Talk:Who implements the Law of Karm:Divine Grace and Karmaphala

By Vishal Agarwal

If Bhagavān’s grace means forgiveness of the demerit accumulated, that will lead to a violation of the Law of Karm according to which everyone must reap the fruit of their actions. But as a counter-argument to this, grace can mean these three things that are consistent with the Law of Karm as well-

1. The Bhagavān removes hurdles in the path of spiritual progress of human beings. They will still need to make an effort to become enlightened but their struggles will be lesser.
2. The Bhagavān takes away the entire stock of Sañcita Karm of the person who is ready for Mokṣa so that he does not have to undergo further experiences in this or in any potential future lives before attaining Mokṣa. This will be discussed in more detail in section 16 later.
3. Divine grace shines perpetually on all without any prejudice. It is up to us to accept and benefit from it. For instance, several people stand underneath a fruit-laden tree but only they who extend their hand to pluck a fruit get to savor it.

In all theistic traditions including Hindu Dharm, Divine Grace is an accepted notion. His Grace over-rides considerations of Karm and its fruit to liberate us from its effects. However, Divine Grace can simply mean the bounties that He provides to all, irrespective of their class, status, level of ethical or spiritual attainments. These bounties include the air we breathe, the light and warmth of the sun and so on. These gifts are provided to everyone without prejudice and it is up to us to decide how we use them-

“In the light of the doctrine of karm it may seem that man is responsible for whatever happens to him in his life in the form of pleasure or pain. Since Bhagavān is only the giver of man’s karmphala, His role is no different from the role of a cashier in a bank. The cashier cannot give any money to the depositor other than his invested capital and its interest. Where then is the scope for Bhagavān’s grace in Hindu Dharm? In reply, Hindu Dharm says that Bhagavān’s grace cannot be conditional. Any conditional gift cannot be called real grace. Therefore, Bhagavān’s grace has to be unconditional, unbiased and impartial. Just as the sun shines on both the good and the wicked, so also Bhagavān showers His grace impartially on everyone, whether good or evil. The good use Bhagavān’s grace for good purposes. The wicked use Bhagavān’s grace for bad purposes. Shri Ramakrishna explains this with the help of a beautiful analogy. In a small room a candle is burning. By the light of the candle one person is reading a holy book, while another person in the same room is forging dollar bills. In this analogy the candlelight represents Bhagavān’s grace. It is impartial; it shines equally on both. The two persons are using Bhagavān’s grace for two completely different purposes – one good, and the other bad. Perhaps one of them will eventually turn into a saint, while the other will end up in prison.”

“According to Shri Ramakrishna the breeze of Bhagavān’s grace is always blowing. Everyone in this world is like the owner of a sailboat. As long as the sail of the boat is not unfurled one cannot take advantage of the breeze – one cannot get the benefit of Bhagavān’s grace. But as soon as the sail is unfurled, the breeze of divine grace starts moving the boat. In this analogy the act of unfurling the sail is no other than making self-effort. Without self-effort one will neither be able to appreciate nor enjoy the benefit of Bhagavān’s grace.”

Another example may be provided to explain how the unconditional and equal grace showered by the Divine reflects his universal love and justice-

“Suppose a householder has four children; the eldest has finished his education, done his training, got a job, and is bringing in some money for the general family maintenance. The next child has passed his examinations, but has not yet enrolled in the service or employment, and the third is still studying. The fourth one is not even old enough to go to school, so he is just playing around and enjoying himself. If one wanted to know which one of the four was most loved by his father, it would seem very difficult to decide, but nevertheless if one tried to decide one would say that the youngest was getting most of his father’s love, Because he is helpless, he does not contribute anything, he is not even clever enough to recite anything learnt at school – and yet he is loved the most. The mother loves him, and whenever the father comes home and is given food, the little boy sits on his lap and gets fed by the father. Sometimes the boy picks up one or two pieces of food and puts them into his father’s mouth in response to all that is being done for him. This little offering of a child fills the father with the greatest joy of his life.

In the same way, the Absolute is the father of all in this universe and whether one is incapable of doing anything, whether one is earning anything or not, whether one is about to repay the debt, it does not matter. He loves all of us.”

In summary, according to this viewpoint, Divine Grace means that He has provided a level playing ground for everyone and given all of us basic amenities that are needed for us to live, flourish and exercise our free well. These gifts are provided to all of us equally irrespective of how we use them. But due to our exercise of free will, we modify the quality and the quantity of these gifts available to us.

4. The fourth viewpoint is that Divine Grace is the sole exception to the otherwise universal Law of Karm.

“Saint Nammalvar is reported to have asked Bhagavān why all the men are not saved by His Grace, and to have got the reply from the Bhagavān that since man is endowed with a free will, Bhagavān would wait to see man’s predilection for Him…..Thus, although at first sight there is an irreconcilable opposition between the doctrine of self-effort or free-will and the doctrine of Grace, writers of Bhakti everywhere have found no difficulty in reconciling both to their satisfaction. They treat Grace as only an exception to the universality of the Law of Karm. All accept both the doctrines and allow each its own sphere of influence.”

This view is specifically found in the Bhakti traditions of Hindu Dharm and may be illustrated with the following story-

Story: Karur Ammā & Bilvamangala

In the 16th-17th century in the town of Guruvāyūr in Kerala (India) lived two devotees of Kṛṣṇa – an elderly lady named Kurūr Ammā, and a poet named Vilvamaṅgala. The people of the town believed that Kṛṣṇa often appeared in front of these two Bhaktas in the form of a child to play with them.

One day, a friend of the two devotees came to visit Vilvamaṅgala and requested, “Dear friend, I have a terrible stomachache that refuses to go. Can you inform your friend Kṛṣṇa about it?” Vilvamaṅgala agreed.

The next day, when Kṛṣṇa appeared before Vilvamaṅgala, he said, “Kṛṣṇa, my friend asked me to inform you that he is suffering from a bad stomachache.” Kṛṣṇa replied, “Well, this is because of some bad Karm that he did in a previous life. He must reap the fruit of that now.”

Vilvamaṅgala conveyed Kṛṣṇa’s message to his suffering friend the following day. Disappointed, the man now went to Kurūr Ammā and begged her to ask Kṛṣṇa to remove his stomachache.

When Kṛṣṇa came to play with Kurūr Ammā, she pleaded with him lovingly, “Dear Kṛṣṇa, a friend came to me with a very bad stomachache. He is really suffering a lot. You are very kind and merciful. Please do this favor on me and remove his pain.” Kṛṣṇa replied, “As you wish. His pain will go away.”

The gentleman’s stomachache indeed disappeared. When he met Vilvamaṅgala a few days later, he told the poet how his stomachache went away after Kurūr Ammā had requested Kṛṣṇa. This made Vilvamaṅgala very angry. When Kṛṣṇa came to visit him the next time, Vilvamaṅgala complained, “You are being partial. When I told you about my friend’s stomachache, you said that he was suffering due to his bad Karm. But when Kurūr Ammā spoke to you, you responded to her request favorably and my friend got healed.”

Kṛṣṇa replied, “Instead of being happy that your friend’s pain is gone, you are upset that I answered Kurūr Ammā’s loving request and that your friend was healed because of her and not you. I am not partial to anyone. I respond to the prayers of my Bhaktas after determining whether they have said it with feeling and love or not. You just conveyed your friend’s request to me as if you were doing a favor on him. But Kurūr Ammā requested me with love and sincerity, and therefore I fulfilled her wish.”