CHAPTER FOUR

ABORTION: FROM RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE

4.1 INTRODUCTION

To understand the problem of abortion from a religious perspective we

need first to look into the moral issue. Abortion is the deliberate ending of the life

of an unborn child, since it is the termination of pregnancy before the fetus is

capable of independent life. When abortion occurs spontaneously, it is called a

miscarriage. However, when the loss of a fetus is caused intentionally or

deliberately, it becomes a moral issue. Abortion destroys the life of a helpless,

innocent, unborn child and is considered illegal in many countries. The resort to

abortion or the deliberate killing of human fetus is a central philosophical question

which raises a number of difficult questions for morality, law and public policy.

When if ever, is abortion morally permissible? Do women have a legal right to

abortion and how is it to be justified? Ought abortions for poor women be funded

by the state? and so on. Thus there is no single problem of abortion. When we

think about abortion we must be precise about which particular set of questions-

moral or legal — we are attempting to address. Most philosophers agree that the

moral question— when, if ever, is abortion morally justified —is central. To

regard this question as central is to say that even if one is immediately concerned

with arguing for a particular policy on abortion, one cannot completely ignore the

matter of the moral permissibility of abortion. So, for the question—when if ever,

is abortion permissible?—We attempt to think that we cannot answer this question

simply by determining the moral status of the fetus. In this connection we must

72
note that there is a class of arguments which stands in favour of abortion, whereas

some arguments would hold that abortion is immoral. The liberal view accepts

abortion as morally permissible for, according to the advocates, an individual has

a right to life only at birth and thereafter. The liberals are thus espoused by pro-

choicers group, which holds that (voluntary) abortion is morally innocuous and,

therefore, that the only acceptable abortion policy is one which treats abortion as

another variety of minor elective surgery. The conservative view, on the other

hand, rejects or considers the practice of abortion as morally impermissible

because, according to the conservatives, a fetus has moral status because it is a

human life. Thus the conservatives are espoused by “pro-life” group. This view

holds that abortion is always morally significant and, therefore, the only

acceptable policy is one which treats abortion as another variety of homicide.

However, there are the moderates who hold that a fetus does not have an equal

right to life until it has reached viability i.e. the capacity to survive outside the

womb. Thus moderates define the moral status of a fetus in terms of viability or

sentience.

Now, let us see how the pro-lifers defend their position. The different

arguments they offer are as follows.

4.2 THE CHRISTIAN VIEW ON ABORTION

4.2 (i) INTRODUCTION

The Catholic Church teaches that all humans have a right to life from the

moment of conception until the natural ordained moment of death. According to

these teachings, a person lives from as young as an embryo until the last second of

life before death. Any form of abortion is morally wrong because it suggests

73
killing of a fetus, which is living, moving and breathing. The pro-lifers would then

hold that with abortion, we give ourselves dominion over a large part of God’s

palm. That is why the Roman Catholics and many Evangelical Protestants believe

that all forms of abortion are sinful and therefore, should not be allowed. They are

the main organisers of group which campaign for the rights of the fetus. They base

their beliefs on certain religious teachings which may be enumerated as follows:

● The sanctity of life and the belief that all life is holy and belongs to God.

Therefore only God has the right to end a pregnancy —and bring about the

death of the fetus.

● That life begins at the moment of conception.

● That the unborn child is created in the image of God.

● That every human has a right to life.

Since abortion was legalised in the United States in 1973, there have been

over forty million abortions in the U.S alone. But the question arises that, is it

moral? What does the Bible say on the subject? We have already mentioned that

abortion is the deliberate extraction or expulsion of the immature human fetus

from the mother’s womb with the intention of putting an end to the life of that

fetus, prior to natural birth. According to the Bible, God is the creator of the fetus

in it’s mother womb. Since God is the creator and sustainer of human life, we

should value and protect the lives of all innocent humans. By the following

evidences we may trace the value and protection of unborn child from the

Christian view point.

74
4.2 (ii) SCRIPTURAL VIEW ON ABORTION

(a) God creates life

The Bible does not use the word “abortion”. But the Bible tells us that

every life is precious to God. He is the One who gave us life. “The Lord God

formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the

breath of life, and the man became a living being” (Genesis 2:7)

“You gave me life and showed me kindness, and in your providence watched over

my spirit.” (Job 10:12)

“Know that the Lord is God. It is He who made us, and we are His; we are His

people, the sheep of His pasture” (Psalm 100:3).

In Job 10:8-11, the poetic description affirms God’s hand in our creation:

“Your hands formed me and made me altogether . . . You have clothed me with

flesh, and have knit me together with bones and sinews.”

Thus life is a gift of God, it should be cherished, it should be nourished, it

should be protected.

(b) God treats a fetus (baby) in the womb as a living person

“For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s

womb. I praise You because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Your works are

wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from You when I was

made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth,

Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in

Your book before one of them came to be (Psalm 139:13-16).

“This is what the Lord says— He who made You, who formed You in the womb,

and who will help you . . .” (Isaiah 44.2).

75
 The words of the Lord came to me, saying, “Before I formed you in the

womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a

prophet to the nations.” (Jeremiah 1:4-5).

The Bible also informs us that John the Baptist, was filled with the Holy

Spirit while still in his mother’s womb, indicating personhood (Luke 1:15). In

addition, the Greek word ‘Huios’ means “son”, but it is also used in Luke 1:36 to

refer to John the Baptist’s existence in the womb before birth, at six months.

All these and many other scriptural evidences show that God treats a fetus

in the womb as a living person. Bible uses the word “person” both for the baby in

the womb as well as outside the womb. A fetus, according to the Bible, is a living

person from conception onwards.

(c) God calls us to protect the defenseless including children

One of the key themes throughout the Bible is that we should be concerned

about the welfare of the poor, weak and helpless. Many scriptures make this very

clear.

“Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless, maintain the rights of the

poor and oppressed. Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the hand of

the wicked” (Psalm 82:34)

Proverbs 31:8-9—“speak up for those who can’t speak for themselves”.

Proverbs 6: 16-19, Proverbs 17:5, Proverbs 12:6, Deuteronomy 27:25,

Deuteronomy 19:10, Luke 17:2, Jeremiah 22:17, Isaiah 59:2-3, are scriptures that

reinforce the truth that it is wrong to harm the defenseless and the innocent.

76
 These are certain scriptures that teach that we must defend and protect the

weak, the defenseless, the innocent, the needy, and the unwanted. Hence they

strongly indicate that we must protect the fetus in its mother’s womb.

(d) Human being/unborn child belong to God, not to us

The following sets of verses show that your physical body is simply the

physical vessel that life is being placed into by God Himself. As such, the life of

your unborn child belongs to God. It does not belong to you, to the man who has

impregnated you, nor to the state or Government.

The following verses reveal that God really “own” the life of unborn child.

“Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you; before you were born I

sanctified you; and I ordained you a prophet to the nations”. (Jeremiah 1:4)

“But you are He who took me out of the womb; you made me trust when I

was on my mother’s breasts. I was cast upon you from birth. From my mother’s

womb you have been my God”. (Psalm 22:9)

These verses go one step further. They say that the unborn child’s days

have been “written” and “fashioned” for him before he is even born through the

womb by God Himself. We may note here specifically the verse about the prophet

Jeremiah, where it states that God ordained him to be a prophet of the nations

before God had even formed him in his mother’s womb!

In short these verses depict that since God creates everything in the world,

He is also the creator of the unborn child in the mother’s womb and so the unborn

child really belongs to God.

Thus, it may be assumed from these scriptures, that in God’s eyes,

abortion is murder, and it is breaking His Commandment, ‘Thou shalt not kill’.

77
Hence, the person who plans on having, performing, or even assisting in, an

abortion should remember that (Hebrews 4:13) – “Nothing in all creation is

hidden from God’s eyes. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before His eyes to

whom we must give account”.

4.2(iii) BIBLE CONDEMNS ABORTION

It is true that the Bible does not specifically address the issue of abortion,

nor does the word ‘abortion’ appear in it. Yet, there are numerous teachings in the

scripture that make it abundantly clear what God’s view of abortion would be.

Jeremiah 1:5 tells us that God knows us before He forms us in the womb. Psalm

139:13-16 speaks of God’s active role in our creation and formation in womb.

Exodus 21: 22-25 prescribes the same penalty namely, death for someone who

causes the death of a baby in the womb like someone who commits murder. All

these clearly indicate that God considers a baby in the womb to be as human, as a

full grown adult. For the Christians, then, abortion is not a matter of a woman’s

right to choose. It is a matter of life or death of a human being made in God’s

image (Genesis 1:26-27, 9:6). The Bible simply forbids killing innocent persons.

A child is a “person” whether born or unborn, for the divine Author of the Bible

does not recognize any material difference between the two. According to the

Christian view, a fetus must be considered as a person from the beginning, who

goes through growth and development both inside and outside the womb of the

mother. The Bible is explicit in its condemnation of murder. Since we find

evidence that the Bible views human life before birth to be just as valuable as

human life after birth, abortion would be biblically condemned under the broad

78
banner of murder. By the following biblical evidence we may trace the value and

protection of the unborn child, “fetus”—

4.2 (iiia) God created the life of human in His image thus human life is unique

Further, the Bible clearly affirms that God created man in His image, man

did not evolve from lower forms of life, which implies that we have the capability

of rational thought, personality and moral responsibility. Abortion destroys

something that God actively created hence, God alone has the right to give and

take life. According to Paston John Piper “Abortion is evil because what is

happening in the womb is the unique person forming work of God and, therefore,

abortion is an assault on the creator— rights of the king of the Universe to bring

eternal person into existence.”1

Thus aborting the child is an attack on God’s glory and is treason against

the Ruler of the Universe.

Psalm 139: 13-16. “For You formed my inward parts, You wove me in my

mother’s womb.” . . . “My frame was not hidden from You, when I was made in

secret, and skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth, Your eyes have seen my

unformed substance, and in Your book were all written the day that were ordained

for me, when as yet there was not one of them.

Jeremiah 1:5. Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before

you were born I consecrated you.”

All these evidences show that before we are even formed in the womb,

God knew us. He knows how each day of our lives on earth will unfold. Thus

human lives are the unique formation of God and thus aborting a fetus implies

violating God’s creation.

79
4.2 (iiib) The Bible condemns the shedding of blood of innocent lives

The Bible does not prohibit all types of ‘killing, that is to say, the Bible

does not forbid capital punishment by the government for national or personal

defense. But the Bible strongly condemns shedding ‘innocent blood’— ‘Thou

shalt not kill’— where the word ‘kill’ specifically refers to ‘murder’— a

premeditated and deliberate act of taking someone’s life. It is different from other

forms of taking lives, which could be accidental, or in self-defense. God has

indeed different laws regarding different sorts of death, but He specifically

opposes murder, especially ‘murder of the innocent’.

God’s judgement against the killing of innocent grows out of His love for

human kind. The crime of murder is not only an offense against the sanctity of

life, it is a ‘pollutant’ upon the very land we live. When the land becomes defiled

with sin, people cry out for God. Each sin that we commit is not merely an

isolated incident, but will set off a chain reaction of other sins if not dealt with.

Thus killing a fetus also deliberately involves sin, since according to God’s

judgement, “You shall not kill a fetus as it is innocent life.” Abortion is a sin

against another human being. ‘It’s the ultimate sin against ultimate innocence’.

(Isaiah 59:7).

Thus all these verses seem to voice the view that we should not take the

life of or shed blood of “innocent” people. What could be more “innocent” than an

unborn child still growing in its mother’s womb?

We may notice here that the verse from Deuteronomy 27:25 states “Cursed

is the one who takes a bribe to slay an innocent person. A bribe is taking money

for some action done. Doctors and nurses who perform abortion take money for it.

80
This verse addresses the issue that all the people who engage in this abominable

practice “are cursed”— which could be another way of saying that they will all go

to hell, when they die.

All these verses show that, though it is not mentioned in the Bible “you

shall not abort”, it is very clear from the several verses, that abortion is

condemnable in the Bible.

4.2 (iiic) Pre-natal human life is fully human and thus precious to God

The Old-Testament’s regard for pre-natal life, ‘is that the baby in the

womb has as much value as an already born person. The Bible repeatedly affirms

that God’s providence governs everything in the world. Surely if God governs

everything in the world, then He must also govern or ‘super intend’ the formation

of a human being in the womb.

In the New Testament the Greek word “brephos” is used to describe the

unborn, newborns and youth. In the Luke 1:44, the word is used to mean unborn

baby: “For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby

leaped in my womb for joy. “Then, in Luke 2:12, it means a newborn: “So they

came in a hurry and found their way to Mary and Joseph, and the baby as He lay

in the manger”. And in Luke 18:15, “brephos” refers to a young child: “And they

were bringing even their babies to Him So that He would touch them, but when

the disciplines saw it, they began rebuking them.”

In the old Testament the Hebrew word “Yeled” is used in the same way.

whereas in the Exodus 21:22 it means an unborn child.

81
 As late as the 16th century, the word “child” was used for both the born

and unborn baby. Later, the new word “fetus” developed, to describe a developing

baby.2

In the Bible, our worth as a human being or our “personhood” does not

depend on how far in our life’s journey we have come. Instead, we are beings who

are made in the image of God (Gen 1:27). Each person is valuable because God

created him or her that way. It does not matter whether a person is still in his

mother’s womb, a new born, a toddler, an adolescent, or a senior citizen. Only

quite recently has the concept of “personhood” surfaced in the discussions on

abortion. There are some who want to find a developmental stage where they can

justify that the fetus is only a collection of organs, not really a person. Like many

other pro-choice thinkers, Carl Sagan argues that, fetal stage comes around sixth

month, when the cerebral cortex is in place; only, then, Sagan feels, should we

confer “personhood” on a fetus.3 However, it would seem that these discussions of

personhood only arose from a need to justify the act of abortion. Certainly, they

were not expressed in the Bible. Quite to the contrary, the Bible story shows that

“personhood”, or reaching one’s full potential, comes from knowing God. A

person develops and is preserved through his communion with a personal God

who reveals Himself to us in love. The Bible consistently links our “personhood”

to the time we are formed (conception), or even before, in God’s mind. Thus no

one has any right to abort the pre-natal human life because, it is something which

is constituted by God and no one has any right to interfere in God’s direct

superintendence.

82
 Thus to summarise the above discussion we find that, the Christian view

held that it was wrong to end the life of the ‘formed’ fetus that had grown to the

point where it had developed a rational, as opposed to a vegetative or animal soul.

Borrowing from the Greek philosopher Aristotle, they took this ‘formed’ fetus to

come into existence forty days after conception for the male and ninety days for

the female. However, they viewed ending the life of the ‘unformed’ fetus (early

embryo before the forty-nine days point),4 as a less sin that was akin to the use of

contraception. They reasoned that to do so was not to destroy an ensouled being,

but instead was to frustrate what they considered the proper end of sexual

relations namely, procreation.

4.2 (iv) IS ABORTION PERFORMED TO SAVE THE LIFE OF A MOTHER, IN THE

CASE OF RAPE OR INCEST OR FETAL DEFORMITY ACCEPTABLE TO A
CHRISTIAN?

Most Christians generally agree that abortion is a sin. But the question

may arise regarding abortion performed to save the life of the mother or abortion

done in case of rape or incest?

The first argument that usually arises against the Christian stance on

abortion is “what about the case, when the life of the mother, is at risk?” Honestly,

this is, by far, the most “difficult question concerning the issue of abortion. It

might not be a sin to abort in order to save the life of the mother. Yet this is not

exactly a case of self-defense, because the unborn baby is not guilty of threatening

the mother’s life. That is, we cannot compare this case to one where someone else

deliberately and knowingly threatens the mother’s life. Yet, from one aspect, this

act is a sin, because a good mother would care more about the life of her child

83
than her own life, and would be willing to give up her own life to save her

innocent child’s life.

In case of rape, the problem condoning this is that the child is not unclean

and does not willfully burden the mother, who has to take care of the unwanted

child. And if the mother cannot take care of the child after it is born, then the

mother can give up the baby for adoption. That is to say, the child would-still

remain innocent in this case.

The problem seems to be that the Bible does not address this issue, at least

not directly. The Catholic Church always condemned abortion as a grave evil.

Christian writers from the first-century maintained that the Bible forbids abortion,

just as it forbids murder.

Some Protestants, of the Church of England, and the Methodist Church,

agree that abortion is evil, but feel that sometimes the lesser of two evils has to be

chosen. Many would allow abortion if pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, or

where the embryo is handicapped or deformed, so that to allow the child to be

born would only result in suffering and/or early death. The Protestants also

allowed abortion when the mother’s life was threatened or the mother was in

certain dire circumstances (for example, extreme poverty). But the Bible is clear

that in this fallen world, God ordains suffering for wise and good purpose.

Sometimes we suffer as consequences of our own actions, and these may include

the hardships associated with having a baby out of a wedlock etc. Thus, according

to the Biblical principles, to abort, because having a child would cause emotional

or economic distress, is always wrong. But if one argues that, it is better to kill a

deformed child in the womb than to allow him to live would be to insult thousands

84
of people born with severe handicaps, but who, nevertheless, live meaningful and

productive lives. It is also an insult to the many families who provide love and

care for such handicapped or deformed children as well as adults. Moreover, on

rare occasions, there may be the difficult dilemma of performing an abortion to

spare the mother’s life. But even then, the goal should be to preserve the lives of

both the mother as well as that of the child. Moreover, according to the Christian

view, God is a creator of miracles. He can preserve the life of a mother as well as

of the child despite all the medical aids going against it. Ultimately, though, this

question can only be settled between a husband, wife and, finally, by God

Himself. Any couple facing this extremely difficult situation should pray to the

Lord for wisdom (James 1:5) as to what should be done.

Furthermore, the Biblical principles show that one does not obviate the

real pain of rape or incest by compounding it with the murder of innocent, pre-

born child. Two wrong do not make a right. The very thing that makes rape evil

also makes abortion evil. In both cases, an innocent human being is brutally

dehumanized.

Finally, the real question is whether abortion is the murder of an innocent

human being. If so, abortion should be avoided at all costs. According to the

Christian view, killing an innocent child is one of the worst crimes that a woman

could ever commit. In the age of scientific enlightenment, we know that the

embryo, even at its earliest stages, fulfills the criteria needed to establish the

existence of biological life (including metabolism development, the ability to react

to stimuli, and cell reproduction); that a zygote is a living human being (child) as

demonstrated by its distinct genetic code; and that human personhood does not

85
depend on size, location, or level of dependence. Thus, abortion should be avoided

regardless of any circumstances, for it is nothing but taking the life of an innocent,

defenceless, helpless child and it also violates God’s commandment “Thou shalt

not kill”.

Proverbs 17:15

“Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent— the Lord detests them

both.”

4.2 (v) THE BIBLE SAYS GOD FORGIVES THOSE WHO HAD AN ABORTION WHEN
THEY ASK

If one have had an abortion, or if one helped someone get an abortion,

should she/he be regarded as having committed a sin? All sins however, can be

forgiven in the sacrament of Reconciliation:

1. Examine your conscience, by comparing your choices in life to Church

teachings.

2. Repent, by admitting that you knowingly chose to do something that are

wrong, and then resolve to turn away from sin and toward true love of God

and neighbour.

3. Confess your sins to a priest in confession. Then you are forgiven by God.

4. You should also do penance of your sins: e.g. prayers, self-denial, work of

mercy. But even without penance, your sins are forgiven. If you are unable to

go to confession, you can obtain forgiveness immediately by making an act of

perfect contrition (or repentance): this act is usually a prayer to God,

expressing true sorrow for sin, and true repentance from sin, out of love for

God, with the resolve to avoid sin.

86
 Some women say that the aftermath of abortion is worse than that of rape.

Infact, in many ways abortion is akin to rape: for abortion is a brutal assault on

innocent life, on a woman’s body, and on the dignity of womanhood. But in the

case of abortion the victim consents to the “rape” and even pays the “rapist” for

the assault. Here we need to remember that the other victim of abortion, viz. the

unborn does not consent to the abortion. Drawing the parallel, further, we may say

that, something sacred, something previous, is taken from a woman in case of both

rape and abortion. In the one case it is taken by force, in case of the other, by

consent. Since consent is involved, true healing can only begin when the wrong is

acknowledged and forgiveness is sought for. Forgiveness can only be experienced

by those who honestly admit they need it.

“Have mercy upon me, O God according to Thy loving kindness:

according unto the multitude of Thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.

Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from sin. For I

acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me” (Psalm 51, The

Bible KJV).

God loves and cares both for you and your child. God will forgive you and

your child. God will forgive you even if you have had an abortion. He wants you

to receive mercy and forgiveness through repentance and confession. “He that

covereth his sins shall not prosper: but who so confesseth and forsaketh them shall

have mercy.” (Proverbs 28:13 The Bible, KJV).

Once a person sincerely repents, confesses a sin, and asks forgiveness,

God not only forgives; He forgets the sin.

87
 “I even I, am the one who wipes out your transgressions for My own sake;

And I will not remember your sins” (Isaiah 43:25, The Bible, NAS). The Bible

says further, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins,

and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (John 1:9 The Bible, KM).

The above discussion shows that although the Bible does not specifically

address the issue of abortion, yet it acknowledges that it is only through sincere

prayer that one can receive mercy and forgiveness from God for committing the

sin of abortion.

4.3 BUDDHIST VIEW ON ABORTION

4.3 (i) INTRODUCTION

Buddhism like all religious and secular philosophies, focuses on two

central questions concerning abortion — (1) when does the embryo or fetus

acquire the property which makes termination of pregnancy “killing”? and (2) Is

termination of a pregnancy, before and after this point, ever justifiable?

According to the Buddhist view abortion is undeniably the taking of life.

The debate centers on the issue as to whether the life in question can be

considered ‘human’. Buddhism like most religions says most emphatically that it

is so. The Buddhist teaching runs as follows—

Consciousness first arises at the moment of conception; that consciousness

is shaped by karmic influences from past lives, and that, it is a critical, and indeed

formative, component of the new organism from that moment onwards. Most

Buddhist commentators have adopted classical Hindu teachings that, the

transmigration of consciousness occurs at conception and, therefore, that all

abortion incurs the karmic burden of killing. Before modern embryology was

88
discovered, in the countries where Buddhism flourished as well as in the west,

ideas about conception were scientifically inaccurate. These ideas often associated

the beginning of life with events in the third or fourth month of pregnancy.

But before entering into the details of this view, let us note the ethical

issues in Buddhism.

4.3 (ii) GAUTAM BUDDHA’S VIEW ON ABORTION

Many Buddhist institutions have laid down rules and regulations, but

Buddha’s actual teachings on any issue like abortion would be that, there is no

absolute ruling. Moreover, the Buddha Himself spoke directly of abortion in His

discourse called the Dharani Sutra. He said:

“There are five kinds of Evil Karma which are difficult to extinguish, even if one

were to repent on them. What are the five kinds of offences? The first one is

killing the father, the second one is killing the mother, the third one is abortion,

the fourth one is to cause injury. For the Buddha, the fifth one is to create

disharmony among the Sangha assemblies (i.e. create division and schism). These

five types of evil and sinful Karma are difficult to extinguish.”5

In Vinaya Pitaka (guide for monks and nuns) there are “Four Disrobing

offences”. These four offenses that can get a monk “disrobed,” ex-communicated

are:

1) Engaging in sexual intercourse.

2) Stealing something of value.

3) Purposely killing a human being, or encouraging someone to commit

suicide, or “convincing a woman to have an abortion.”6

89
 4) Boasting that one has realized enlightenment while knowing one has not

yet realized it (i.e., lying about ones’ own spiritual station)

For other offences, monks and nuns can do penance, but not for these four.

These are excommunicatable offences.

Of the Eight-fold Path that Buddhism preaches, the fourth is Right

Action7—Under Right Action comes the principle of ahimsā i.e. non-violence to

all living things.

In this context we may mention that the Buddhists believe in re-birth. The

general Buddhist belief about re-birth is that at conception three-things come

together — the sperm, egg and the Karmic force, that is the effect of the action of

previous life. Without getting technical about how re-birth works, basically this

means that a human life begins at the moment of conception and thus, it must not

be aborted. If a human fetus is terminated or otherwise if it dies, this might mean,

in Buddhist terms, that the bad Karma carried over from the previous life has been

‘paid’, and so the next life will be more fortunate. However, at the same time the

people concerned with causing the abortion (say the woman, doctor etc.) will be

generating bad Karma themselves for this act of violence. Thus the Buddhists,

who strongly believe in Karma, that is, the law of cause and effect, firmly oppose

abortion, because according to their doctrine, Karma will cause bad effects to the

performer of abortion, (i.e. the woman and the abortionist) as well as to the

aborted fetus while abortion would generate bad Karma for the former two, the

fetus would be deprived of the opportunities of earthly existence and, therefore, of

earning good Karma. In other words, abortion hinders its spiritual progress.

90
 Buddhism, no doubt, does not have a definite opinion about the individual

human life begins at conception, a view widely shared in contemporary Buddhist

societies. The ancient authorities, of course, had an imperfect knowledge of

embryology, particularly, concerning conception, but their understanding of fetal

development as a gradual process with a definite starting point was not very

different from that of modern science. Interpreting the traditional teachings in the

light of modern scientific discoveries, such as, ovulation, the view of most

traditional Buddhists today is that fertilization is the point at which individual

human life commences. Consequently, the Buddhists regard abortion as contrary

to the First Precept (which has been discussed in the next sub-section).

4.3(iii) PRECEPTS IN BUDDHIST ETHICS

Ethics basically involves leading life through which an individual passes

again and again, but does belief in re-birth increase or reduce the seriousness of

abortion? It may be thought that it reduces it, since all that has been done is to

postpone rebirth to a later time—the child that was to be born would simply arrive

later. Traditional sources, however, do not hold this view. They regard the

intentional killing of a human being at any stage of life as wrong, regardless of the

fact that he or she will be born again.

Although in one sense life is a continuum, Buddhism also believes that

each life is an embodied individual who has a clear beginning and an end. From

the earliest times Buddhist sources have opposed abortion; and the main belief is

that it is wrong to abort. However, there seems no reason for the Buddhists to

oppose birth control. Birth control prevents the coming into being of an existence.

Here no killing is involved and there is no “akusala” (bad) Karma. But abortion, in

91
their view, is wrong because it involves taking away or destroying a visible or

invisible life and, therefore, cannot be justified.

4.3 (iv) SERIOUSNESS OF ABORTION RELATES TO RE-BIRTH

The Buddhist belief in re-birth introduces a new dimension to the abortion

debate. For one thing, it puts the question “when does life begin?” in an entirely

new light. For Buddhism, life is a continuum with no discernible starting point.

Birth and death are like revolving door in a right manner and making right

decisions about moral issues. In Buddhism, there is no God. So, it is upto human

beings themselves to perform right action and make this world a better one. It is to

be noted that in Buddhism, ethical behaviour is necessary not only because it is

based on right actions, but also because it is a means to the attainment of

enlightenment.

For common Buddhists, the Five Precepts that form the foundation of

ethical behaviour are:

● First Precept : Prevent taking life of beings. Every living being has a right

to life and it should be honoured by one and all.

● Second Precept : Prevent taking things not given. One should neither steal nor

accept things meant for someone else.

● Third Precept : Prevent sensual misconduct. One should not only refrain

from sexual misconduct, but also avoid excessive sensual

pleasure of any kind (like gluttony).

● Fourth Precept : Prevent making false statements. This not only includes

lying but also slander and speech that might cause harm to

others .

92
● Fifth Precept : Prevent taking substance that cause intoxication. This precept

is important in the sense that it could be the cause of other

four precepts being broken.

In addition to these, the Theravada Buddhists also observe three more

precepts on special or holy occasions. The three rules that should be followed by

the members of Sangha on a regular basis are:

● Prevent taking food at unsuitable time—from noon the previous day to sunrise

next day.

● Prevent any form of entertainment as well as items used to beautify oneself.

● Prevent the use of high beds.

INTERPRETING THE FIRST PRECEPT

As with all religious traditions, there are varying opinions amongst

Buddhist, concerning abortion. Abortion is widely performed in some countries

where Buddhism is wide spread such as Japan and South Korea, while in other

Buddhist countries, such as Srilanka, Thailand, and Burma abortion is more

restricted.

(a) Pro-life Buddhist view

The First Precept enjoins us not to kill any living being. The First Precept

instructs one to refrain from taking life. The most serious instance of killing is

taking a human life. The reasoning behind this prohibition is that nothing can be

dear to a living being than its own life. The injunction against taking life, is rooted

in compassion (Karuõā) for living beings.

93
 Traditionally, for the Buddhists, the life process of sentient beings begins

at the moment of conception, when a being’s consciousness “enters” the conjoined

egg and sperm of the parents. Since life begins at the moment of fertilization,

there is thought to be no qualitative difference between an abortion in the first

trimester and one in the last. Although a fetus is not regarded as having a fully

developed “personality” it is, nevertheless, regarded as being a “person” complete

with the five aggregates, (skandhas) that serve as the basis of determining

personal identity, feeling, perceptions, karmic formations and consciousness.

Abortion, because it is seen as taking the life of a fetus, possess a serious

moral, spiritual and personal dilemma for the Buddhists. In Buddhist text, taking

life applies to taking the life of a “sentient” being, a being with consciousness and,

along with it, the potential to achieve enlightenment. Taking life includes

performing the action of killing, having someone else killed, or encouraging

someone to kill.

It must be noted here that, this precept does not only apply to humans, it

can be extended to other living beings. However, if it is accepted that, the fetus is

alive, then the precept implies that it should not be harmed. Since abortion implies

the taking of life for the Buddhists, this involves an unethical and immoral act.

According to the teachings of Buddha, five conditions must be present to

constitute the evil act of killing. They are:

1) a living being
2) knowledge or awareness of it as a living being.
3) intention of killing.
4) effort to kill, and
5) consequent death.

94
When a female conceives there is a being in her womb and this fulfils the first

condition. After a couple of months, she knows that there is a new life within her

and this satisfies the second condition. If for some reason, she wants to do away

with this being in her and gets an aid to do the job, the third condition is fulfilled.

When the aid or the abortionist agrees to do the job, the fourth condition is

satisfied and, finally, the fifth condition is fulfilled when the ‘being’ is killed as a

result of that action. Thus abortion , which involves a violation of the First Precept

— ‘not to kill’, is an immoral and an evil act.

(b) Pro-choice Buddhist view

The Buddhist texts make no case for the legal rights of a fetus, nor do they

mention abortion in circumstances of rape, incest, severe deformity or cases of

mental, physical or emotional abuse. It is quite clear from the variety of sources

that traditionally abortion was severely disapproved. It is also equally clear that

abortion was tolerated and accommodated under exceptional circumstances by

some modern Buddhists8. The situation is similar to that of Roman Catholics,

where abortion, though disapproved, in the strongest terms by Church authorities,

is still practised by a large number of devoted Catholics and defended by at least a

few. Although there are exceptions, Buddhism is still an anti-abortion religion.

The abortion issue usually hinges on whether, the fetus is indeed a ‘living being’

in the relevant sense. In its early stages, a fetus is not considered a human by the

Buddhists. It is alive but not a human being. Therefore, in some cases abortion

may be right or appropriate. “One cannot say that a fertilized egg is a ‘karmically’

advanced human being, just because it is a fertilized egg”. It does not take a

human form yet, and all that is there is “genes” and surely genes do not entirely

95
make up a person9. In 1970 the Japanese High Court declared: “A fetus is part of a

mother’s body until it is born, and is not by itself a person” 10.

The Buddhist approach to ethics can be summed up in one word —

‘compassion’ (Karuõā). Just as compassion (Karuõā) for the unborn fetus is

necessary, so also compassion for the pregnant woman is vital. At the very least it

must be said that Buddhists feel that if a woman makes a wrong decision in

having an abortion, then they should certainly extend compassion (Karuõā) to her

and not be judgmental or critical about her decision.

So, to conclude, very generally it might be fair to say that most Buddhists

feel that, in principle, abortion is wrong or, atleast, very regrettable but one should

always examine the circumstances to allow for exceptions and not condemn those

who arrive at a different conclusion.

If the decision is considered compassionately, and after long and careful

thought (i.e. taking into consideration the special circumstances), then although

the action may be wrong the moral harm done will be reduced by the good

intentions involved.

4.4 ISLAMIC VIEW ON ABORTION

4.4(i) INTRODUCTION

Islam is one principal religion in the contemporary world, and has great

influences on all aspects of life.11The holy Qur’an as the most important source of

Islamic jurisprudence does not explicitly mention abortion. But it explains the

stages of creation of a human in the intra-uterine life:

“We created man of an extraction of clay, then we set him a drop in a safe

lodging, then we created the drop of a clot, then we created of the clot a tissue,

96
then we created of the tissue bones, then we covered the bones in flesh; thereafter

we produce it an another creature. So blessed be God, the Best of creators.”

(23:12-14), and obviously, the holy Qur’an gives a very high priority to the

sanctity of life:

“Whosoever has spared the life of a soul, it is as though he has spared the

life of all people. Whosoever has killed a soul, it is as though he has murdered all

of mankind.” (5:32).

The holy Qur’an objects to infanticide in clear words: “kill not your

offspring for fear of poverty; it is we who provide for them and for you. Surely,

killing them is a great sin.” (17:32)

Islamic schools, based on a tenable interpretation of the Holy Qur’an and

teachings of the prophet, do not agree with those who say that a woman has full

control over her unborn child as part of her body. Islam considers our bodies as a

trust, which we have to preserve and maintain. It also confirms that the fetus is the

creation of Almighty God. No one, not even the parents, have the right to make

decision about his life, unless its presence threatens the life of the mother.12

4.4 (ii) VIEWS OF DIFFERENT ISLAMIC SCHOOLS ON THE PRACTICE OF

ABORTION

Different schools of Islamic Jurisprudence hold different views on the

grounds for abortion, and also at which stage of pregnancy it can/cannot be carried

out. Sunni schools permit abortion until the end of the fourth month. In Islamic

teachings, the soul is said to enter the fetus at 120th day (fourth month) after

conception. Thus, according to them, a pregnant woman could have an abortion

without her husband’s consent, but she should have reasonable justification for

97
this act. Another view holds that, an abortion is permissible with the consent of

both parents up to 40 days and not thereafter. In the Shiite jurisprudence (one of

the largest Islamic jurisprudence schools), the ensoulment occurs only after about

the fourth month.13 Before this stage, all Shiite authorities regard abortion as

‘Hārām’, unless if continuing the pregnancy would put the mother’s life in real

danger or be intolerable for her. But after that, they regard abortion as Hārām,

even if it endangers the mother’s life, unless continuing the pregnancy would

result in the death of both the mother and the fetus, while abortion could save the

life of mother. Further, should the occasion for choice occur, the physician should

save the one (mother/fetus) who has more chance of survival.14 However, the

Shiite authorities have not accepted to legitimise abortion in unwanted

pregnancies or in pregnancies resulting from adultery (zina) or rape.15

The eminent Muslim scholar, Sheikh Yusuf-Al-Qaradawi, states in his

well-known book, The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam:

“While Islam permits preventing pregnancy for valid reasons, it does not allow

doing violence to it once it occurs.”

Muslim jurists have agreed unanimously that after the fetus is completely

formed and has been given a soul, abortion is “Hārām. It is also a crime, the

commission of which is prohibited for the Muslim because it constitutes an

offence against a complete, living, human being. Whatever the cause of abortion

be, all Islamic jurists insist that the payment of blood money (Diyā) becomes

incumbent if the baby is aborted alive and then it dies; a fine of lesser amount is to

be paid if it is aborted dead. Thus excepting certain special conditions (which will

98
be discussed later) abortion is forbidden (Hārām) in Islam, whether it be in the

early or late stages of pregnancy. In fact the holy Qur’an defends the sanctity of

life thus:

“If anyone slays a human being unless it be (in punishment) for murder or

for spreading corruption on earth—it shall be as if he had slained the whole of

mankind; if anyone saves a life, it shall be as if he had saved the lives of the whole

of mankind.”16

Ebrahim Comments:

“From this verse it is evident that every human being has the right to be

born, right to be alive, and the right to live as long as Allah permits. No one may

be deprived of life except for a legitimate crime. The fetus is regarded by all

schools of Islamic Law as having this right to life, and this right to life is absolute

in Islam: it cannot be overriden, even in cases of rape or concerns regarding fetal

deformity”.

4.4(iii) WHEN IS ONE PERMITTED TO HAVE AN ABORTION?

The previous discussion shows that abortion or termination of pregnancy is

generally considered abominable and, therefore, a hārām (sin) since it involves

interfering with the life process which has already started. We have seen that

abortion is considered sinful in the holy Qur’an according to the authentic view of

scholars. However, it is allowed only in exceptional cases, especially, after the

ensoulment, which takes place on the 120th day of conception (i.e. twelve weeks).

Abortion after this stage is akin to murder, so it could never be a valid option

unless there is real danger to the life of the mother. (that is, of the continuation of

pregnancy endangers the woman’s life or puts her in intolerable difficulties, as

99
also if a nursing infant is threatened by its mother’s next pregnancy). Muslim

physician scholar, Ibn Sina (d. 1037 A.C) contends, “At times it may be necessary

to have an abortion: (1) when the pregnant woman is young and small and it is

feared that child birth would cause her death, or (2) when she suffers from a

disease of the uterus (that would) make it very difficult for the fetus to emerge.”

Some religious jurists, like Sayyed El-Khounei, permit the woman to protect

herself even through undergoing abortion, if the pregnancy puts the mother’s life

in a real danger. The problem here is not a matter of primary killing; rather, it is a

matter of protecting or defending one (namely, the mother) from the impending

danger.

Thus, in accordance with the general principle of the Shari’ah (Islamic

law), that of choosing the lesser of two evils, [Known in Islamic legal terminology

as the principle of al-ahamm wa’l-muhimm (the more important and the less

important)] abortion can be performed. That is to say, on the issue of the life of

the woman, Muslims universally agree that, her life takes precedence over the life

of the fetus. This is because the woman is considered the “original source of life”,

while the fetus is only “potential life”. It would not be possible to sacrifice the

mother’s life for the life of a fetus which has not yet acquired a personality, and

has no responsibility or obligations to fulfill. Thus, on this view, abortion may be

allowed on the principle that “the greater evil (the woman’s death) should be

warded off by the lesser evil (abortion)”. As the prophet says, “when two

forbidden things come (upon a person) together, then the lesser will be sacrificed

for the greater.”17

4.4 (iv)(a) WHEN IS IT NOT PERMISSIBLE TO HAVE AN ABORTION?

100
 The Shari’ah ruling on abortion states that abortion can be done into two

stages:

(A) Abortion after the Soul (Ruh) enters the fetus.

(B) Abortion prior to the entry of the Soul into the fetus.

(A) Before mentioning the ruling on abortion with regard to these two stages, it

must be noted here, that according to the Shari’ah the Soul (Ruh) enters the fetus

on the 120th day (fourth month) from conception. The jurists (Fuquaha) base this

view about duration upon a Qur’anic verse and a statement of Allah. In the verse

Allah states the stages of development of the embryo in the womb of the mother.

The verse runs as follows:

“And verily we did create man from a quintessence (of clay). Then we

placed him (as a drop of sperm) in a place of rest, firmly fixed. Then we made the

sperm into a clot of congealed blood. Then we made out of that lump bones and

clothed the bones with flesh. Then we developed out of it another creature (by

breathing life into it). So blessed be Allah, the most marvellous creator.”18

In the Hadith recorded by the two most authentic authorities, Imam al-

Bukhari and Imam Muslim in their respective Sahih collection, the Messenger of

Allah, discuss in detail the periods elapsing between these stages, mentioned by

the holy Qur’an.

Abdullah Ibu Mas’ud narrates that the Messenger of Allah, says:

“The seed of one of you remains in the womb of the mother for forty days

in the form of a Nutfa (fertilized ovum). Then it remains like a clot for a same

number of days like a lump of flesh” (when the formation of the limbs and the

growth of the bones begin).

101
 So, the ruling on abortion in stage (A) that is, after the entry of the soul

into the fetus which is (as explained) 120th day, is that, it is totally impermissible

and tantamount to murder, as it results in the extraction of an innocent life. Infact,

this is considered to be similar to committing infanticide, which was condemned

in the holy Qur’an.

(B) Degree of sin: According to the Islamic view the degree of sin incurred varies

according to the status of pregnancy. For instance, less sin is incurred if the

abortion takes place during the early stages, while it becomes increasingly hārām

(prohibited by Allah) as the pregnancy advances till the 120th day, when abortion

is totally forbidden. But this does not imply that abortion is permissible before

120th day. With regard to stage (B) that is, prior to the entry of the Soul into the

fetus (120th day), the ruling is that, even in this case it is sin (hārām) to abort the

pregnancy. The reason for this is that, although there may not be life in the fetus,

yet the fetus is considered to be part and parcel of the mother’s body as long as it

remains in the womb. Thus just as one’s very own life and also the limbs and

organs of the human body are “trust given” by the Almighty creator, so too is the

fetus a “trust given” to the mother by Allah and, therefore, she has no right to

abort it. The only difference here seems to be that the sin of aborting the fetus will

be of a lesser degree than aborting it after 120th day; it would not be equivalent to

murder — but only a violation of the rights of a human organ entrusted to the

mother by the Almighty.

(b) Will fetal deformity justify abortion?

From the perspective of Islam, the likelihood of bearing a deformed fetus

does not allow for it to be aborted. However, therapeutic abortion may be

102
necessary when there is a concern for the life of the mother being in danger. But

even in this case, the fetus may be aborted before the spirit is breathed into it (i.e.

fourth month gestation).

Moreover, even if fetal deformity is detected, the fetus nust be allowed to

live for, according to Islam, the fetus like its mother has a right to care, protection

and life. Thus, abortion, on this ground, is strictly forbidden. Finally, if one were

to accept the ‘destiny’, that Allah has laid down, then one should not be worried

about the future of one’s deformed child.

Furthermore, if it is permissible to abort a deformed fetus, then why not is

it permissible to kill a deformed person? If fetal deformity is detected, one should

know that Allah can afflict any child with fatal disease, even though he/she has

been proven to be free of all diseases. So, accepting Allah’s destiny, one should

not be worried too much about the future of their child. Thus, even if the fetus

does have an “abnormality” the fetus must be given a chance to live.

(c) Can poverty be the cause of abortion?

Islam values human life. The holy Qur’an teaches that on the Day of

Judgment, parents who kill their children out of poverty or any other reason, will

be under trial for that crime, and their children will be witnesses against them19.

On the same ground aborting the fetus would be strictly forbidden. As the Qu’ran

voices: “Do not fear of poverty. We shall provide for them and you.20

(d) Is abortion permissible in case of rape or incest?

103
 Even if the conception is the result of a forced extra-marital union or rape,

abortion is not allowed, according to Islam, because the unborn child, has the right

to life that cannot be denied.

Undoubtedly the rape of a Muslim woman by an evil enemy is a strong

reason for her to have an abortion. For she will hate, will want to get rid of the

fetus, which is the result of an iniquitous attack. Islam, however, forbids such an

abortion. On this view, if it is decreed that the fetus should remain in her womb

for the usual term and she gives birth to it, then it will be a Muslim child, as the

Prophet says:

“Every newborn is born in a state of fitrah (the natural state of man, i.e. Islam).”21

The fitrah is the religion of Tawheed, i.e., Islam. Now, it is stated in ‘fiqh’ that

that if the parents have different religions, the child should follow the religion of

the father. But what if father is unknown? The child here will be considered a

Muslim child, and the Muslim society would be obliged to take care of his proper

upbringing. They should not leave this burden on the mother, for any woman who

is raped is not guilty of any sin, since the situation is beyond her control.

Thus we find that, abortion is generally forbidden according to Islamic

teachings. It is permissible under certain circumstances if carried out before

ensoulment at the fourth month of gestation and even after that only to save the

life of the mother. Traditionally, the well-being of the mother was the sole

consideration for abortion. Currently, however, some Islamic countries, and

certain Sunni and Shiite scholars, have permitted abortions when the fetus is

detected with congenital disorders that are profoundly debilitating, or not

104
compatible with life, or when there are serious, economical hardships on the part

of the mother involved in the carrying of a child to term.

4.5 HINDU VIEW ON ABORTION

4.5(i) INTRODUCTION

Hinduism is one of the world’s oldest religions, and has over nine hundred

million followers worldwide. There is no single doctrine of Hinduism, nor is there

any single recognized founder or teacher. Hindus believe in a universal, eternal

soul called Brahman, who is the creator and is present in everything. However,

they also believe in and worship other deities, each of which exhibits different

attributes of the Supreme Being, the Brāhman. Hindus also believe in Karma and

the idea that the Soul passes through a cycle of successive lives, each incarnation

being dependent upon how the previous life was lived.

One of the main teachings of the Hindu religion is to “do no harm”. The

Hindu medical ethics stems from this principle of non-violence or ahi§sā. Thus,

when considering abortion, the Hindu way would be to choose that action that will

bring about the least harm to all involved: mother, father, fetus as well as the

society.

Now, from time immemorial, Hindus have considered children to be the

gift of God. They believe that all life is sacred because all creatures are

manifestation of the Supreme Being.

Thus, Hinduism is generally opposed to abortion. It would be acceptable

only when it is necessary to save the mother’s life. Classical Hindu texts

demonstrate strong opposition to abortion. One text compares abortion to the

105
killing of a priest, while another considers abortion a worse sin than killing one’s

own parents.

Traditional Hinduism and even many modern forms regard the production

of offspring as a “public duty” to continue the family and produce new members

of society, rather than as an individual expression of personal choice. Thus, many

Hindus see abortion as a breach of duty, because Hinduism teaches that abortion,

like any other acts of violence, thwarts a soul in its progress towards the ultimate,

God. Hinduism teaches that the fetus is a living conscious person which deserves

care and protection. Let us now discuss the Hindu view on abortion from different

perspectives.

4.5 (ii) IS ABORTION PERMISSIBLE WHEN CONSCIOUSNESS ENTERS INTO THE

BHRŪöA (FETUS)

The Hindu view of a person is the central theme of the Hindu scriptures. In

Hinduism, the human person is a product of two principles: Spirit (“ātmān”,

“puruùa”) and matter or “prakçti”.22 The “ātmān” is actionless, self-dependent,

sovereign, all pervading, and omnipresent; that it has conscious control over the

body and witnesses its doings.”23 The body or “prakçti” is made of five

“mahabhutas”: earth (kùiti), water (ap), fire (teja), wind (marut), space (vyom).24

According to the Caraka Sa§hitā, a Hindu medical text, “conception occurs when

intercourse takes place in due season between a man of unimpaired semen and a

woman whose generative organ, (menstrual) and womb are unvitiated —when,

infact, in the event of intercourse, thus described, the individual soul (jiva)

descends into the union of semen and (menstrual) blood in the womb in keeping

with the (Karmically produced) psychic disposition (of the embryonic matter)”25

106
Caraka Sa§hitā maintains that “the conscious principle is active in the fertilized

egg, directing its growth right from conception. Thus there is no justification for

making any qualitative distinction between different stages of pregnancy. Since

fetus acquires personhood, that is to say, the embryo contains both “atman” and

“prakçti” from the time of conception, killing it would be more than “taking out

an appendix”. There is, however, a minor tradition in Hinduism that puts the

joining of the Spirit with matter closer to the time of “viability” of fetus. The

Garbha Upanishad describes this developmental view, “. . . in the fifth month, the

back and spine form; in the sixth month, nose, eyes and ears develop. In the

seventh month the ensoulment takes place, and in the eighth month it is complete

in every part.”26 However, both tradition forbid abortion at any point during

pregnancy.27

The Viùõu Purāõa describes consciousness in the womb:

“An individual soul (jantu), possessing a subtle body (sukumāratanu) resides in

his mother’s womb (garbha), which is imbued with various sorts of impurity

(mala). He stays there being folded in the membrane surrounding the fetus (ulba).

He experiences severe pains, tormented immensely by the food his mother takes,

incapable of extending (prasāraõa) or contracting (ākunčana) his own limbs and

reposing amidst a mud of faeces and urine. He is unable to breathe. Yet, being

endowed with consciousness (sacaitanya) and thus calling to memory many

hundreds (of previous) births, he resides in his mother’s womb with great pains

being bound by his previous deeds.”28

107
 More evidences can be adduced in favour of the view that the fetus is not

just a piece of flesh but a sentient being having “conscious experiences”29 The

fetus suffers “garbhaduhkþa” (suffering of residence) and remembers all its

previous lives and reincarnations, trapped in the cycle of “karma” and “rebirth”.

Evidences of the consciousness of the fetus can also be found in the Mahābhārata.

Arjuna’s son learnt many of the secret of the art of war in the womb when Arjuna

described the secrets of war to his wife. If the fetus has a soul then abortion also

interferes with its path of salvation. Not being allowed to be born and given a

chance to do good “karma”, the fetus is done a grave injustice.30 Abortion,

therefore, violates not only “karma”, but also “dharma” as it forces an “untimely

death”31 of the fetus.

The embryo is not just an extension of the mother’s flesh, but is an

independent soul that is reincarnated in her. She is, however, only a vessel. The

embryo/fetus then is not a private concern of the mother alone and abortion cannot

be allowed on that ground.

4.5(iii) HINDU SCRIPTURES ON ABORTION

Hindu scriptures and tradition have, from the earliest times, condemned

the practice of abortion, except when the life of the mother was in danger. These

scriptures refer to abortion as garbhapāta (womb killing) and bhrūna hatyā.

Manusa§hitā forbids abortion as one of the worst acts. Rg Veda32 too begs for

protection of fetuses. The Kaushitaki Upanishad33 draws a parallel between

abortion and killing of one’s parents. The Atharva Veda34 remarks that the slayer

of the fetus, that is bhruõāghni, is among the greatest of sinners35.

108
 The Pañca-pātaka (five heinous acts) described by Hindu Purāõas are:

1. Brahmā-hatyā : killing of a bramin.

2. Bhrūõa hatyā : desruction of unborn fetus.

3 Surā-pāna : drinking of liquor.

4. Svarõa-steya : stealing of gold.

5. Guru-talpa-gamana: having sex with guru’s wife.

The Viùõu Purāõa, 2.6, states “He who causes abortion, plunders a town,

kills a cow, or strangles a man, goes to the Rodha hell (or that of obstruction).”36

Let us try to explain the issue, in the context of —

A. Veda

B. Dharma÷āstra and Purāõa

(A) VEDA

(a) èg veda

In the èg Sa§hitā (which embodies some of the earliest canonical scriptures of the

Hindus, possibly before 1200 B.C.), the deity Viùõu is referred to as “protector of

the child to-be”. As we have mentioned earlier, èg Veda begs for protection of

fetuses. There are prayers in the èg Veda to guard a growing embryo.

● èg Veda Hymn 11/162/ HYMNCLXII. Agni 3. That which destroys the

sinking germ [of life] the settled, moving embryo, that which will kill the

baby at birth, even this will we drive far away.

Again, the well being of the unborn is prayed for —

● èg Veda Hymn 6.78.HYMNLXXVIII. Asvins [The divine Physician Twins]

109
7. Like as the wind on every side ruffles a pool of lotuses, so stir in thee the babe

unborn, so may the ten-month babe descend.

8. Like as the wind, like as the wood, like as the sea is set astir, so also, ten-month

babe, descend together with the after-birth.

9. The child who hath for ten months’ time been lying in his mother’s side, may

he come forth alive unharmed, yea, living from the living dame, notice the

invocation of a physician, not of a priest.

Thus the èg Veda holds the woman’s self, like any part of her body; it does not

want to hurt her, she protects and develops the embryo within herself. As she

protects the embryo, so she also is protected.

(b) Atharva Veda

The Atharva Veda (equally old) expresses the same attitude towards the

unborn child, with the added implication that abortion counts amongst the most

heinous crimes.37

Evidently, the “embryo slayer” is seen as a suitable candidate to bear the

sufferings and sins of the rest of the Vedic community. The Satapatha Brāhmana

compares the reputation of those who eat beef to those who perform abortions.

Infact, according to this text, the person who extracts the embryo is called an evil

doer, while the Upanishads place him in the category of thieves and outcastes38.

(B) DHARMA SĀŚTRAS AND PURĀöA

● Parashara Smçti 4.20; as per 1.24 compares abortion to a sin twice greater than

that committed by killing a brāhmaõa. There is no atonement for this sin.

110
● Further woman becomes an outcaste by obtaining abortion.(Gautama

Dharma÷āstra (21.9)). Infact, the worst penalty that could be inflicted upon a

member of the traditional Hindu Society was to make her an outcaste; it also

had tragic implications on one’s prospects for spiritual liberation.

● In the code of Manusa§hitā (5.89-90), libations of water shall not be offered to

those who neglect the prescribed rites and who cause an abortion, or kill their

husbands or drink spirituous liquor.

● In a number of nights equal to the member of months after conception, a

woman is purified from an abortion (Viùõu Smçti 22.25). This refers to

miscarriage since: The impurity of a miscarriage lasts for the number of days

and nights equal to the number of months from conception. (Gautama

Dharma÷āùtra 14.17-18, similarly Manu Smçti 5.66).

The Brahma Khaõóa (5.10) of Padma Purāõa states that, women who have

abortions are often damaged psychologically and /or physically. Pregnancy is not

just the result of sex. It is also the result of divine will.

“pūrva janmani ya nāri bhrūõa hatyām ca yo narah

kuryat sa mçta vatsa ca mçta vatso bhared dhruvam.”

That is to say, any woman who, in previous births had an abortion, would

certainly have a dead child born to her in this life. (Padma Purāõa, Brahma

Khaõóa 5.18).

All these evidences indicate that abortion or the killing of a fetus was a

great sin (mahāpāpa).

111
 “Yatpāpām brahmahatyayā§ dviguõa§ garbhapatane.
Prāyaścitta§ na tasyāsti tasyāstyāgo vidhiyote”(Parā÷ar süçti 4/20).

As mentioned already, there is no atonement for the sin of abortion. Parā÷ar süçti

insists that, there is no prāyascitta for this mahāpāpa and in such a case woman

has to be abandoned (Parityāga). (Parā÷arsüçti 4/20);

Manusüçti holds that—

“Bhrūõdnāvekùita§ caiva sa§spçùta§ cāpyudkyayā.

Patratriõahvalīra§ ca śuõa
Sa§spçùñmeva ca”. (Manusüçti 4/208).

‘It is immoral to see the woman who has committed abortion (garbhapātkāri), to

touch a woman during the menstruation, and to receive food touched by the birds

and dogs.’

Some slokas have been quoted in the following way—

“Pūrve januùi yā nāri garbhaghātakāri hyabhūt.

garbhahapāten duhkþārta sāhatra janmani jāyate.” (477/1)

‘Vandheya§ yā mahābhāga pracchati sva§ prayojanam.

garbhapātratā pūrve januùyatra phala§ tvidam”

(659/1. 856/1, 921/1, 1857/1).

This text also contains injunctions against abortion, as well as protections for

pregnant women. In the Viùõudharma Sūtra (“sacred-law Book of viùõu”), killing

either fetus or mother is equated to the worst crime possible in Hindu Society,

namely killing a Brāhman:39

The Pūrāõas’ prophecy for Kali Yuga states, “Everyone will be miserable

owing to the dominance of vice and Tamoguõa; people will freely commit

abortion. Earth will be valued only for her mineral treasures. Money alone will

112
confer nobility. Power will be the sole definition of virtue. Pleasure will be the

only reason for marriage. Lust will be the only reason for womanhood. Falsehood

will win out in disputes.”40

Thus, all these traditional views prove that the practice of abortion was

morally condemnable in Hindu culture.

Even in modern times, we find, India’s greatest apostle of non-violence,

Gandhiji, contends: “It seems to me clear as day light that abortion would be a

crime.”41 Infact, some Hindu religious leaders go further and regard all forms of

contraceptives as act of abortion, because they interfere with nature’s arrangement

and, therefore, result in unfavourable Karmic reaction.

Thus from the above discussion we may conclude that according to the

Hindu Śāstras abortion is absolutely forbidden. It is a pāpa, a sin. The Śāstras are

very clear that abortion means killing a child. Birth is the appearance of the more

developed human form.

It is not the beginning of human life, for life begins with fertilization. Birth

and death are beyond one’s control, for they depend on God’s will. Thus on this

view no one has the right to destroy another to suit his/her convenience.

4.5(iv) ABORTION AFFECTS — KARMA, REBIRTH AND LIBERATION AND

VIOLATES THE PRINCIPLE OF AHIMSĀ

According to the Hindu view abortion is the evil of the worst magnitude,

and cannot be supported. The Indian philosophers, however, make a distinction

between ‘bhrūõahatyā’ and ‘garbhapāta’. They hold that garbhapāta (miscarriage)

which is sometimes an involuntary action may be considered as a morally

permissible action. But bhrūõa-hatyā (fetus-killing) which is deliberate or

113
intentional termination of pregnancy, cannot be morally acceptable, except in the

circumstance when the mother’s life is threatened. On this view the practice of

abortion is morally forbidden on the following grounds:

(a) Abortion disturbs the natural and necessary cycle of karma and rebirth.

(b) Abortion infringes upon the individual’s future prospect of being enlightened

or liberated.

(c) Abortion goes against the notion of jīvan-mukti, which is maintained by some

of the schools of Indian philosophy.

(d) Lastly, abortion violates the principle of ahi§sā, the cardinal principle of

Indian philosophy and culture.

Let us clarify these grounds a little

(a) Abortion disturbs the natural and necessary cycle of karma and rebirth.

Hinduism has traditionally believed that a soul is reincarnated and enters the

embryo at the time of conception. According to the doctrine of reincarnation,

fetus does not develop into a person, but is a person from the very early stage,

and should be treated accordingly. That is why the doctrine of reincarnation

can be used to make a strong case against abortion because, if the fetus is

aborted, the soul with it suffers a major karmic setback and is deprived of the

opportunities and potentialities to earn good karma and be free of the cycle of

rebirth.

(b) Abortion infringes upon individuals prospect to be enlightened or

liberated.

and

(c) Abortion also goes against the notion of jīvan mukti.

114
 According to the doctrine of ‘jīvan-mukti’ an individual can be

liberated from re-birth by doing good Karma. Thus, if a fetus is aborted

before its birth it cannot live a productive life, and is also deprived of the

opportunities of being liberated from rebirth. (jīvan-mukta).

(d) Abortion goes against the notion of ahi§sā.

According to the Hindu view, life is manifestation of the Supreme Being

(Brahma). Thus it is wrong to kill not only living beings but also the

embryos, which possess the living souls. The principle of ahi§sā or non-

violence forms the cardinal principle of Hindu philosophy. Infact, Hindu

medical ethics stems from this principle of non-violence or ahi§sā.

In conclusion we may note that Hindu ideology makes an exception in the

case where, to save the life of the mother, abortion becomes necessary. The

Suùrutā Sa§hitā, describes a procedure of inducing birth during complications in

the pregnancy, that is, when the fetus is known to be defective, or there is danger

of the fetus dying, or even a danger to the life of the mother. The ultimate

objective is, of course, saving the lives of the mother and the child. However, in

the event of this being not possible, the text (Suùrutā Sa§hitā) affirms, saving the

mother should take precedence over that of the child, and an abortion would be

justified.

This serves as an evidence against the possible assertion that, the real basis

for an anti-abortion attitude in Hindu Society stems solely from social goals

related to providing sons for the family and, therefore of the caste. For if that were

true, and the moral sentiment played no role, then surely the mother would have

been considered less important than the child.

115
4.5 (v) PRĀYAŚCITTA

Although Hindu dharma stands against the practice of abortion yet for the

woman who commits abortion, under special circumstances, the religion also

prescribes the atonement (Prāya÷citta). What is the prāya÷citta, the penance, to be

done to atone for abortion? One that works very well in this modern age is to

adopt a child, raise it with tender loving care, believing this soul to be akin to the

aborted soul.

116
 REFERENCES

1. Baptists for Life: www. bfl.org.

2. Origin of “fetus”, http/www.wordwizard.com accessed 27-5-11.

3. Sagan Carl, The dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human

intelligence, New York: Random House, 1977, 196.

4. discussed on section 1.2 of chapter-1 of this thesis paper.

5. The Dharani Sutra of the Buddha on Longevity, The Extinction of Offences,

And the Protection of Young Children, p. online.

6. Vinaya The Four Disrobing Offences, p. 1 online.

7. The Symbol of Buddhism is a wheel with eight spokes. This represents the
Eight fold-path. Each Buddhist is supposed to follow the “Noble Eight fold
Path” which represents:

(1) Right understanding (2) Right Thought. (3) Right speech (4) Right
Action (5) Right Livelihood (6) Right Effort (7) Right Mindfulness (8) Right
Concentration.

8. The Tibetan Spiritual Leader Dalai Lāmā voiced the unorthodox and
controversial view that: “Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is
an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the
circumstances. If the unborn child be retarded or if the birth creates serious
problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I
think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each
circumstance”.

9. Making such ethical decision is tremendous personal responsibility,

however, and one’s motivation is crucially important.

Most of the studies on Buddhism and abortion to date have focused on

Japan, especially the popular ritual called ‘mizuko kuyo’, and its American

117
 adaptations. Since reliable methods of contraception are not readily available
in Japan, abortion has becomes the principal means of birth control, with
Japanese women often undergoing six or more abortions. The ‘mizoko’
rituals represents a way of these women to cope with the grief, loss and
shame they feel as a consequence. Those who have experienced abortion or
loss of a child may pray to Jizo Bodhisatva, a supreme being regarded as a
protector of women and children, and transfer merit or offer prayers to
comfort the Spirits of the departed. Although these beliefs and practices are
not found in Buddhist canons, and are in no way typical of practices in other
Buddhist countries and cultures, they provide a way for women, who have
experienced abortion, to come to terms with their decision.

10. The ancient religion of Japan was shintoism; the belief the nature contains
many spirits called Kami.

11. Abbasi M. Abortion. Tehran: Hoghooghi Publication, (Farsi); 2003, p. 33-35

and Abortion: The Islamic view. http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/
abortion/religislam 2, shtml (Accessed on April 10 2007).

12. El Ashi A. Islam and Abortion. Muslim World League, Canada Office.
http://www.momin.com/abortion/ (Accessed on April 10 2007).

13. Abbasi M. Abortion. Tehran: Hoghooghi Publication, (Farsi); 2003, p.33-35.

14. Khamenci A (Grand Ayatollah). Fatwas. http:/www. leader, ir/(Accessed on

April 15 2007) and 19 Fazel-Lankarani M (Grand Ayatollah). Fatwas.
http:/www. Lankari.org (Accessed on April 15 2007)

15. Ministry of Health of Islamic Republic of Iran, Deputy of Health, scientific

documents regarding abortion (the proposed guide lines) 2005.

16. Abdul Fald Mohsin Ebrahim. Abortion, Birth Control and Surrogate
Parenting: An Islamic Perspective. n.p.: American Trust Publication, 1989.

17. al-Ashbah wa al-Naza’ir, p.98.

118
18. Surahal-Mu’minum, 12/13/14.

19. See Qu’ran 81:8-9.

20. Qu’ran 17:31.

21. Narrated by al-Bukhaari.

22. Francis C.M. 1992. “Ancient and Modern Medical Ethics in India”.
Transcultural Dimensions in Medical Ethics. ED. Pellegrino, E.D.,
University Publishing Group. 175-196.

23. Lipner, Julius J. “On Abortion and the Moral Status of the Unborn”, in
Hindu Ethics, edited by Coward, Lipner, and Young. State University of
New York, Albany. 1989. 41-69.

24. Desai, Prakash N. (1988) “Medical Ethics in India”, Journal of Medicine and
Philosophy, 13.3:231-255.

25. qtd. in Lipner 1989. 53-54.

26. qtd. in Lipner 1989. 54.

27. Lipner 1989. 55.

28. Lipner 1989. 55.

29. Lipner 1989. 41-69

30. Lipner 1989. 43

31. Lipner 1989. 41-69.

32. 7.36.9, RVP, 2469.

33. 3.1 UPR, 774.

34. 6.113.2 HE, 43.

35. 6.113.2.

119
36. Wilson, 1840, p. 208, sacred-texts.com.

37. Hindu Ethics: Purity, Abortion and Euthanasia, p. 43.

38. Lipner 1989, p. 43-44.

39. Hindu Ethics: Purity, Abortion and Euthanasia, p. 44.

40. The Sanskçt Purāõas by Cornelia Dimmitt, pp. 1-2 online.

41. Abortion is bad karma: Hindu perspective by Vasu Murti and Mary Krane
Derr.

120