existence of the previous life of the soul form seeing different peple born and brought up under different conditions in this world such as affluence and poverty, happiness and misery, talent and idiocy, etc. Suppose a physician and a layman are taken ill. The physician at once finds out the cause that brought on the disease on him, while the layman cannot; because the former has studied Medical Science while the latter has not. But even the layman knows this much that he must have violated some law of nature – dietetic or sanitary, etc., – to bring on the disease, such as fever. Similarly, why can you not infer the pre-existence of the soul by observing people afflicted with pain and suffering, or endowed with pleasures or joys of this world in unequal proportions – results of their actions not in the present life? If you refuse to believe in the pre-existence of the soul, how do you think it to be consistent with the justice of God to bless some with riches, power, and talent, etc., while afflict others with poverty, suffering, idiocy and the like without their having done anything – good or evil – in their previous lives to deserve them? God can be just only when He gives the soul pleasure or pain according to its good or evil deeds done in its previous lives.
Q. The belief in the unity of birth is not inconsistent with the justice of God. He is like a Sovereign Ruler, whatsoever he does is just. He may also be likened to a gardener who implants trees big and small in his grove, some he trims, others he cuts down, others still he protects (from wind and cattle, etc.), improves and multiples. One can do whatever one likes with one/s own. In like manner, God can do whatever He likes (with His world). There is no one above Him who could punish Him or whom He should fear.
A.~ God always desires justice and acts justly, therefore, it is that he is Great and worthy of our homage and adoration. He would not be God if He acted unjustly. A gardener who plants trees aimlessly or promenades or other places, cuts down trees that do not require cutting, multiplies those that are fit to be multiplied, and does not multiply those that are suitable for multiplying, is worthy of blame.
In like manner would God be blameworthy were He to act without a reasonable cause. It is absolutely necessary for God to act justly, because He is pure and just by nature. Should He act like a madman? He would even be beneath a good judge of this world, and would no longer be honored. Does not a judge, in this world, who punishes the innocent and awards honor t those who have done nothing to deserve it, merit blame and forfeit his honor? God never does anything that is unjust. He, therefore, fears none.
God has pre-ordained all. He gives one or acts by one whatsoever He had determined before-hand to give or do.
A.~ His determination is always in accordance with the actions of the soul. Should it be otherwise, He would be unjust and guilty.
All men have the same amount of misery and happiness. .
The great have great cares, whilst the small have small troubles and cares. A rich merchant, for instance, has a law suit, of say 100,000 rupees, in a Court of law. He leaves his house in a palanquin (borne on the shoulders of men) for the Court on a very hot day. The ignorant, when they see him thus passing through a street, cry out “Behold the might of virtue land vice. One is comfortably sitting in the palanquin, whilst the others are bearing him on their shoulders bare-footed with a burning ground underneath and a scorching sun over head.” But the wise know that as the Court is drawing nigh, the anxiety of the merchant, his doubts and fears are increasing, while the palanquin bearers are getting easier at the prospect of being soon relieved from their burden
When at last they get to the court, the merchant thinks of going hither and thither. He soliloquizes thus “Shall I go to see by counsel or shall I see the clerk of the Court first? Shall I win or lose to-day? Oh! I wish I knew what was going to happen” and so on. The palanquin bearers, on the other hand, chat together, smoke, feel happy, and enjoy their siesta. If the merchant wins, he feels a bit happy, if he loses, he sinks into the depths of misery, whilst the palanquin bearers are affected neither one way nor the other.
They remain just as they were before the case was decided. Similarly, when a king lays himself down on his beautiful and soft bed, he does not go to sleep quicker than a labourer who falls asleep as soon as he stretches himself on uneven earth covered with stones and pebbles. The same is true of all other conditions seemingly unequal.
A.~ Only the ignorant can believe that all are equally happy or miserable. If a rich merchant and apalanquin bearer were asked to change their places with one another, the merchant would never like to become a palanquin bearer, while the latter would simply jump at the offer. Had they been equally happy or miserable, the merchant would never have refused to change his place with the palanquiin bearer, nor, would the latter have liked to become a rich merchant.
Behold the difference between the happiness and misery of the different people! One soul comes into the womb of the queen of a great righteous and learned king, whilst another in that of the wife of a poor miserable grass-cutter. One is happy and well-cared for in every way since the day of its conception, whilst the other suffers in a hundred different ways. When one is born, he is bathed with pure fragrant water, and his cord is carefully cut. He is properly fed and cared for. When he is hungry, he is given milk mixed with sugar and other necessary ingredients in proper proportions. There are servants to wait upon him, toys for him to play with, conveyances to take him out to pretty and healthy places. He is well-loved, and is happy. The other is born in a jungle, where not even water is to be had to wash him. When he is hungry and wants milk, he slapped on the face instead, cries most pitifully, but no one attends to him and so on.
The infliction of suffering or the awarding of happiness to souls, without their having previously done acts – sinful or virtuous – to deserve it, would disgrace God. Besides, if we suffer or enjoy here in this world without having previously done anything – sinful or virtuous – our going to Hell or Heaven after d4ath ought not to be dependent on our deeds done in this life, because just as God has given us pleasure or pain her without our having previously done sinful or virtuous deeds, so would He send some of us to Hell, others to Heaven just according to His pleasure.
Why should men then practice virtue. (If this logic be accepted) all would become wicked and lead sinful lives; because it is doubtful if virtue will bear any fruit. It all rests with God. He would do just as it would please Him. No one will thus fear sin which will consequently multiply, whilst virtue will decay. It follows therefore that the present birth of the soul is in accordance with its deeds – sinful and virtuous – in the past, whilst the future will be determined by its present and past modes of life – righteous or unrighteous.