Question about Reincarnation

[Kismet]

I have a question about both reincarnation and enlightenment, specifically in conjunction with one another.

As I understand it, most Hindu philosophies (like Vedanta) posit that upon reaching liberation the individual jiva is freed from generating any new karmas as he loses the sense of (false) individual consciousness (ahamkara). The enlightened being still has to endure, albeit dispassionately, the remaining karmas he had previously sown in former moments and lives (prarabdha). Hence, the mukta remains in a body until death, after which there can be no rebirth.

Now, my major question is this: karma must in the end bear its results. It is not possible for previous karmas generated not to bear fruit in some fashion since this would then contradict the very immutability of the law itself. You reap what you sow, and to allow an exception to this rule is essentially to void the rule. Karma does not exist, in such a case. At least, not at all times and places.

Taking this into consideration, why should it be immediately supposed that a jivanmukta who realizes the non-dual Truth be exempt from taking on a new body after death (if such is what his karmic debt requires) and suffer (again, dispassionately) the lawfully resulting effects of previous actions?

Keep in mind that I am in no way saying that the jivanmukta does not get finally and uncontroversially liberated. Rather, my thinking is that a "new" jiva (if you may pardon the paradox) in some sense appears, "redacting" as it were the previous "enlightened jiva" - which at a previous point (enlightenment) had, granted, realized its own Selfhood, - and in effect donning a brand new form of avidya anew.

[devotee]

Namaste Kismet,

Karma has no real existence ... it is just a delusion. So, in reality there is no Karma and therefore, there is no Karmaphala. See what Lord Krishna says in BG :

" He who sees Karma (action) in Akarma (no-action) and akarma (no-action) in Karma ... is the wise among the human beings".

"In fact, all Karmas are "done" by Prakriti i.e. Nature but Jiva due to Ahamkar (bound to ego-mind entity) thinks that he is the doer and therefore gets bound (to Karma)".

Therefore, when realisation occurs, the doer is "seen" as the Brahman, the "deed" too is Brahman and the fruits of the "deed" is too Brahman alone.

If that is so .. who should suffer for what ? The Realisation burns all Karmas & so there is no Karmaphala left to fructify.

OM

[Kismet]

Namaste Kismet,

Karma has no real existence ... it is just a delusion. So, in reality there is no Karma and therefore, there is no Karmaphala.

Is this looking at reality from the pAramArthika (absolute) or vyAvahArika (relative/pragmatic) point of view?

If you are referring to the former I would most certainly agree. There is only the non-dual Brahman (Reality) without a second. Guna, karma, prakriti, etc, are non-existent. No relative attributes or ideas have any function and can be called delusions or unreal.

But if you mean karma on the dualistic plane, I would have to say that it does have a phenomenal existence. Else, why should it even be spoken of in the shastras?

See what Lord Krishna says in BG :

" He who sees Karma (action) in Akarma (no-action) and akarma (no-action) in Karma ... is the wise among the human beings".

I would love it if you elaborated more on this passage. I still have a ton of learning to do and don't quite know where to begin.

"In fact, all Karmas are "done" by Prakriti i.e. Nature but Jiva due to Ahamkar (bound to ego-mind entity) thinks that he is the doer and therefore gets bound (to Karma)".

True. And I am not denying that the realized person is exempt, through Knowledge, from being bound. But the question is, on the relative plane of vyAvahArika, isn't the law of karma still active? Isn't Nature or Prakriti still in motion? If there exist karmic debts attached to the realized jiva that have to be paid off in the form of prarabdha isn't a rebirth still necessary?

Let me give you an example. Say some terrorist just bombed a hospital and killed hundreds upon hundreds of people. Let's say that promptly after the premeditated act he becomes enlightened and dies in a freak accident. By Knowledge and grace he is liberated from being bound. And yet, on the phenomenal level, the karmas are still running, nature and all its causes and effects remain in motion, and so a new body is in order so that effects may necessarily play themselves out. This entails the avidya and boundedness of a new, "redacted" jiva.

Therefore, when realisation occurs, the doer is "seen" as the Brahman, the "deed" too is Brahman and the fruits of the "deed" is too Brahman alone.

If that is so .. who should suffer for what ? The Realisation burns all Karmas & so there is no Karmaphala left to fructify.

OM

I still think you are conflating the relative with the absolute. Yes, the jiva is so liberated that all becomes Brahman. But the very fact that this is not the experience of mundane jivas who are not liberated is proof enough that the whole cosmos does not get freed along with the mukta.

So, karma remains. And it requires a body in order to be fulfilled. Thus, avidya comes into being alongside the Self. I think this is consistent with the notion that ignorance is "anadi" or beginningless.

[devotee]

Namaste Kismet,

Is this looking at reality from the pAramArthika (absolute) or vyAvahArika (relative/pragmatic) point of view?

Please don't mix the two. Vyavharika Satyam loses its meaning on atting Jnana ... when the whole world becomes a dream-like phenomena then the experience gained therein also becomes dreamlike and they cannot affect the awakened person. Can they ? Vyavharika Satyam is applicable till the person is dreaming ... is not out of dream ... till that time, his dream hunger can be satisfied by the dream sweets but does it have any meaning when he is awakened ?

But if you mean karma on the dualistic plane, I would have to say that it does have a phenomenal existence. Else, why should it even be spoken of in the shastras?

I think the above answer satisfies your this objection too. If you need any further elaboration, please let me know.

I would love it if you elaborated more on this passage. I still have a ton of learning to do and don't quite know where to begin.

This is verse no. 18 of Chapter 4 of Bhagwad Gita. The full verse is this :

Karmanya-akarmah yah pashyeta, Akarmani cha karma yah;
Sa buddhimaanmanushyeshu sa yuktah kritsnakarmkrit || BG 4.18 ||

True. And I am not denying that the realized person is exempt, through Knowledge, from being bound. But the question is, on the relative plane of vyAvahArika, isn't the law of karma still active? Isn't Nature or Prakriti still in motion? If there exist karmic debts attached to the realized jiva that have to be paid off in the form of prarabdha isn't a rebirth still necessary?

My dear, you have to realise that YOU are untainted (in fact, you can never be tainted), ever free, blissful, Infinite, the Supreme Reality expressing YOURSELF through powerful Maya as a human being. So, whatever is here & wahtever happens here has value only till the time the sway of maya is there. As soon as the magic-spell of Maya is broken you find that there was never a bondage to begin with and there was never a Karma.

Regarding Pararabdh Karma and Sanchit Karma bearing fruits after realisationetc., Maharishi Ramana said, " Some people say that though all karmas get roasted on Self-realisation, Sanchit karma will still bear fruits. This is laughable. If a person, who has several wives, dies then all will become widow. It cannot be that one of those will remain "sumangali" (whose husband is alive) while others become widows !"

Let me give you an example. Say some terrorist just bombed a hospital and killed hundreds upon hundreds of people. Let's say that promptly after the premeditated act he becomes enlightened and dies in a freak accident. By Knowledge and grace he is liberated from being bound. And yet, on the phenomenal level, the karmas are still running, nature and all its causes and effects remain in motion, and so a new body is in order so that effects may necessarily play themselves out. This entails the avidya and boundedness of a new, "redacted" jiva.

Your assumption is too hypothetical & it is next to impossibilty to happen like that. However, when it does happen by the grace of God/Guru due to some very-very extraordinary reasons, there is no further Karma-cycle and there is no rebirth.

... and if you remember what Lord Krishna says in Chapter-2 of Bhagwad Gita :

You cannot kill anyone. There is no killing possible. The indestructible cannot be destroyed by anyone and the destructible will perish even if you do something or you do not.

You need to come out of your conditioned thinking to understand all this. This is what Jnan-yoga offers. It is almost impossible to get out of Karma-cycle by doing "good" works etc. ... the Karma-cycle is too complicated & very difficult to understand. You must shake yourself out of this dream to realise that you were never bound to begin with. Jnana roasts all karmas .... karmas are like seeds giving rsie to future karmas and the good-bad fruits ... but roasted seeds not grow and bear fruits. Jnana is equated with fire which burns all Karmas without a trace (as there was no Karma in reality).

OM

[SOV]

Hi,

Let's consider that a person has attained self-realisation(jivanmukti). Now there are two types of karma for this person, one being prarabhdha(karma which has taken effect) and the other is sanchitha(karma which has to take effect, yet). Prarabhdha karma, the person has to witness it. Like even though he is realized, he gets some disease. But he won't be bothered by that however. The upadhi(adjuncts) like the body exists even after realization. And the person may continue to be like anyone else. But, there won't be any fruits for the sanchita karma. Since this karma is burnt up by the knowledge of Self. This is called atyantika-pralaya. That is why it is called jivan-mukti.

There is a story in yoga vasishta, where a person after having realized the self, avoids seven re-births.

[Kismet]

Hi,

Let's consider that a person has attained self-realisation(jivanmukti). Now there are two types of karma for this person, one being prarabhdha(karma which has taken effect) and the other is sanchitha(karma which has to take effect, yet). Prarabhdha karma, the person has to witness it. Like even though he is realized, he gets some disease. But he won't be bothered by that however. The upadhi(adjuncts) like the body exists even after realization. And the person may continue to be like anyone else. But, there won't be any fruits for the sanchita karma. Since this karma is burnt up by the knowledge of Self. This is called atyantika-pralaya. That is why it is called jivan-mukti.

There is a story in yoga vasishta, where a person after having realized the self, avoids seven re-births.

Right, and what I'm saying is that the portion of prarabdha which is not entirely burned up within the lifespan of the jivanmukta must, of necessity, require a new body for itself in order that effects may play out. The mukta is still free of course, he is realized, liberated and so on. But what he had sown previously must bear its fruit. As of now I see nothing which might invalidate this reasonining.

[Kismet]

Namaste Kismet,
Please don't mix the two. Vyavharika Satyam loses its meaning on atting Jnana ... when the whole world becomes a dream-like phenomena then the experience gained therein also becomes dreamlike and they cannot affect the awakened person. Can they ? Vyavharika Satyam is applicable till the person is dreaming ... is not out of dream ... till that time, his dream hunger can be satisfied by the dream sweets but does it have any meaning when he is awakened ?

I see absolutely nothing disagreeable here. Yes, Vyavaharika loses its meaning with the dawning of Knowledge (for the liberated jiva). I have no problem with that in any way.

My dear, you have to realise that YOU are untainted (in fact, you can never be tainted), ever free, blissful, Infinite, the Supreme Reality expressing YOURSELF through powerful Maya as a human being. So, whatever is here & wahtever happens here has value only till the time the sway of maya is there. As soon as the magic-spell of Maya is broken you find that there was never a bondage to begin with and there was never a Karma.

Agreed. Maya is on some level incomprehensible. With enlightenment you transcend time itself, and it is realized that all of time has never had binding power because it is negated. It is as though I had went back in time to alter history. None of the causal series from that time onward would have taken effect. So our present "reality" is really that fragile an image, which dissolves its hold when the Truth manages to dawn and the eye of Shiva annihilates all past actions.

But even then you have to grant Vyavaharika ontological status. This is simply for the fact that jivanmuktas exist right NOW in contradiction to regular jivas. While this duality exists from the stand-point of Maya, it is indeed logically valid relative-wise and so we should accept it.

Regarding Pararabdh Karma and Sanchit Karma bearing fruits after realisationetc., Maharishi Ramana said, " Some people say that though all karmas get roasted on Self-realisation, Sanchit karma will still bear fruits. This is laughable. If a person, who has several wives, dies then all will become widow. It cannot be that one of those will remain "sumangali" (whose husband is alive) while others become widows !"

Sanchit karma cannot bear fruit because the mukta has lost all sense of doership. But prarabha still needs to extinguish itself. I ask again: why should a single lifetime be all that is needed for all the prarabdha of a given jiva to be completely and utterly done with? If you cannot answer this question, then I'm afraid you are not going to disprove me.

Your assumption is too hypothetical & it is next to impossibilty to happen like that. However, when it does happen by the grace of God/Guru due to some very-very extraordinary reasons, there is no further Karma-cycle and there is no rebirth.

So, karma then does not have to take effect (prarabdha I mean). This does not make any sense. My example, though hypothetical, is sound. The doer of the actions (bombing the hospital) must have accrued negative karma. And even though in succeeding moments he became liberated, that karma which owed to doership has to take effect, somehow. So a new rebirth must in some sense be required. This rebirth however has no effect upon the liberated jiva (which has become the Self) since that jiva has attained to complete realization and union with Brahman. The sense of doership is passed on to an illusory, upadhi-laden jiva with the sense of doership, and so the cycle continues...

... and if you remember what Lord Krishna says in Chapter-2 of Bhagwad Gita :

You cannot kill anyone. There is no killing possible. The indestructible cannot be destroyed by anyone and the destructible will perish even if you do something or you do not.

Keep in mind though that Krishna shifts in his perspective according to the given view to reality he is giving an account of. There is no killing. This is true. But it is true according to the Absolute, and not according to the relative.

You need to come out of your conditioned thinking to understand all this. This is what Jnan-yoga offers. It is almost impossible to get out of Karma-cycle by doing "good" works etc. ... the Karma-cycle is too complicated & very difficult to understand. You must shake yourself out of this dream to realise that you were never bound to begin with. Jnana roasts all karmas .... karmas are like seeds giving rsie to future karmas and the good-bad fruits ... but roasted seeds not grow and bear fruits. Jnana is equated with fire which burns all Karmas without a trace (as there was no Karma in reality).

OM

Alas! My conditioned thinking stems from Maya. But that thinking itself is applicable to Maya! So, even though my remarks cannot touch Brahman, with due respect to Prakriti they are quite applicable! This world is eternal, going round in cycles round and round, forever and ever, according to divine Leela....

[smaranam]

So a new rebirth must in some sense be required. This rebirth however has no effect upon the liberated jiva (which has become the Self) since that jiva has attained to complete realization and union with Brahman. The sense of doership is passed on to an illusory, upadhi-laden jiva with the sense of doership, and so the cycle continues...

Namaste KismetJi, you bring up something very interesting. Can you please explain :

Jiva01 is now liberated, and considers herself the Self/Brahman. Disconnected from BMI (bodi-mind-intellect-ego).
There is prarabdha , and ideally the upadhi will fall off like a tyre wheel set in motion - wobble wobble collapse. Done.

In your example, that leftover lifetime is not enough for jiva01's prarabdha. So she takes birth again, but is disconnected from BMI right since birth.

You said "the sense of doership is passed to an illusiory upAdhi-laden jiva" ? Which one ? jiva01 ? Someone other than this jiva01 ? But is she not disconnected from upAdhi since birth with "aham brahmAsmi" ?

Who has the sense of doership in the new birth ? Or did you mean that prakruti alone is handed this doership and not jiva01 ?

What acc. to you happens when BMI of jiva01 dies again, this time prArabdha all gone ? Does she know "i am jiva01 who has realized Brahman" ? Or not ?

thank you.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam all: I think questions like this may be easier to answer once Self-Realisation occurs. Either it will be clear then or irrelevant. Until then, well, one can hope it comes sooner than later.

Aum Namasivaya

[devotee]

Namaste Kismet,

But even then you have to grant Vyavaharika ontological status. This is simply for the fact that jivanmuktas exist right NOW in contradiction to regular jivas. While this duality exists from the stand-point of Maya, it is indeed logically valid relative-wise and so we should accept it.

.................

Sanchit karma cannot bear fruit because the mukta has lost all sense of doership. But prarabha still needs to extinguish itself. I ask again: why should a single lifetime be all that is needed for all the prarabdha of a given jiva to be completely and utterly done with? If you cannot answer this question, then I'm afraid you are not going to disprove me.

It doesn't matter what you feel is right or what I feel is right. My feeling or your feeling in a particular way doesn't make anything right or wrong. What I am saying is based on what Sastras say and what the Self-realised souls said.

I cannot accept your version because it is against what Lord Krishna says in BG and what the Upanishads say and also what the Self-realised souls said.

You may like to refer to Chapter 4 of BG which talks in detail about Karma etc.

... BTW, if you think you are right, I have no issues as I am not here to prove you wrong. I participated in this discussion thinking that you needed help to understand how karma works ... but if you are so sure then certainly you don't need any help.

My best wishes ...

OM