Postnatal Abortions=Infanticide=Homicide

Giovanni Battista's The Madonna and Child in Glory with Cherubs

Upon reading this post, I couldn't help but have my own response. I would like to point out the argument of how the sex culture of America is the factor to look at in any of these instances (abortions, infanticide, and homicide.) Anyone would be a fool to ignore that an American teenage girl has been given the green light by society to have sex. Several of these "green lights" are seen in condom commercials making it on TV, the tendencies and promotions of sex as an inevitable act of pleasure in SexEd classes in schools, and our culture that says yes to everything and anything an individual wants i.e. greed. I personally find that any movement for postnatal abortions ignores the fact that a woman is seen only for her sex. And if any argument should be made about the woman in the instance of an abortion, it shouldn't be about if its a choice, her choice, or any choice is to be made at all, but rather that the woman has been subdued by a paternalistic society. This shouldn't be shocking because based on the reality, who has the abortion? Males are never  held accountable for their actions in these instances because they never have been held to such a standard since it was absurd to have sexual relations with a woman out of wedlock. While this argument could go straight to the argument over marriage is the only place for sex, I find that one has to look no further than our local communities. I find it horrific that PlannedParenthood or any clinics that ultimately end in decimation (rather, death,) should be considered or esteemed so highly as bright and cheery resources for a woman. It's considerably flip flopped in that the woman is "free" after submitting to have sex and given the ability to erase any trace of responsibility or submission. In this Culture of Death that we promote, it is seemingly mechanical for the woman to make the hardest decision with what to do after sex. I find that something as destructive and evil as postnatal abortions is just a glimpse of how far our (world) culture is willing to go in order that our immediate, hedonistic pleasures; the highest of these being sex.

Karmic Propensities: An Uncomfortable Cause and Effect

Even after Jesus said “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also," we still are quick to condemn. (Matthew 5:38-39.) I never find it acceptable to let a convicted criminal to walk guilt-free. However, Hinduism's definition of karma is loosely "action or work." Buddhism takes the notion of negative karma a step further. This blog's namesake define how negative karma effects our lives: kleshas (कलेशा) consist of Three Poisons: greed, hatred, and delusion. Tanhas (तन्हस) are cravings or desires. Both of these fuel our negative actions which in Catholic terminology translates to sins, both venial and mortal. However, where Catholicism believes in the forgiveness of sins through the sacrament of Reconciliation/Confession, Buddhists believe that the negative karma remains with you. 

I write this because until recently redefined by my Comparative Religions teacher, I always assumed that karma would come back to you for the sake of its harmful effects on the sinner. However, loosely summing up what he said, negative karma reaches the doer in the long run so that they may be more aware of their sins or kleshas. By being aware of their sins, similar to how Catholics acknowledge their faults through an Examination of Conscience, both Buddhists and Catholics attempt to achieve equanimity. "Equal mindedness" is a step closer to Buddhahood, or in Western terms, enlightenment. 

Why, or rather how, can be accepting negative karma be uncomfortable, especially for Americans? I was reading my local newspaper today, and one of the front page articles read: Attack suspect found guilty, Man faces 30 years in beating of elderly woman. This by no means justifies or liberates the attacker of his crime, but by Buddhist beliefs, the 87 year old woman had done something within her past that was now being brought into light through karma. What I find hard to understand is did the woman's past sin that caused this- was it equal to her being blinded in one of her eyes? And returning to what my teacher said, karma, doesn't necessarily fall into this "eye for an eye," equal punishment, or even (Western) justice. But, not to ignore the reality of an 87 year old woman being beaten blind, the crime of the guilty man will cause him to receive negative karma in order to understand what harms he caused to obviously his victim, but also to himself. I think it's within this point in which the guilty doesn't receive negative karma as a handed-down judgement, it's uncomfortable for us to think that the man isn't being punished for the woman's injuries, but rather the injuries he inflicted upon himself for the act of violence against another human being. The magnitude to which the karma will reach in the criminal's life is uncertain, but it, going off of what I've summarized my teacher for saying, will be to the extent by which the man will fully understand his sins. 

Again, to highlight how this is uncomfortable, for me especially, the woman doesn't seemed "revenged" or accounted for in the world of karma. But an interesting aspect that plays into Buddhism as well as Catholicism is life after death. Both concepts are fairly similar: Buddhists believe (in simple language) that the criminal will return in his next life as a victim to such violence he committed. An analogy that better describes this is if one harms dogs in this life, they will return as a dog that receives harm from its owner. Catholics believe that you will be judged on the Final Day. This relates to Buddhism because God, acting as the judge, reviews your actions and sins that are within your heart. Both faiths have a negative response to sinful actions done within this life. And while Yahweh did indeed say "But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise," Jesus did contradict this with the idea that God, or rather love in a karmic fashion, will ultimately judge the sinner's action. 

Thoreau Living Hinduism's Doctrine Through A Buddhist Lifestyle

               “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.” The recognition of this statement as reality is Truth. It is also the first of the Four Noble Truths in Buddhism. What Henry David Thoreau paraphrases into a simple sentence happens to encompass a much larger philosophy of dukkha, or suffering. Hinduism similarly points out that the human condition is samsara, which is life’s wheel of birth and death. The three beliefs, transcendentalism, Buddhism, and Hinduism prescribe medication, or rather certain rituals and practices to heal oneself of reality’s inflicting pain. The concept of life not being experienced fully is pointed out in Thoreau’s philosophy. Quiet desperation is prominent, hence “the mass of men lead” this short-sighted and ephemeral life style. Hinduism’s term samsara describes the limited life Thoreau mentions as innate; human beings are born with this dukkha, or the suffering of living in the veiled world.

Shiva Nataraja

               Hinduism’s definition of the human condition is the most complex of these three definitions. Samsara incorporates an identification of the unconscious because one is not able to recall previous lives. This belief that one has lead many lives through samsara is profound and seems irrelevant and foreign compared to Thoreau’s idea of quiet desperation. The dizziness that samsara can create, best depicted in the Hindu artwork of Shiva Nataraja sculptures does not encompass what the quiet desperation happens to embody. But if one was to look at these two concepts from a more general viewpoint, they both require the same medication. Quiet desperation calls for the recognition of nature as ultimately being God. The process through which one recognizes the ultimate reality of God is samsara’s opposite, moksha, or liberation from life’s repetative cycle. Moksha can be achieved through the Four Yogas which inevitably lead a yogi, the equivalent of a transcendentalist following Thoreau’s ideals, through several stages before reaching the final goal of moksha. These two medications are the same because “desperation” is in fact samsara; it is the fear of life’s unending cycle and consequently, the fear exclusively in desperation is a continuation of samsara.

               Thoreau’s prescription to cure a man’s life of his quiet desperation put in the simplest of terms is experiencing nature. It is crucial to understand that the quiet desperation derives from Thoreau’s previous life in New England life before becoming a transcendentalist. It’s also worth noting that the desperation is quiet because it is shameful. It is a weakness in Thoreau’s New England world to visibly wear the weight of life’s burden.  What Thoreau is escaping from in the “real” world, the world that is noisy, despairing, and hedonistic, is what yogis try to escape through the prescription of the Four Yogas. Raja yoga best exemplifies a transcendentalist’s escape from the world. Because a transcendentalist is not a reform worker or religious fanatic, he is not a karmic or bhakti yogi. The preliminary requirements for raja yoga are “one’s personal life needs to be in order by practicing the five abstentions that restrain one from injury, lying, stealing, sensuality, and greed.” (Huston Smith, 34.) This mirrors Thoreau’s previous life before escaping to Walden Pond; studying at Harvard University. There is a certain amount of preparation that both the yogi and transcendentalist undergo in order to fully experience moksha and nature.

               While these two types of believers follow strict rules, they in essence achieve what they are striving for in their work. “The object of…raja yoga is to unplug one’s sense receptors…or put them on hold so the clatter of the world’s boiler factory won’t disturb the yogi’s concentration.” (Smith, 37.) The escape a transcendentalist makes from society is this unplugging of one’s sense receptors. Both Thoreau and raja yoga point that too often are one’s surroundings and they are distracting and perverse. This establishes a need to perform rituals, such as raja yoga, to reach an ultimate truth above quiet desperation. This truth, found in nature and moksha, ultimately bring one to what is ultimately real. Realizing that there is in fact more to life than just quiet desperation is moksha, and to achieve it, one most consume and perform the necessary prescriptions that their medication calls for in healing.

               Buddhism prescribes explicitly what medication to take and in what dosage. Buddhism takes the Hindu term samsara a step further in explaining what it embodies. Known as the first of the Four Noble Truths, dukkha, meaning suffering, is what Thoreau coins as quiet desperation. The second of the Four Noble Truths is the cause of dukkha known as tanha, or thirst or craving. (Smith, 70-71.)This thirsting is fueled by kleshas, which are afflictive emotions and mental defilements. (Robert Clark.) Kleshas are divided into the Three Poisons: greed, hatred, and delusion. Thoreau viewed these as the causes for a man to consequently live a life of quiet desperation. Quiet desperation, or kleshas, creates negative karma. In the Buddhist context, negative karma builds the amount of dukkha one undertakes.

The Four Noble Truths, however, don’t only echo the reality of dukkha; they also prescribe a cessation to its harm. Known as the Eight Fold Path, the Fourth Noble Truth is a course of training to end quiet desperation. The Three Components establish context for the marga, or path: sila meaning ethics, dhyana depicting concentration, and prajna, an accurate understanding of reality which translates into English as wisdom. (Clark.) Viewed as a pyramid, the Three Components are founded on sila. Ethics are ruled by the Five Precepts that hinder killing, stealing, lying, sexual misconduct, and the consumption of intoxicants. (Smith, 74.) By observing these laws, one is able to step to the next level of the pyramid known as dhyana. Concentration in this context refers to meditation, and through the practice of it, one can attain prajna, an accurate understanding of reality. Prajna is known as wisdom because wisdom allows for one to fully embody the Three Marks of Existence: dukkha, anicca, and anatman.

The Three Marks of Existence are the ultimate goal which Thoreau desires to reach, that is wisdom. Dukkha, or realizing that one does suffer, is the first step that leads one back to the beginning of the Four Noble Truths. Anicca means impermanence which encompasses the idea of an accurate understanding of reality. Anatman literally means “no-self.” Deriving from Hinduism’s term atman,

Kali

anatman rejects the egocentrism that a life of quiet desperation carries; self-centeredness, known as tanha, restricts one to fully partake in dhyana and prajna. (Smith, 71.) Hindu and Buddhist artwork depict the bloody rejection of egos, which inevitably derives from our ignorance. In certain portrayals of the Hindu goddess Kali, her necklace of severed skulls is the egos of her devotees. To fully undertake the Eight Fold Path to end dukkha, or lives of quiet desperation, one must cut off their ignorance.

This is where minute differences begin to appear between Thoreau’s ideal Walden Pond and Buddha’s strict teachings that derived from Hinduism’s seemingly sanguine doctrine. To an extent, it can be viewed that in the East, this shedding of hedonistic pleasures in a gory fashion are not warmly welcome in the West. If any change is to take place, even the “most dramatic” like Thoreau’s escape to Walden Pond, it is not painful. I think that there is too much gluttony and accessibility to comfort and the apparently profound idea of chopping this tanha, this “ego-oozing” desire as Smith puts it, from ourselves is too difficult and overly demanding. This can also be weighted with the West’s growing xenophobia, but I think there is more than just a fear for what is distant to us; there is a fear of dramatic change, even in this case when it is for the obvious better. It can be based on my opinion, but there is much to be gained from these outlying philosophies that reject the fulfillment of our egos. I think that much of what is coined with transcendentalism today is sustainable living, and thus it remains on the fringes of society. But in the East, both Hinduism and Buddhism thrive on the surface of Asian culture. I think that the “dramatic and bloody” baptism into a life of anatman is inevitably lacking within Western, fringe philosophy. Because we feel comfortable half-associating ourselves with certain ideals, we are able to pick and choose qualities of certain philosophies. And so when something profound like transcendentalism appears to mainstream America in the late 19^th century, only that which can coincide with our comfort is learned and accepted from that philosophy.