Happened
to read Devdutt Pattanaik explaining it so nicely that I thought all of us
should read him:
Devdutt
Pattanaik:
The
word 'paap' is commonly translated as sin. But the word sin has no antonym in
English: you either follow word of God or you sin. The word sin is even used by
in secular contexts strangely. Paap has an opposite: punya, a word that cannot
be translated in English. If you translate punya as virtue or merit, then paap
becomes vice or demerit, not sin.
Sin
comes from a worldview where there are absolute rules from an unquestionable
authority. Paap and punya come from a worldview where actions are deemed good
or bad depending on the other person's point of view.
The
modern legal system is based on the concept of 'sin', not 'paap-punya'. Indian
society, however, thinks in terms of 'paap-punya' where accumulated merits can
be used to negotiate against a demerit. Since we reject 'paap-punya' as myth
and assume 'sin' and 'law' to be truth (both are myths/beliefs/assumptions), we
end up creating conflict between people's beliefs and intellectual's
ideologies, resulting in the mess that is now India.
