Free Will in Hinduism and Christianity: Ideologies on Both Religious Practices and Philosophy Essay

Free Will in the Eastern Religions

The Eastern Family religions are native to Asia. These religions can possibly be categorized into two categories: Taoist and Indian religions. Some of the Taoist religions are Taoism itself, Shintoism, and Confucianism. Indian religions include Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism, Hinduism, and Buddhism.

Essentially, Eastern religions base their ideologies on both religious practices and philosophy. Indian religions, for instance, emphasize natural law and personal duty. Related to this is the question of free will. The question here, therefore, is how the Eastern family religions perceive free will. This discussion on ‘free will’ will focus on Hinduism. However, Hinduism here does not represent all other Eastern religions. Despite the share origins, these religions still differ. This analysis should therefore only be understood as an isolated example.

Free Will in Hinduism

Hinduism deals with the notion of free will in much detail in relation to the ‘karma’, i.e. the laws of rebirth. According to Hinduism, fate and free will are not at war. While God is the dispenser of human fate, humans themselves are responsible for the actions that lead to that fate. One, therefore, exercises free will through action. In other words, fate refers to the past karma, while free will refers to the present karma. The only difference between fate and free will is in relation to ‘time’. Otherwise, since both are the same, i.e. karma, there can never be any conflicts.

Karma operates on the law of cause and effect, based on the premise that one reaps what he sows. A ‘karma’ is a consequence of human action, and those actions are the fruits of human thoughts. Karma is therefore the cycle of action and reaction that runs life. In the end, the soul pays the price of its own actions, as reflected in feelings, thoughts, and actions. And love returns to those who give it to others.

The soul, therefore, cannot escape taking responsibility for its own actions. As it proceeds to the next cycle, it bears the impressions of its former life. But karma should not be mistaken for fate as everyone still possesses the power of free will. On the basis of the aspect of free will, the determination of the laws of karma is not favoring to particular people as everyone is treated the same, and has the same opportunity for personal growth.

Every human, therefore, has to go through his past karma again. Thus, it can be said that the notion of fate controlling human lives is void. Instead, it is one’s karma that guides him/her to behave and live in a certain way, i.e. towards maturity and wisdom. The present is always there for a person, who, through free will, can shape that ‘present’. There is no point therefore in paying attention to the past as it is gone and beyond reach or vision, hence the term adrishta, which means ‘the unseen’.

Again, this is not to say that a person should give up on his/her fate. Instead, Hinduism asserts that every person should devote themselves to their free will. Through past exercises on free will, humans shape their fate. As described in Bhagwad Gita, this is what makes the natural law. According to Bhagwad Gita 3: 27, humans are not ‘doers of activities’. Nature is. By exercising one’s free will presently, one is able to get rid of the negative consequences of the past and enjoy the positive aspects of it.

Having looked at this, the question that follows is what free will is and how it operates. One may assume that the freedom and ability to act on free will implies an unlimited pursuit of one’s wishes and desires. On the contrary, a person’s free will is influenced by his/her samskaras, i.e. certain mental maps left by past karmas. The premise here is that humans are both partly free and controlled/governed.

Still, saying that fate presents barriers to one’s free will is not exactly true. Instead, these obstacles are meant to make people see the importance of their free will by provoking it into action. Ultimately, the fact that karma guides a person’s experiences does not make him/her helpless. It only means that human free will is limited within certain boundaries. Even as people pursue happiness, they must in the end be answerable for their actions.

Hinduism, therefore, gives every person freedom to act. But at the same time, Hinduism shows one what is right and wrong so that he/she can decide, through free will, what way to go in the pursuit of happiness. This way, one does not justify his/her actions and attempt to evade responsibility by blaming fate. Ultimately, individual destiny is in one’s own hands. It is one’s choice to make it a good destiny or bad destiny. And that choice rests in free will.

Free Will in the Abrahamic Religions

Abrahamic family of religions comprises monotheistic faiths that have their roots in Abraham. These include Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. This discussion will focus on free will according to Christianity. Again, Christianity here does not represent all the other Abrahamic religions.

Free Will in Christianity

The advent of Christianity came with a new character of free will. It emphasized the doctrine that God created man, whom he commanded to obey the moral law. And depending on whether one lived by or deviated from them (the dictated moral law), he/she would be rewarded or punished. This turned moral liberty into a transcendent issue, i.e. a matter outside the person. But this stance begs the question of man’s freedom and how much responsibility a person has for his/her actions. If humans are not free, then they cannot be held responsible for their actions as everything is predetermined for them.

The notion of predetermination brings to light the question of ‘predestination’. Predestination is closely related to Calvinism. John Calvin argued that God is sovereign of all the things that happen. In other words, God predetermines the people He will call. And God’s will cannot be changed by any human no matter what they do. The premise is that even before creating the earth, God had already preordained those who would be saved and those who would be condemned.

Those who are condemned cannot be saved by any means. And those who are called to be saved cannot end in condemnation no matter how wrong the things they do are. This question of predestination can be traced throughout the Bible, both the old and the new testaments. For instance, According to First Corinthians, 2:7, “…we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.” And Jeremiah 1: 4-5 states that God knows every single person even before they are born.

Now the question follows, is free will relevant in the same context as ‘predestination’? Different people, depending on whether they subscribe to the Christian faith or not, have different opinions on this. Jack Wellman, a Christian pastor, and author, in his online article What Does the Bible Teach about Free Will and Predestination?, argues that God’s sovereignty and free will are not in conflict with each other. Instead, they work together. To further his point, he creates the analogy of a slave chained on the deck of a ship and given a choice to row for the ship’s captain. He likens the chain here to God’s sovereignty. And free will is exercised when the slave decides to row or not.

By rowing, the slave chooses not to be whipped. By refusing to row the slave chooses to be punished. Equally, one may decide to break and escape. To Wellman, this is a manifestation of God’s sovereignty working in tandem with personal free will. Based on this analogy Wellman concludes that God does not ‘twist a person’s arm’ into heaven. One can either accept God’s grace or refuse it.

But this argument presents more questions. For example the story of Judas. Did Judas have a choice to betray Jesus or not? And let us say that he did, would Jesus have been arrested? And if Jesus had not been arrested, would there be ‘salvation for the world? This last question implies that Jesus had to be killed if his death had to save the world. This is irrespective of whether Judas had been the one to betray him or not. In other words, some people had to be responsible for Jesus’ suffering whether they chose to or not?

Vexen Crabtree, also in his online article Biblical Christianity Denies Free Will, argues that the Bible does not agree with the notion of free will. To prove his point, Crabtree (2005) cites Biblical verses that stress the notion of predeterminism. He especially dwells on Ephesians, Romans, and the second letter to Timothy. In the end, he talks of the predetermined chosen and condemned.

Although Wellman, like many other, christens would like to make people believe in the role of free will in Christianity, the belief in predestination waters down the credibility of such attempts. Actually, predeterminism or predestination makes personal choice merely an extension of it.