Universe: How mythology impacts notions of social justice

The idea of Judgement Day is found only in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, i.e. the monotheistic religions of the world. The assumption is that God created the world and gave laws of how humans should live. This is transmitted to humans through messengers. The laws are changed from time to time, depending on the messenger. The final messenger, depending on which faith you belong to, is Moses, or Jesus, or Muhammad. If you follow the law, then after death, on Judgement Day, you will be allowed to enter heaven. If you do not follow the law, you will go to Hell and suffer eternally — unless God wills against it.

Before the rise of monotheism, the concept of judgement by gods did exist in cultures that believed you live only one life. In Egyptian mythology, your heart is weighed against the feather of truth. If it has been true to the gods, then you go to the afterlife. If not, your body is eaten by a monster, and you do not get an afterlife. In Greek mythology, when you die, you’re judged by three judges. You can be sent to Tartarus for annoying the gods, or to Elysium if you’ve impressed the gods. For all the mediocre people, they get the realm of Asphodel.

Belief in polytheistic gods who used humans as labour for their leisure and pleasure lasted for 2,000 years, before it was replaced by monotheistic faiths, where God is seen as merciful and lawful. Everyone was equal before Him, there was no judgement on the basis of loyalty or heroism. The same law applied to everyone. In other words, the idea of justice came from monotheistic faiths of the Middle East. Along with the idea of justice came the idea of equality, and the belief that you live only once.

This is where the religions of India differ. Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism believe in rebirth, which means every human being carries a different karmic burden. Because one carries a different karmic burden, the same law cannot be applied to everyone. Yet, for a functional society, a king needed to ascribe to some form of justice. So, the Brahmins came up with the Dharma Shastras. Here, there were different laws for Brahmins, landowners, traders, and service providers. The differences existed because each one’s birth was the result of karma.

Now, one can argue that those with the highest number of privileges should have got the severest punishments and those with the least amount of privileges should suffer less harsh punishments. But that is not how it works. The laws seem to clearly favour the powerful and the privileged because the assumption was that those who did meritorious deeds in their past life enjoy an elite life in this world. Likewise, those who did nasty things in their previous life get a low status in the current world. This is very clear in the Chandogya Upanishad, which is over 2,600 years old, long before the caste system was entrenched in India. So, the idea is a very ancient one.

Indian culture, thus, can be seen as one that didn’t believe in the idea of Judgement Day, justice and equality. It had a very hierarchical view of things. Indian society shaped itself using the accounting system of debit and credit more than the legal system of right and wrong, popular in the Middle East.

When the Greeks spoke of justice, they did not mean a uniform law. They did mean different laws for different people. Aristocrats had different laws, compared to the commoners. There were different laws for free people, different ones for slaves, different laws for women. So, the idea of justice in the Greek world was very different from the idea of justice that existed in say, the Islamic law of Sharia. Later, Christian law evolved from the old Roman ways, which privileged the Roman citizens over non-Roman citizens. It changed very gradually to a more common civil code, unlike what happened in the Middle East.

It is important to understand how mythology impacts our notions of social justice. Modern social justice has its roots in monotheism, not in atheism. The difference in atheism is that the one God has been replaced by the State. The judicial courts function like the temples of the one true God. We assume that the judges sitting in the courts will be fair and treat all humans equally. Furthermore, we believe that there will be justice in the courts. We all know that is not true. The rich, who can afford better lawyers and the powerful who can influence postings of judges, do play a key role in shaping justice.

— The writer is an acclaimed mythologist

Comments