Talk:Sharing and Transference of Karmaphala between Individuals/Groups:No Transfer of Karm Possible

By Vishal Agarwal

The first view states that there is an exact correspondence between the doer and the reaper, even if the two are separated by lifetimes. The phenomenon of rebirth is a corollary to the law of karm. Therefore, if one does not reap the fruit of one's deeds in the present lifetime, those fruits will be experienced in a future lifetime. According to this view, the fruits of karm are experienced by the individual who performed the actions and are not transferred to another person.

Just as a calf recognizes his own mother from among thousands of cows, likewise the deeds performed earlier locate their correct doer at a later time. Mahābhārata 12.181.16

Bhagavān Śiva said to Devī Pārvatī, 'Whatever deed one performs, that very fruit he obtains (i.e., the fruit or results are consistent with the deed performed). The jīva reaps the fruit of his own karm. No one else is entitled to the fruit of the karm of another. Mahābhārata 13, chapter 145 (Southern recension)

No one takes the good and bad fruit of anyone else’s virtuous and evil karm. In fact, everyone reaps the fruit of his own karm. Mahābhārata 12.280.2

Man is born alone; man dies alone; he enjoys his merits by himself; he reaps the bitter fruits of his sins by himself. Garuḍa Purāṇa 2.12.22

In this view, no transfer of karm takes place even between family members and generations within the same family. Every individual has his own personal, individual and separate stock of the fruit of karm that they alone have performed in previous lives or earlier in the present life.

There is no connection between the deeds of a father and his son, or the deeds of the son and his father. Bound by his own karm, each individual treads his own path, and reaps the fruit of his own karm.' Mahābhārata 12.153.38

This point needs emphasis because one often does virtuous or evil deeds for the sake of his family members, friends or other loved ones. But in this viewpoint, even if evil karm is done for the sake of others, the doer alone reaps the fruit and never those for whose sake it was done.

For the sake of one’s wife and children, one does several evil deeds and incurs evil result. But one has to suffer the results of his karm alone, whether in this world or in the next. Mahābhārata 12.174.25

In this connection, we read of the story of Maharṣi Vālmīki and his transition from a highway robber to an esteemed ṛṣi and author of the Śāstras, the Rāmāyaṇa.

Story: How the Dacoit Ratnākara became a Ṛṣi

Ṛṣi Vālmīki is called the Ādi Kavi or the first poet in the Sanskrit language. He composed the Rāmāyaṇa, the story of the life of Bhagavān Rāma, in 24,000 verses. The Rāmāyaṇa has become so influential that even outside Bhāratavarṣa, countries like Indonesia, Thailand, Burma, Laos, Malaysia, China, and Japan have developed their own versions based on Ṛṣi Vālmīki’s original epic.

Ratnākara (also identified in some traditions as Vālya Koli) lived as a forest bandit who survived by robbing travellers passing through the forests. The narrative relates that he used the wealth and provisions obtained through these activities to support his family.

One day ṛṣi Nārada encountered Ratnākara (Valya) in the forest. When Ratnākara attempted to rob him, Nārada questioned him about his way of life and asked whether the members of his family, for whose sake he committed acts of violence and theft, would also share the consequences of those actions.

The narrative relates that Ratnākara returned to his family and asked whether they would share in the pāpa resulting from his actions, just as they shared the benefits obtained from them. His family replied that while it was his responsibility to provide for them, the consequences of his actions would be his alone.

This response prompted Ratnākara to reflect on his conduct. He returned to Nārada and sought guidance on how to free himself from the consequences of his past actions. Nārada instructed him to undertake spiritual discipline through meditation and repetition of the name of Rāma.

Ratnākara is said to have practiced this discipline for an extended period. During this time, an anthill (vālmīka) reportedly formed around him, giving rise to the name Vālmīki. The narrative further relates that Nārada later returned and instructed him in the story of Rāma.

In subsequent tradition, Vālmīki came to be regarded as a ṛṣi and as the author of the Rāmāyaṇa. The story is frequently cited as an illustration of the principle that individuals experience the consequences of their own karm and cannot transfer responsibility for their actions to others.