Hubbry Logo
SinSinMain
Open search
Sin
Community hub
Sin
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Sin
Sin
Sin
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Depiction of the sin of Adam and Eve (The Garden of Eden with the Fall of Man by Jan Brueghel the Elder and Pieter Paul Rubens)

In religious context, sin is a transgression against divine law or a law of the deities.[1] Each culture has its own interpretation of what it means to commit a sin. While sins are generally considered actions, any thought, word, or act considered immoral, selfish, shameful, harmful, or alienating might be termed "sinful".[2]

The concept of sin originates from the Old English synn, tracing back to Proto-Germanic and Proto-Indo-European roots meaning “being” or “truly guilty,” implying a judgment of wrongdoing. Over time, different religions and cultures developed distinct understandings of sin, often shaping moral frameworks and spiritual practices.

In Buddhism, sin as defiance against a deity does not exist; instead, actions naturally bring consequences through karma. While general “sin” refers to transgressions against universal moral law, five acts — harming a Buddha, killing an Arhat, creating schism in the Sangha, matricide, and patricide — are considered so severe that they bring immediate karmic repercussions. In contrast, Shinto views sin (tsumi) as impurity caused by external factors like evil spirits, not inherently by human actions, and emphasizes purification rituals (harae) to restore harmony.

In Abrahamic religions, sin carries a stronger theological dimension. Christianity treats sin as an offense against God, rooted in disobedience, with doctrines like original sin and redemption through Christ’s sacrifice; concepts like the seven deadly sins classify vices leading to moral corruption. Islam defines sin (khiṭʾ, ithm) as violating God’s commands, distinguishing between minor and grave sins. Judaism frames sin as “missing the mark” of God’s law, placing greater weight on wrongs against other people than against God, with atonement often requiring repentance and restitution.

Etymology

[edit]

From Middle English sinne, synne, sunne, zen, from Old English synn ("sin"), from Proto-West Germanic *sunnju, from Proto-Germanic *sunjō ('truth', 'excuse') and *sundī, *sundijō ("sin"), from Proto-Indo-European *h₁s-ónt-ih₂, from *h₁sónts ("being, true", implying a verdict of "truly guilty" against an accusation or charge), from *h₁es- ("to be"); compare Old English sōþ ("true"; see sooth). Doublet of suttee.

Buddhism

[edit]
Main article: Buddhist views on sin

There are a few differing Buddhist views on sin. American Zen author Brad Warner states that in Buddhism there is no concept of sin at all.[3][4] The Buddha Dharma Education Association also expressly states "The idea of sin or original sin has no place in Buddhism."[5]

Ethnologist Christoph von Fürer-Haimendorf explained, "In Buddhist thinking the whole universe, men as well as gods, are subject to a reign of law. Every action, good or bad, has an inevitable and automatic effect in a long chain of causes, an effect that is independent of the will of any deity. Even though this may leave no room for the concept of 'sin' in the sense of an act of defiance against the authority of a personal god, Buddhists speak of 'sin' when referring to transgressions against the universal moral code."[6]

However, there are five heinous crimes in Buddhism that bring immediate disaster through karmic process.[7] These five crimes are collectively referred to as Anantarika-karma in Theravada Buddhism[7] and pañcānantarya (Pāli) in the Mahayana Sutra Preached by the Buddha on the Total Extinction of the Dharma,[8] The five crimes or sins are:[9]

  1. Injuring a Buddha
  2. Killing an Arhat
  3. Creating schism in the society of Sangha
  4. Matricide
  5. Patricide

Christianity

[edit]

Hamartiology

[edit]
Main article: Christian views on sin
See also: Seven deadly sins
A sculpture depicting the judgment of sinners by Jesus at Amiens Cathedral, France

The doctrine of sin is central to Christianity, since its basic message is about redemption in Christ.[10] Christian hamartiology describes sin as an act of offense against God by despising his persons and Christian biblical law, and by injuring others.[11] According to the classical definition of St. Augustine of Hippo sin is "a word, deed, or desire in opposition to the eternal law of God."[12][13] Thus, sin requires redemption, a metaphor alluding to atonement, in which the death of Jesus is the price that is paid to release the faithful from the bondage of sin.[14]

Among some scholars, sin is understood mostly as a legal infraction or contract violation of non-binding philosophical frameworks and perspectives of Christian ethics, and so salvation tends to be viewed in legal terms. Other Christian scholars understand sin to be fundamentally relational—a loss of love for the Christian God and an elevation of self-love (concupiscence, in this sense), as was later propounded by Augustine in his debate with the Pelagians.[15] As with the legal definition of sin, this definition also affects the understanding of Christian grace and salvation, which are thus viewed in relational terms.[16]

The concept of the seven deadly sins holds a significant place within Christian teaching as a classification of seven major vices that lead to further immoral behavior and other sins. These sins are pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony, and sloth.[17] They are considered "deadly" because they are the root causes of other sins and moral corruption, opposing the virtues that Christians are encouraged to cultivate such as humility, charity, and patience. The idea of the seven deadly sins originated in early Christian thought and was later formalized by figures such as Pope Gregory I and St. Thomas Aquinas. While not identical to mortal sins, the seven deadly sins are viewed as capital vices from which many other sins arise, thus emphasizing the need for redemption and moral vigilance in the Christian life.[18]

Original sin

[edit]
Main article: Original sin
A Sistine Chapel fresco depicts the expulsion of Adam and Eve for transgressing God's command not to eat the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

This condition has been characterized in many ways, from the desire to commit wrongful action, referred to as a "sin nature", to total depravity and "utter helplessness even to exercise a good will toward God apart from God's supernatural, assisting grace".[19][20]

The concept of original sin was first alluded to in the 2nd century by Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon in his controversy with certain dualist Gnostics.[21] Other church fathers such as Augustine also shaped and developed the doctrine,[22] seeing it as based on the New Testament teaching of Paul the Apostle (Romans 5:12–21 and 1 Corinthians 15:21–22) and the Old Testament verse of Psalms 51:5.[23][24][25][26][27] Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose and Ambrosiaster considered that humanity shares in Adam's sin, transmitted by human generation. Augustine's formulation of original sin after 412 CE was popular among Protestant reformers, such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, who equated original sin with concupiscence (or "hurtful desire"), affirming that it persisted even after baptism and completely destroyed freedom to do good.[citation needed] Before 412 CE, Augustine said that free will was weakened but not destroyed by original sin. But after 412 CE this changed to a loss of free will except to sin.[28] Calvinism holds the later Augustinian soteriology view. The Jansenist movement, which the Catholic Church declared to be heretical, also maintained that original sin destroyed freedom of will.[29] Instead the Catholic Church declares that Baptism erases original sin.[30] Methodist theology teaches that original sin is eradicated through entire sanctification.[31]

Islam

[edit]
Main article: Islamic views on sin

Sin (khiṭʾ) is an important concept in Islamic ethics. Muslims see sin as anything that goes against the commands of God (Allah), a breach of the laws and norms laid down by religion.[32]

Islamic terms for sin include dhanb and khaṭīʾa, which are synonymous and refer to intentional sins; khiṭʾ, which means simply a sin; and ithm, which is used for grave sins.[33]

Judaism

[edit]
Main article: Jewish views on sin

Judaism regards the violation of any of the 613 commandments as a sin. Judaism teaches that sin is a part of life, since there is no perfect man and everyone has an inclination to do evil. Sin has many classifications and degrees, but the principal classification is that of "missing the mark" (cheit in Hebrew).[34][better source needed] Some sins are punishable with death by the court, others with death by heaven, others with lashes, and others without such punishment, but no sins committed with willful intentions go without consequence. Sins committed out of lack of knowledge are not considered sins, since sin cannot be a sin if the one who committed it did not know it was wrong. Unintentional sins are considered less severe sins.[35]

Sins between people are considered much more serious in Judaism than sins between man and God. Yom Kippur, the main day of repentance in Judaism, can atone for sins between man and God, but not for sins between man and his fellow, that is until he has appeased his friend.[36] Eleazar ben Azariah derived [this from the verse]: "From all your sins before God you shall be cleansed" (Book of Leviticus, 16:30) – for sins between man and God Yom Kippur atones, but for sins between man and his fellow Yom Kippur does not atone until he appeases his fellow.[37][38]

When the Temple yet stood in Jerusalem, people would offer Korbanot (sacrifices) for their misdeeds. The atoning aspect of korbanot is carefully circumscribed. For the most part, korbanot only expiates unintentional sins, that is, sins committed because a person forgot that this thing was a sin or by mistake. No atonement is needed for violations committed under duress or through lack of knowledge, and for the most part, korbanot cannot atone for a malicious, deliberate sin. In addition, korbanot have no expiating effect unless the person making the offering sincerely repents of his or her actions before making the offering, and makes restitution to any person who was harmed by the violation.[35]

Judaism teaches that all willful sin has consequences. The completely righteous suffer for their sins (by humiliation, poverty, and suffering that God sends them) in this world and receive their reward in the world to come. The in-between (not completely righteous or completely wicked), suffer for and repent their sins after death and thereafter join the righteous. The very evil do not repent even at the gates of hell. Such people prosper in this world to receive their reward for any good deed, but cannot be cleansed by and hence cannot leave gehinnom, because they do not or cannot repent. This world can therefore seem unjust where the righteous suffer, while the wicked prosper. Many great thinkers have contemplated this.[39]

Shinto

[edit]

The Shinto concept of sin is inexorably linked to concepts of purity and pollution. Shinto does not have a concept of original sin and instead believes that all human beings are born pure.[40] Sin, also called Tsumi, is anything that makes people impure (i.e. anything that separates them from the kami).[41] However, Shinto does not believe this impurity is the result of human actions, but rather the result of evil spirits or other external factors.[40][41]

Sin can have a variety of consequences in Japan, including disaster and disease.[40][41] Therefore, purification rituals, or Harae, are viewed as important not just to the spiritual and physical health of the individual but also to the well-being of the nation.[40]

See also

[edit]

Notes and references

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Sin

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Sin is a central theological and moral concept in the —, , , and the Bahá'í Faith—referring to any act, thought, or that violates the divine will, , or order established by , often resulting in separation from the divine and requiring or for reconciliation. This notion encompasses both individual transgressions and a broader state of human fallenness, with consequences including spiritual alienation, divine , and communal disruption. Etymologically rooted in ancient Near Eastern ideas of offense against deities, the term in these faiths derives from scriptural languages: Hebrew ḥāṭāʾ (to miss the mark or err), Greek hamartia (failure or deviation), and Arabic dhanb or ithm (burden or fault). Analogous concepts of moral or spiritual transgression appear in other religious traditions, such as papa (sin or evil) in Hinduism, which arises from dereliction of dharma and accumulation of negative karma, or unwholesome actions (akusala kamma) in Buddhism that lead to suffering.

Etymology

Linguistic Roots

The term "sin" in its religious connotations traces back to ancient Semitic languages, particularly Hebrew, where the primary word is chatta'ah (חַטָּאָה), derived from the verb chata' (חָטָא), meaning "to miss the mark" or "to go astray," akin to an archer failing to hit the target. This noun denotes an offense or deviation from God's law, first appearing in the Hebrew Bible in Genesis 4:7, where it personifies sin as "crouching at the door," and later in the Torah, such as in Leviticus 4:3, describing sin offerings for transgressions. In the Hebrew Bible, chatta'ah encompasses both deliberate and inadvertent acts that rupture covenantal relationship with the divine, emphasizing failure to align with prescribed righteousness. In the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the (LXX), chatta'ah is rendered as hamartia (ἁμαρτία), a term from the verb hamartanō (ἁμαρτάνω), literally signifying "to miss the mark" or "to err" in achieving an intended goal. This translation influenced the , where hamartia appears over 170 times to convey moral failure or deviation from divine will, as in Romans 3:23, portraying sin as falling short of God's glory. Examples from the include its use in translations of Exodus 29:14 and Leviticus 5:1, bridging Hebrew concepts of offense into Hellenistic contexts while implying a broader sense of ethical shortfall. The English word "sin" derives from a distinct Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root *h₁es- ("to be" or "exist"), evolving through forms like *h₁s-ónt- ("being" or "true"), which carried connotations of guilt or condition in descendant languages. This PIE root influenced Latin sons (genitive sontis), meaning "guilty" or "criminal," as seen in legal texts denoting . In Germanic branches, it developed into Proto-Germanic *sun(d)jō ("sin" or "guilt"), leading to Old English synn, with early uses in texts like the Blickling Homilies around 971 CE implying moral wrongdoing. Etymological connections between these families are limited, as like Hebrew belong to the Afro-Asiatic family, while Greek and the lineage of "sin" stem from Indo-European; however, translational overlaps in the facilitated conceptual links without direct borrowing. For instance, the Indo-European tree branches as PIE *h₁es- > Proto-Germanic *sun(d)jō > synn > Modern English "sin," paralleling but not intersecting with Semitic chata' > chatta'ah. Other families, such as Uralic or Altaic, show no attested cognates for these terms, highlighting the independent evolution of sin-related vocabulary across linguistic phyla.

Historical Development

The term "sin" entered English through Old English synn, attested around 900 CE in texts such as the Blickling Homilies, where it denoted moral wrongdoing or offense, derived from Proto-Germanic *sun(d)jō, a root emphasizing guilt and personal fault rather than mere error. This Germanic lineage, shared with cognates like Old Norse synd and Old High German sunta, initially carried connotations of criminal or social culpability before fully aligning with Christian moral theology. The adoption of Latin peccatum in Jerome's Vulgate translation of the Bible (late 4th century CE) profoundly shaped Western Christian terminology for sin during the late Roman Empire, rendering Hebrew ḥaṭṭāʾt (trespass) and Greek hamartia (missing the mark) into a term implying stumbling or transgression against divine order. This ecclesiastical Latin influenced monastic and early medieval scriptoria, embedding peccatum as the standard for doctrinal discussions and penitential literature across Europe. In the medieval period, scholastic Latin expanded peccatum within theological treatises, such as those by and , incorporating legalistic connotations of sin as a owed to , which permeated vernacular adaptations like Old French peché (from peccatum, emerging in 12th-century texts) and Middle High German sünde (retaining Germanic roots but gaining juridical overtones in confessional manuals). These evolutions reflected the integration of into , with terms evolving in works like the to denote both voluntary fault and habitual . By the 19th and 20th centuries, English dictionary entries documented a secular dilution of "sin," shifting from predominantly religious transgression to broader ethical or social impropriety, as seen in the Oxford English Dictionary's 1911 edition (revised through the 20th century), which included senses like "a violation of moral or social principles" alongside theological ones, influenced by Enlightenment rationalism and modern psychology. This broadening is evident in 20th-century usage, where "sin" appeared in secular contexts such as economic critiques or personal ethics, marking a transition from divine offense to human-centered moral fault.

Abrahamic Religions

In Judaism

In Judaism, sin, or averah, refers to a transgression or rebellion against the divine will as expressed in the 613 mitzvot (commandments) detailed in the . These sins are categorized using terms such as chet (an inadvertent error or "missing the mark"), pesha (deliberate rebellion), and avon (iniquity or willful deviation), reflecting varying degrees of intent and severity rooted in biblical and rabbinic texts. Unlike a state of inherent corruption, sin arises from human actions that deviate from these covenantal obligations, emphasizing personal accountability over predestined guilt. Sins are broadly classified into two types: those committed against (bein adam laMakom), such as or , and those against fellow humans (bein adam lechavero), including , slander, or harm. processes differ accordingly; sins against are primarily expiated through , , and rituals on , the Day of , while sins against others require prior restitution, direct apology to the wronged party, and before divine can be sought. This distinction underscores Judaism's focus on repairing interpersonal relationships as a prerequisite for spiritual renewal. Central to addressing sin is teshuvah (repentance or "return"), a multifaceted process involving confession of the wrongdoing, sincere regret for the harm caused, and a resolute commitment to avoid repetition in similar circumstances. This practice intensifies during the Ten Days of Repentance from to , culminating in synagogue services that include the prayer, a legal of personal vows made to , symbolizing liberation from past burdens to enable full . Through teshuvah, individuals actively restore their covenantal bond with and community. Judaism does not teach inherited , viewing humans as born neutral and capable of moral choice. Instead, each person possesses the (evil inclination), a natural drive toward self-interest, pleasure, or survival that can lead to sin if unchecked, balanced by the yetzer tov (good inclination) that emerges with maturity and . This dual framework promotes , ethical growth, and the potential for righteousness through ongoing self-discipline and adherence to mitzvot.

In Christianity

In Christianity, the theological study of sin is termed hamartiology, which investigates its nature, origin, and consequences as a fundamental breach of relationship with . Sin is conceptualized as any failure to align with God's will or commands, constituting rebellion against divine holiness, exemplified in the biblical assertion that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of ." This perspective underscores sin's pervasive impact on human existence, rendering humanity incapable of achieving righteousness apart from divine intervention. A cornerstone of Christian doctrine is , articulated by in the 4th and 5th centuries CE, which posits that all humans inherit guilt and a corrupted nature from Adam's disobedience in the as described in Genesis 3. Augustine argued that this primal fault is transmitted through human generation, imprinting —a disordered inclination toward sin—upon every person from birth, such that even infants bear its guilt until remitted by . This inherited depravity forms the basis for the Reformed theological concept of , which holds that sin taints every facet of —mind, will, emotions, and body—leaving individuals spiritually dead and utterly unable to initiate reconciliation with God without grace. Christian traditions distinguish between types of sin based on severity, particularly in Catholicism, where represent grave violations that fully sever one's relationship with and destroy sanctifying grace, requiring sacramental confession for restoration. These differ from venial sins, which are lesser offenses that weaken but do not rupture charity or friendship with , gradually disposing the soul toward more serious wrongdoing if unaddressed. This categorization draws from 1 John 5:16-17, which differentiates "sin that leads to death" (mortal) from "sin that does not lead to death" (venial), emphasizing the need for and accordingly. Central to Christian , sin's resolution occurs through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ, whose death and provide redemption from its power and penalty. In , Anselm of Canterbury's satisfaction (11th century) views Christ's obedience and suffering as satisfying the infinite honor offended by sin, restoring divine order without implying punishment transfer. Protestant traditions, particularly Reformed, emphasize penal , wherein Christ vicariously endures the legal penalty of sin on behalf of believers, bearing God's wrath to secure justification. These models highlight sin's role in necessitating Christ's mediatorial work, bridging humanity's fallen state to eternal life.

In Islam

In Islam, sin is understood as any act of disobedience to Allah, encompassing both intentional transgressions and errors that deviate from divine commands. The primary Arabic terms for sin in the Qur'an are dhanb, which refers to a fault or sin that incurs consequences requiring divine forgiveness, and ithm, denoting a morally harmful or deliberate wrongdoing. The gravest sin in Islam is shirk, the act of associating partners with Allah, which undermines the foundation of monotheism (tawhid). The Qur'an states that Allah does not forgive shirk if one dies upon it, but He forgives lesser sins for whom He wills: "Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills" (Qur'an 4:48). Sins are categorized into major sins (kabair) and minor sins (sagha'ir). Major sins are grave offenses explicitly warned against in the Qur'an and , such as shirk, , (zina), (riba), and false ; a well-known lists seven destructive ones: associating partners with , sorcery, killing a soul has forbidden except by right, consuming orphans' property, eating , fleeing from the battlefield, and slandering chaste women ( 2766). Minor sins, while less severe individually, can accumulate and lead to ruin if unrepented, as the Prophet Muhammad warned: "Beware of minor sins, for they are like a people who camped in the bottom of a , each one bringing a stick of until it ignites and burns them all" (Musnad 2306, graded sahih). Repentance (tawba) is the primary means of seeking for all sins except unrepented shirk. The process involves sincere regret for the act, immediate cessation of the sin, firm resolve not to return to it, and direct supplication to for pardon. The Qur'an assures believers: "O My servants who have transgressed against themselves, do not despair of the mercy of . Indeed, forgives all sins. Indeed, it is He who is the Forgiving, the Merciful" (Qur'an 39:53). Islam rejects the concept of , teaching that humans are born in a state of innate purity known as fitrah, a natural disposition toward recognizing and submitting to . As the Qur'an describes: "So direct your face toward the religion, inclining to truth. [Adhere to] the fitrah of Allah upon which He has created [all] people" (Qur'an 30:30). The Prophet affirmed: "Every child is born on fitrah, but his parents make him a Jew, a Christian, or a Magian" ( 1358). Individuals become accountable for their actions upon reaching , facing judgment on the Day of Resurrection based solely on their own deeds, with no inherited guilt.

In the Bahá'í Faith

In the Bahá'í Faith, sin is understood not as an inherent or ontological , but as actions, thoughts, or attachments that obstruct spiritual development and arise from self-centeredness and the lower, material aspects of . According to 'Abdu'l-Bahá, sins such as , , , , and stem from the misuse of , where individuals prioritize egoistic desires over divine guidance and service to humanity. This perspective views sin as veils of or that obscure recognition of one's true spiritual potential, rather than a force with independent existence. The Bahá'í teachings reject the doctrine of , asserting that humans are born noble and pure, possessing a dual nature: a higher spiritual aspect aligned with divine attributes like and , and a lower animalistic aspect driven by instincts and passions. Sin emerges when the lower nature dominates through the exercise of , leading to separation from , but it is not transmitted genetically or as an inherited stain across generations. Bahá'u'lláh emphasizes that the root of such error lies in forgetting one's servitude to and exalting the , which fosters all forms of wrongdoing. Remedies for sin focus on spiritual progress and immediate divine forgiveness, achieved through sincere repentance, prayer, meditation, and selfless service to others. 'Abdu'l-Bahá teaches that upon turning wholeheartedly to God, forgiveness is granted without intermediary confession to priests or public disclosure, as sins are a private matter between the individual and the Divine. Unlike traditional Abrahamic conceptions that may portray sin as warranting eternal punishment, the Bahá'í view positions it as an educational opportunity for soul growth, where overcoming errors builds virtues and draws the individual closer to spiritual maturity and unity with the Creator.

Dharmic Religions

In Hinduism

In Hinduism, the concept of sin is primarily understood as pāpa, which refers to moral wrongdoing or evil actions that arise from violations of (righteous duty) and accumulate as a form of karmic debt. Pāpa is not viewed as an inherent flaw in human nature but as the result of unrighteous acts () stemming from ignorance, desire, or ego, leading to in this life or future rebirths. Ancient texts like the Manusmṛti categorize pāpa into three types based on the means of commission: mental sins (such as harboring malice or lustful thoughts), verbal sins (including lying, slander, or harsh speech), and physical sins (encompassing , , or ). For instance, the Manusmṛti describes how mental acts produce effects in the mind, verbal acts in speech, and bodily acts in the body, all contributing to negative karmic residue. Pāpa is intrinsically linked to the law of karma, where sinful actions generate negative impressions (saṃskāras) that bind the soul (ātman) to the cycle of rebirth (saṃsāra). These accumulated pāpa perpetuate suffering across lifetimes, as the cosmic principle of cause and effect ensures that unrighteous deeds yield corresponding fruits, trapping the individual in endless transmigration until purification occurs. Unlike concepts of sin tied to , pāpa operates under ṛta, the Vedic cosmic order representing the natural and moral law that maintains universal harmony without intervention from a singular . This impersonal governance emphasizes personal responsibility, where adherence to aligns one with ṛta, while pāpa disrupts it, leading to karmic repercussions. Atonement for pāpa, known as , involves deliberate practices to neutralize karmic debts and restore . These include ritualistic methods such as to atone for minor verbal offenses, pilgrimages (tīrtha-yātrā) to sacred sites for purification from physical sins, and charitable acts to mitigate accumulated pāpa. Repetitive chanting of mantras () serves as a meditative tool to burn away mental impurities, fostering devotion and mental clarity to dissolve negative saṃskāras. Additionally, yogic practices, including breath control (prāṇāyāma) and ethical disciplines ( and ), promote inner purification by disciplining the mind and body, gradually eroding the effects of pāpa and facilitating liberation (mokṣa) from . While the foundational understanding of pāpa remains consistent across Hindu traditions, variations exist in its interpretation and atonement based on sectarian emphases. In , atonement often involves rituals directed toward as the destroyer of sins, emphasizing ascetic practices and tantric purification. Vaishnavism, conversely, highlights (devotional surrender) to or his avatars, where grace through worship and ethical living expiates pāpa, integrating personal devotion with karmic resolution. These differences reflect diverse paths to aligning with ṛta, yet all underscore the transformative potential of disciplined action over eternal damnation.

In Buddhism

In Buddhism, there is no direct equivalent to the concept of sin as a transgression against a divine law or an inherent moral failing, such as original sin; instead, the tradition addresses unskillful or unwholesome actions (akusala kamma), which are volitional deeds rooted in the three poisons of (lobha), (dosa), and (moha). These actions generate negative karma, perpetuating the (dukkha) and rebirth (samsara) by conditioning future experiences of pain and unfavorable circumstances. This understanding is elaborated in the texts, which systematically classify mental and physical phenomena, and in the suttas, such as the , where describes unwholesome kamma as arising from defiled states of mind that lead to harm for oneself and others. The ten unwholesome actions, known as dasa akusala kammapatha, are categorized into three bodily, four verbal, and three mental deeds, as detailed in the Saleyyaka Sutta (MN 41). These are:
  • Bodily actions: Killing living beings, taking what is not given (stealing), and .
  • Verbal actions: False speech (lying), divisive speech (slander), harsh speech, and idle chatter.
  • Mental actions: Covetousness (greed for others' possessions), ill will (wishing harm), and wrong views (e.g., denying karma or ethical ).
Performing these actions, driven by the three roots, results in karmic consequences such as rebirth in the lower realms (hells, animal, or worlds) or unhappy human conditions, but unlike eternal , these effects are impermanent and can be purified through wholesome actions and insight. There is no notion of inherited guilt; each individual's karma is self-generated and arises from their own intentions. Such consequences are mitigated by cultivating the , which includes right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right , and right concentration—practices that counteract unwholesome tendencies through ethical conduct, mental discipline, and wisdom. (sati) and further help in recognizing and abandoning these roots, leading to the cessation of via enlightenment. While Buddhism emphasizes individual karma and personal liberation as an arahant, traditions extend this through the ideal, where practitioners take vows to avoid harming sentient beings and accumulate merit to benefit all, as exemplified in texts like Shantideva's Bodhicaryavatara. These vows reinforce abstention from the ten unwholesome actions on a universal scale, integrating (karuna) into karmic purification.

Other Traditions

In Shinto

In Shinto, the concept of sin is primarily understood through the lenses of kegare (impurity or pollution) and tsumi (transgression or offense), which differ from Western notions of moral guilt by emphasizing ritual contamination that disrupts harmony with the kami (spirits or deities) and the natural order. Kegare refers to a state of spiritual uncleanliness arising from contact with polluting elements such as death, blood, childbirth, disease, or even moral lapses like injustice and deceit, which can extend to communal or environmental disharmony. In contrast, tsumi denotes specific offenses against the kami, such as violating taboos or failing in ritual duties, often manifesting as tangible misfortunes that require cleansing to restore balance rather than invoking eternal judgment. Unlike Abrahamic traditions, Shinto lacks a doctrine of original sin or concepts of inherent human depravity and posthumous punishment; instead, impurity is viewed as removable through rites that prioritize communal well-being and alignment with nature. The historical roots of these ideas trace back to ancient texts like the (712 CE), Japan's earliest chronicle, which illustrates sin as impurity through the myth of 's journey to (the land of the dead) to retrieve his deceased wife . Upon escaping the foul, decaying realm of —described as a source of profound — performs a foundational purification by bathing in a river, shedding his contaminated clothes and washing his body, from which numerous emerge, symbolizing renewal and the origin of cleansing practices known as . This narrative, compiled in the 8th century CE under imperial auspices, establishes and not as indelible moral stains but as conditions amenable to ritual resolution, setting the pattern for Shinto's emphasis on proactive purity to avert calamity. Purification rituals form the core response to sin in Shinto, focusing on restoring harae (purity) through symbolic acts that cleanse both individuals and communities. Misogi, a water-based ablution involving immersion or sprinkling, directly echoes Izanagi's river bath and is performed to wash away kegare from physical or spiritual sources, often in natural settings like waterfalls or seas to reaffirm harmony with the environment. Annual ceremonies like oharae, held at major shrines such as Ise Jingu in June and December, extend this to collective expiation of national tsumi, invoking kami to remove accumulated impurities through prayers, offerings, and ritual wavings of sacred tamagushi branches. These practices underscore Shinto's animistic worldview, where sin's resolution fosters social cohesion and ecological balance rather than personal . Over time, from the onward, Buddhist syncretism introduced elements like confession (keka), blending with native rites to address moral dimensions of tsumi while retaining the primacy of ritual purity.

In Philosophical and Secular Thought

In Western philosophy, Friedrich Nietzsche critiqued the concept of sin as a cornerstone of what he termed "slave morality," arguing in On the Genealogy of Morality (1887) that it emerges from ressentiment, where the weak invert the values of the strong, transforming noble traits into vices and fostering guilt as a mechanism of control rather than authentic ethics. Nietzsche contrasted this with "master morality," which affirms life without the burdensome weight of sin-induced guilt, viewing the latter as a psychological tool that stifles human potential and creativity. Existentialist philosophers further reframed sin in terms of individual existence and authenticity. , in (1849), defined sin as despair arising from a failure to relate the self properly to itself before , manifesting as either defiant self-assertion or passive evasion, which he described as a profound spiritual malaise. , in a secular existential vein, reconceived sin-like errors as "" in (1943), portraying it as where individuals deny their freedom by adopting fixed roles, thus evading responsibility for their moral choices. In , sin is often interpreted as actions that violate fundamental human principles without invoking divine authority. John Stuart Mill's , outlined in (1859), posits that interference with individual liberty is justifiable only to prevent harm to others, framing moral wrongs akin to sin as those causing tangible injury rather than abstract offenses against a . This utilitarian approach, emphasizing the greatest happiness for the greatest number, treats ethical failings as deviations that undermine societal well-being, as seen in violations of frameworks where actions like represent secular equivalents of sin. Psychological perspectives demystify sin as a product of internal mental processes. , in (1930), explained guilt associated with sin as arising from the superego's harsh internalization of societal norms, leading to neurotic conflicts where unconscious aggression is redirected inward, creating a pervasive sense of moral inadequacy. In modern , particularly developed by , excessive guilt over perceived sins is viewed as stemming from irrational beliefs, such as absolutistic demands for perfection, which therapists challenge to alleviate self-judgment and promote adaptive thinking.

References

  1. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sin-christian/
  2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343913566_A_Theological_Reflection_on_the_Concept_of_Sin_in_Christianity
  3. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=forbidden_fruit
  4. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rec3.12260
  5. https://www.hinduwebsite.org/hinduism/h_sin.asp
  6. https://hebrew4christians.com/Meditations/Chata_ah/chata_ah.html
  7. https://biblehub.com/hebrew/2403.htm
  8. https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/nas/chattaah.html
  9. http://biblehub.com/greek/266.htm
  10. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g266/kjv/tr/0-1/
  11. https://antipas.org/books/purifying_heavenly/sin_offering.html
  12. https://www.etymonline.com/word/sin
  13. https://blog.oup.com/2017/04/etymology-sin-part-1/
  14. https://www.oed.com/dictionary/sin_n
  15. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13548a.htm
  16. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sin
  17. https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/what-is-sin
  18. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/114939/jewish/The-Nature-of-Sin.htm
  19. https://ohr.edu/holidays/rosh_hashana_and_yom_kippur/teshuva/8051
  20. https://www.reconstructingjudaism.org/article/sin-and-forgiveness/
  21. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1620809/jewish/The-Ten-Days-of-Repentance-The-Aseret-Yemay-Teshuvah.htm
  22. https://www.ou.org/holidays/the_prayers_of_yom_kippur/
  23. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-birth-of-the-good-inclination/
  24. https://ohr.edu/ask_db/ask_main.php/27/q2/
  25. https://www.chafer.edu/hamartiology
  26. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15062.htm
  27. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15062.htm#chapter44
  28. https://www.vatican.va/content/catechism/en/part_three/section_one/chapter_one/article_8/iv_the_gravity_of_sin_mortal_and_venial_sin.html
  29. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atonement/
  30. https://www.sdmorrison.org/7-theories-of-the-atonement-summarized/
  31. https://qurantalkblog.com/2024/09/28/different-words-for-sin-in-quran/
  32. https://montazer.co/types-sin/
  33. https://quran.com/4/48
  34. https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/why-is-shirk-the-greatest-sin-of-all
  35. https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2766
  36. https://www.abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2013/12/20/minor-sins-pile-firewood/
  37. https://quran.com/39/53
  38. https://www.abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2012/10/06/every-child-born-fitrah-nature/
  39. https://www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/paris-talks/3
  40. https://bahaiteachings.org/original-sin-sins-father/
  41. https://www.bahai.org/beliefs/life-spirit/human-soul/human-nature
  42. https://www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/bahaullah/kitab-i-aqdas/5#705636406
  43. https://www.wisdomlib.org/concept/papa
  44. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11407-003-0003-6.pdf
  45. https://ir.nbu.ac.in/bitstreams/53a1cffe-49c3-42f1-b715-b0e7da3f4da0/download
  46. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23445563
  47. https://sanskritarticle.com/wp-content/uploads/08-60-Dr.Krishna.Panda_.pdf
  48. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324384338_Prayaschitta
  49. https://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/concepts/japa.asp
  50. https://www.dlshq.org/teachings/japa-yoga/
  51. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5165893
  52. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-indian-buddhism/
  53. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mendis/wheel322.html
  54. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.intro.budd.html
  55. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abhidharma/
  56. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/arahantsbodhisattvas.html
  57. https://www.lionsroar.com/best-practices-for-bodhisattvas/
  58. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1037&context=southernanthro_proceedings
  59. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1150&context=masters
  60. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/203590
  61. https://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/Fac/Adler/Reln275/Shinto-purification-rituals.htm
  62. https://www.cuw.edu/academics/schools/arts-and-sciences/_assets/theological-journal/v5i1-Spring_2018.pdf
  63. https://www.mlit.go.jp/tagengo-db/common/001565681.pdf
  64. http://jshm.or.jp/journal/66-3/66-3_sosetsu_1.pdf
  65. https://www.zygonjournal.org/article/id/14285/
  66. https://pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu/understandingreligion/chapter/shintoism/
  67. https://ia601907.us.archive.org/21/items/nietzsche-on-the-genealogy-of-morality/Nietzsche%2520-%2520On%2520the%2520Genealogy%2520of%2520Morality.pdf
  68. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche-moral-political/
  69. https://ia601400.us.archive.org/32/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.189042/2015.189042.The-Sickness-Unto-Death_text.pdf
  70. https://iep.utm.edu/sartre-ex/
  71. https://eet.pixel-online.org/files/etranslation/original/Mill%2C%2520On%2520Liberty.pdf
  72. https://godandgoodlife.nd.edu/resource/utilitarianism-john-stuart-mill/
  73. https://www.stephenhicks.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/FreudS-CIVILIZATION-AND-ITS-DISCONTENTS-text-final.pdf
  74. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-13412-008
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.