Assess and arguments for the law of karma, and discuss whether the law Essay

Assess and arguments for the law of karma, and discuss whether the law implies or refutes the ex - Essay Example Sankhya believe that the material of creation is made of earth and stone and could possibly not be created by ‘Isvara’ whose own characteristics are not consistent with the same material (Radhakrishnan 43 b). The Sankhya doctrine holds that it is not possible to prove the existence of God and therefore he cannot be said to exist (Larson 83). I would opine that the doctrine contention aligns with the view that a benevolent God would have no motive of creating a world of mixed happiness and sorrows. The Purusa takes an important place in the understanding of the Sankhya doctrine. The Sankhya offers that the Purusa is not caused (Collins 106). The Purusa is usually likened to consciousness. In most doctrines, consciousness is usually attached to the idea of the existence of a Supreme being. The Sankhya position that the Purusa is not caused directly contradicts the idea of the existence of a creator God. However, problems arise within the doctrine with the supposition that Purusa does not have any qualities. In my opinion, this view would imply that all beings are same. Such a thesis would refute the possibility of the existence of different fates for different actions as understood within the overall framework of the Karma. The position adds weight to some of the problems and contradictions that have been identified within the Sankhya doctrine with regard to the nature and qualities of the Purusa. The character of the ‘Isvara’ according to the doctrine developed by the Sankhya is that he is not attached to the universe (Radhakrishnan 40 b). According to the Mimamsa doctrine, the ‘Isvara’ does not provide the fruits of actions, which essentially distinguishes them from other doctrines that assign roles of reward and punishment to the deity (Radhakrishnan 22 b). Instead, the rewards or consequences of actions are purely depended on the actions of individuals. Good actions beget positive consequences, while bad actions bring ab out negative consequences. The Mimamsa doctrine does not mention whether or not the ‘Isvara’ created the universe (Radhakrishnan 19 b). In my view, I would conclude that the positions adopted by both doctrines acknowledge the fact of divine being but do not agree on his nature or tasks. In general terms, the Sankhya philosophy is governed by the concept of dualism. The philosophy challenges the view of the God as central idea that controls the cause and destiny of humanity. The destiny of man, according to Mimamsa is dependent on the actions and will of man in accordance with the Verdas (Radhakrishnan 74 a). In this sense, God is only a benevolent power that grants to human beings their due share in accordance with their character on earth. It is therefore important to consider the fact that the actions of man are integral in the destiny of the universe. The cultivation of ‘Dama’ or self-control as a way of pursuing a virtuous and upright life (Radhakrishna n 13 b). Samkhya adopts the position that the harmony in the world is born out of the paradoxical dualities as argued by Sage Kapila. Samkhya philosophy is founded on the idea of harmony numerals. According to the terms of this philosophy the collection of elements and characteristics of things in the universe work to maintain some sense of balance between the systems. The underlying meaning in the Samkhya philosoph