You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Assess and arguments for the law of karma, and discuss whether the law implies or refutes the ex
Pages 8 (2008 words)
Name: Natasha Neehaul Course: MA Indian Philosophy Course Instructor: Dr Will Rasmussen Date: 14/12/12 Assess Sa?khya’s and Mima?sa’s arguments for the law of karma, and discuss whether the law implies or refutes the existence of God. Sankhya and Mimamsakas have various convergence and divergent points with regard to the Karma and its perspectives on the existence of God.
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. ...
Not exactly what you need?