Vaishnava scriptures, such as Bhagavad-gītā and Bhāgavata Purāṇa, describe the essential properties of the soul/self/jiva as sat-cit-ananda — that is, we are existing (ie. eternal), knowing (ie. conscious), bliss-seeking, things.
In the “where’s Wally” of the Absolute Truth, our current cosmographic situation is square within the maha-tattva — sometimes referred to as the material world of prakriti. A VR-like world of changing things, including our bodies and minds. Whereas the soul is unchanging, just experiencing and desiring.
So far all clear. Fish out of water. Ouch.
But the question that keeps me up at night is, what drives us souls to act in the various ways that we do — from comforting, to competing, to killing?
An answer I have often heard is that souls get mixed up in the gunas — three modal forces that basically make up the material realm. Like the three primary colours, the gunas mix to an unlimited degree in order to provide limitless experiences for a soul in this world. Even bodies and minds are setup in a modal collage. Sattva brings clarity, rajas brings movement, passion, and tamas brings ignorance.
We are constantly associating with the gunas, and we vote with our choices. The more we choose to move towards a guna, the more we become attached. Whereas association with sattva is freeing for a soul, clinging to tamas leads one to spiral into disruptive habits that restrict one’s freedom — eg. take heroin once, and you can make it out perhaps, but keep taking it and then it (tamas) will take you.
So, be careful who and what we choose to associate with.
And yet my question remains — what drives us souls to act in the various ways that we do — from comforting, to competing, to killing?
One might reply that the question has been satisfactorily answered — our choosing certain guna shades is what drives us to do all sorts of things in the world.
Fair enough. I need to hone my question further to get clearer about what I am asking. Here goes — whatever a soul chooses to enact under the illusion of ahankara (false ego) within the material world, can a soul ever have an evil intent? By “evil intent” I mean to say, can a soul be so lost in illusion that their intent is to harm?
For me, the answer is no.
The first argument against my “no” will be the following — obviously souls desire to harm, we see all the time people abusing and killing one another.
OK, but I have more questions — let’s talk:
Me (M) — I agree that souls may desire to harm themselves and others.
Other (O) — OK, so it’s settled.
M — No.
O — Come off it, you’re just nit-picking. What could you possibly take issue with?
M — I don’t see “desire” and “intent” as synonymous.
So, what do I mean by “intent” versus “desire”?
A soul is sat-cit-ananda — we already established that earlier. It cannot be anything but that. As such, does not reason dictate that the intention of a soul must always to be itself?
Back to our conversation:
O— Are you seriously proposing that someone who desires to — and does — harm another person, or themselves, is “trying to be themselves”?
M — Yes.
O — Then you’re a madman.
M — Perhaps I am, but hear me out — I haven’t defined “desire” yet.
O — Go on then, this bus is running late anyway.
M — A cell or an organism maintains its “self” by homeostasis, and it uses various means to do that depending on the environment. Similarly, the intention of a soul behind its various weird and wonderful actions under the illusion of ahankara is to keep its fundamental nature.
O — So what you’re saying is that a soul knows what it needs to keep itself together as a pure entity — and today it just so happens to be a little rape and pillage.
M — You don’t hold your punches.
O — Look, my bus is coming soon — I’m trying to wrap this up.
M — Pragmatic, thank you. As I said earlier, I am certainly not condoning violence. In fact, my attempt is to do the opposite. Imagine this — you are by nature eternal, but you have forgotten that because you have chosen to be in illusion. Someone threatens you with a knife and you come alive with adrenaline, and feel the fear pumping. Could we say that at that point you are valuing your safety?
O — Of course.
M — So we agree that you value safety, even though you’re eternal. You value it because you don’t remember what you are.
O — Correct.
M — And your desire/strategy in that situation might be to leg it as fast as you can, so you can be safe. Now imagine that you are the man threatening someone with a knife. Can you conceive that the reason you might be doing that is for the same underlying value — safety? For example, it might be that you are poor and need to feed your family, and this is the only way you know how — by mugging someone at knife-point.
O — But come on — you can’t compare…
M — Remember, I’m not comparing the strategies by which we souls try to meet values such as safety, harmony, belonging, care, comfort, trust etc. Rather, I am proposing that souls always act in order to fulfil values, because these values reflect who we are as sat-cit-ananda souls, and we can’t not be ourselves. But of course, the mode in which we try to meet those values varies — consisting of an infinite variety of mixing of desires/strategies in the gunas of sattva, rajas and tamas.
O — I can see this leading to moral relativism.
M — And right now I’m wondering if you’re feeling afraid because you have a strong value around protecting society from an “anything goes” mentality.
O — You’re damned right. See you old chap — here’s my U1, got to run.
