Posted on: 27 May 2021
[An online spiritual discussion was conducted on May 23, 2021, in which several devotees participated. Devotees’ questions answered by Swāmi are given below.]
[Śrī Bharath Krishna asked: Swāmiji, I understand that if a person becomes the victim of a horrible crime like rape, there is a possibility that it is due to the person’s past bad karma. But there is also a possibility that it was a fresh crime that was done by the criminal due to the criminal’s own cruel nature. How can such a thing happen in the divine administration of God, without the victim having done any bad deed in the victim’s karma account? When I got this question in my mind, I analysed it a bit. I think I have got an answer. The moment souls asked You during the Satya Yuga to grant them complete freedom, that very moment, souls opened up the possibility of they becoming victims of any crime, even without having any bad karma in their account. This is because, when souls demand the freedom to be totally responsible for their lives, they do not get God’s protection. Am I correct, Swāmi? If I am wrong, please correct me by explaining what is the correct answer for my above question. Also please tell me what will be the compensation that You will give to any fresh rape victim or the victim of any other horrible crime, if that person does not develop a vengeful attitude and leaves the decision to God?]
Swāmi replied: Your thought regarding the free will aspired by the souls from God is the correct answer in the above elaboration of question. Apart from this point, you have asked in the last about:- a) A criminal doing fresh crime and the victim keeping patient without revengeful attitude—In this case, God will immediately compensate the victim heavily. Then, He will think about the criminal by giving some time to Him for reformation about which the victim need not bother. b) A criminal doing crime based on the previous crime done by the victim in the past birth—In this case, the criminal will escape the case and will not be punished by God. Even if the victim keeps silent without the attitude of revenge, God will not give any compensation to the victim since it is the case of retort arranged by God Himself. c) A criminal does a crime and the crime may be the type of (a) or (b) as explained above. If the victim is unable to fight back and develops revengeful attitude towards the criminal, the victim not only loses the compensation, but also receives punishment from God for his/her revengeful attitude. d) When the criminal harms the victim, the victim fights that to harm the criminal- In this case, the victim succeeds in the fight if it is not a retort case and God helps the victim to succeed in the fight. If the case is retort, the victim will be unable to fight back because God supports the criminal.
On the whole, the essence is that you shall leave everything to God and try to not have even a trace of revengeful attitude. Draupadī and her four husbands (except Dharmarāja) were having revengeful attitude and the criminals did fresh sin only. All these five went to hell first and then to heaven. In this same case, Dharmarāja never had a trace of revengeful attitude. Hence, Dharmarāja did not go to hell and went only to heaven. Of course, Dharmarāja also went to hell to see the suffering of his brothers and his wife by which he suffered mentally and this was due to his refusal to tell a lie in the war even though God requested him to tell the lie (in the context of telling a lie that Aśvatthāmā was killed).
Killing somebody or raping somebody by the criminals are the cases of non-compensation. Such sins do not take place as fresh cases unless retort is provided by God. Even if an attempt for such fresh type of cases is done, God will stop such cases. If you add both cases together which means that the rapist also performed killing and the retort is only up to rape, the criminal will be killed by God. If both rape and killing were retort cases together, the criminal escapes the punishment in spite of hectic efforts and there are several cases of this type. Hence, from the analysis of the nature of the result, the nature of the cause can be identified.
Another important point to note is that the present life comes to an end in the view of the soul and hence, if the compensation is not given in this life, it is lost forever. But, in the view of God the present life is just like a day in the human life because it is only a comma and not full stop for the soul. Hence, the compensations of certain crimes not given in this life are not permanently lost.
When God gives the compensation in the next birth, the soul may not realize it directly. Although there is no direct knowledge (perception) of the compensation provided, the soul may realize that it is a compensation from the past birth through inference, which is indirect knowledge. This can be explained as follows: When a soul gets a bad fruit in this birth, without doing a corresponding sin in this birth, the soul naturally infers that it must have done some sin in the previous birth. Many people have this realization. They even openly say that they might have received the bad fruit due to some sin done by them in the previous birth. Similarly, when the soul receives a good fruit, without doing a corresponding meritorious deed, it infers that it might have done a good deed in the past birth.
The first crime done must have been a fresh case. But God gave compensation to the victim only in the next birth. God gave direct knowledge to the victim-soul only in the first case, so that the victim realizes the compensation given in the next birth. From the second case onwards, the direct realization of the compensation provided is not necessary. Instead, indirect knowledge of the compensation provided is available to the soul.
This cycle of retaliation of crime and compensation becomes endless until the soul is reformed. Here, the retaliation by fighting back immediately is not a sin because by fighting back, the soul immediately realizes whether the crime was a fresh case or a retaliatory case. If it is a fresh case, the victim will win and if the case is retalitatory, the victim will lose. But the most harmful quality is to go on developing the attitude of revenge, instead of immediately fighting back. When the victim thus develops and intensifies the attitude of revenge, that attitude leads to many other sinful actions. Hence, the vengeful attitude is separately punished by God. Fighting back immediately is not punished.