Sin is considered to be an evil ruling the entire world. Sin is the transgression of the commandment of God. Man commits sin by going against his conscience. The teachings of some that sin is a development like natural offenses habitually committed by animals, such as getting angry and fighting, deserves to be condemned. They also teach that man fell in sin like animals at the beginning impelled by his brutish nature. Their aim is to equate man with animal. Those who committed sin, did so, only after contemplating on the thought which came to their minds.

The detailed teaching about sin can be known through the Holy Scriptures. It is good to think about the expiation of sin rather than disputing it's origin. If the entire teaching contained in the scriptures on the subject of sin is to be condensed into a single word, it can be said that sin is 'self-will'. The early man's sin was that he acted not according to the will of God but according to his own will. On the contrary, Christ acted not according to His own will but according to the will of the One who sent Him (John 5:30). Those who believe in Him should also walk the way He walked (Rom. 15:2-3; Gal; I John 2:6).

The following points are to be noted further:

1. That sin is not only committed through actions but also through words and thoughts Matt. 5:28, 12:36-37).

2. Not only doing what ought not to be done is a sin but not doing what ought to be done also is a sin (Matt.; Jud.).

Common teaching on sin in India:

Everyone has to admit that in the Hindu philosophical texts, the texts dealing with realization of sin is relatively small. When common people exclaim 'alas', it is only understood as a tragic event but never to mean an offense. Let us see the reasons for this shortcoming:

1. If we observe the teachings of the books of Sruti Smriti, it can be seen that they are not meant to generate the realization of sin. In Rig veda, many rishis (sages) confess their sins to god Varuna and entreat him and other gods to favor them. In later times such feelings are also absent. According to puranas, Hindu gods are guilty of horrible sins. Although humans are told not to do such things, the Hindu devotees are only spoiled rather than benefitted in any way because of the evil deeds of their gods. We frequently notice common people's inability to understand the difference between righteousness and wickedness as well as the contrast between good and evil even after repeatedly hearing the puranas. Such teachings are not only found in puranas but also in upanishads. In Kausitaki Upanishad, narrating his evil deeds in a brutal manner, god Indira declares that "the one who knows me will not be harmed even if he kills his own father"!

2. The path of karma:

Since the path of karma is only a common path, the great sins as considered by the people are only errors done in contravention to ceremonial rites and customs but not crimes against righteousness. The gods mentioned in the epics and puranas appear to be concerned only with the observance of customary rites by the devotees but not their righteous living. But some exceptional social behaviors aren't found in the sacred books but in the moral books and in unwritten ethnic practices. Therefore it is customary to treat these exceptional behaviors as deficiencies rather than a sin.

3. In upanishads:

The term 'sin' is rarely found. Though humans used to do acts that deserve punishment, they are not treated as sins or as crimes against God. Every human action is said to be divinely motivated. This wrong teaching is also found in Mahabharata though it contains some good teachings too. For example, in the 12th part, it is said that just as the blame related to cutting a tree falls not on the ax but on the man who handled it, the effect of errors that are committed by individual souls shall rest on none other than the God Himself.

In the same manner, Vivekananda while addressing a religious conference at Chicago emphasized that there was no greater sin than to call man a sinner. Did he mean that one who stole should not be called a thief, one who indulged in adultery should not be called an adulterer or one who committed a crime should not be called a criminal? Though the conscience of the people of this land has dimmed because of lack of teaching on the subject of sin, who can say that it is altogether dead? Common people appeal against the offenses of others and admit themselves as sinners.

Brahmins confess their sins to some extent in their daily worship saying, "papoham, papakarmaham, papathma, papasambhavam". The popular Hindu devotees like Manickavasaka and Ramanuja had admitted that they were sinners. Moreover, according to the doctrine of karma, Hindus acknowledge that the fruits of sin are not less.

The teaching on sin is also poor in Islam. In this religion, Mohammed taught that God was like a king who ruled according to his will and that sin was a crime against his will. Mohammed said that he did not consider sins as crimes because God had declared that sins committed by humans were not considered crimes.

Now the urgent need of Hindus and Muslims is the knowledge of God. If the nature of God is properly understood, the horror of sin would become apparent. The essential need of the people all over the world is the knowledge of God.

Search by another keyword