654. Can there be a Sin without a Sinner?

http://www.speakingtree.in/public/spiritual-blogs/seekers/self-improvement/can-there-be-a-sin-without-a-sinner

At the onset what is Sin and who is a Sinner? An act which is immoral and is an indiscretion to the accepted laws is considered a sin. Unless there is an individual who volunteers to initiates the act there is no existence for the sin.

The Spiritual path expects an individual to transcend beyond the body, mind and intellect index. It guides him to look beyond limited senses to comprehend the unlimited galore within. An event in the life of Sri Sri Sankara stands as testimony and the result is Manisha Panchakam. It is a set of five verses which flowed out of Acharya when he realized that the Chaitanya (Consciousness) is the same in all.

Yes, the Chaitanya (Consciousness) is same and hence when an individual performs an amazing act we say there is no doer and there is only the act. This is termed as Tanmayattva (Absorbedness into Void). When we watch an extraordinary dance performance or a musical concert there is no dancer or singer that which remains is the dance and the song respectively.               

Now out of munificence have we likened those acts which have been bloomed out of Tanmayattva to the acts of sin?  When an individual commits a bad act there must be something that must have led him to that act. It could be a reason such as an untamed instinct, a strain of immorality, a defect in conscience or a fault in the upbringing. If such acts are worthy of condemnation then so is the origin of such acts.  

As there is appreciation for a good act so should there be condemnation for a bad act. If appreciation can uplift the gusto of a person so does condemnation slows down the urge to do a wrong deed.  Once while conducting a psychology experiment for the project called “Tragedy of Commons” a team visited a factory consisting of 120 members on a salary day and requested each member to part with $ 10 each from their salary. The amount they said would go to the employers’ welfare fund. They were told to drop a ten dollar bill in the box kept in the room.

When the factory workers had done with it the team looked in the box and found only $ 800 so forty of them had not contributed. The next month the same exercise was repeated but a CCTV was place in the room but the factory workers were unaware of it. This time another 10 workers joined the group of forty and the amount found in the contribution box was $ 700. The team from the project told the factory workers that the CCTV was placed in the room and the names of those who did not contribute would be revealed. The fear of condemnation griped the fifty workers and the next month the box had $1200 in it.                 

In ancient times there was moral fear for a person to resist from doing a wrong deed. Even at those times there were people who would cheat and as condemnation they were kept away from social gatherings and ostracized. As civilization took over it was felt that ostracizing and open condemnation was inhuman. Condemnation as a cognitive response is merely disapproval of the act. The result of non condemnation has left us to tolerate the inhuman act of sin. A politician loots the public money for lack of condemnation and the electrolates have to accept him as their leader till his tenure. Rigveda contains a hymn containing 14 verses dedicated to Manyu. This is called Manyu Sukta which cheers the resolve in a person to stand against the injustice vented on the society. It is not right to get confused with Manyu as Krodha. In fact Manyu on contrary is against anger for self.           

Since condemnation of an act is justified then so is condemnation of the origin of that act. As long as we are unable to identify and address the precise malfunction in a person which caused him to commit the sin, we condemn the whole individual. A person has thousands of reasons to commit a crime, but there is one reason for him not to commit the crime…….. To stick to his values…….What say????