In (some) Christian terms, the concept of Original sin stems from Adam and Eve having sinned by eating the fruit of forbidden knowledge and thus being cast out of the garden of Eden having to suffer in the world. As such, everyone that’s a descendent of Adam and Eve are born from this idea or story or narrative that we’re the progeny of sinners and paying off this bloodline of karmic debt. Then Jesus comes in and sacrifices himself to clear that debt of original sin and cleanse man of the concept of being born with sin among other things.
This is a very abbreviated and abridged take, so take it as superficial. Additionally, some other theologians might argue that the original sin came from something else, prior to the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross. Additionally Gnosticism and other theories exist, so do try to understand that the term ‘Christian’ is rather far and wide in meaning nowadays.
As such, now that a newborn is born, it’s often depicted with iconography of holiness, purity, and innocence. A sort of continuation and homage to the idea that original sin is no longer.
However, there are some Christian traditions, fractal denominations, or even theologian offshoots that espouse the way to being saved is through Jesus Christ and believing in him as the savior. Which in some perspectives is antithetical to the idea of dying on the cross to remove the original sin concept. Because if you pose that hell exists, and that salvation is through Christ to avoid hell, then by virtue one may espouse that we’re all sinners bound to hell if not for somehow accepting an entity as a savior even after the sacrifice had been made, and ergo the sacrifice of dying on the cross wasn’t enough for everyone. But to be clear, there is a difference between being born with sin and living a life of sin.
Essentially the idea is that Jesus died to remove this concept of being born with sin.
And this is an important concept, because this plays out in various ways throughout modern history.
Loosely speaking if we were to redefine original sin, as not the sin of origin of mankind, but rather the origin of our birth into being in this material world. Then Original Sin means that the sin you are born with rather than the origin of all of mankind. This is an important and distinct distinction, one is of humanity, and the other is of the self (applicable to all of humanity).
Original sin of mankind vs. Personal Original sin since ‘birth’
Debts
In the United States, generally speaking it is illegal or against the law to incur generational debts, however, in most of human history that wasn’t the case. If I recall, parts of South Africa have generational debt inheritance. If it weren’t for laws that restricted generational debt, a loan shark or thug would find the will or ‘interest’ to collect past dues and past rents from any survived by members of the family.
Point being, a caste system is also a form of debt inheritance, where serfs are obligated to owe taxes and such to the higher classes of nobility, and the nobility had some form of noblesse oblige in which they were obligated to respond to their people in a reciprocal relationship (even though it wasn’t always honored both ways).
Within many caste systems, there would be slaves or a slave caste. Which is rather antithetical to the idea of humans being created equal or the concept of absolving original sin. Because if you were born a slave, chances are in various times throughout history, you would die a slave without any upward mobility in class or status or social strata.
If humans all descended from Adam and Eve, then any form of human slavery would be enslaving your brothers and sisters. Perhaps that’s why the meta-narrative on slaves being viewed as sub-human or non-human to justify the idea of cattle or ‘chattel’ slavery, and perhaps that was also the justification for having kings be granted a class or station above others.
There’s a lot of theories on why Kings were given the ‘right to rule’ based on bloodline lineage or achievements, ultimately meaning that the right to rule for a king was either granted by the people or by a divine decree. Which is very popular to rely on in both East and Western spheres of influence, a divine decree. This person became king or queen because god willed it so, if not then who challenges them under the same heavens?
In a way, the weight of the crown being a heavy burden that was passed down the succession of bloodlines can be argued to be another form of original sin, but of course not a lot of people would view that as a ‘sin’. Yet the pressures that the nobility faced were very real, and many ended themselves in madness. How many crowned princes were merely killed for being the crowned prince? How many of them died outside of nobility?
Typically if multiple royal bloodlines exist then there can be possible contention to the rights to the throne. The theory is that all collateral bloodlines had a closer degree to being a ‘true monarch’ as compared to others, because they had that ‘hidden something’ in their blood that legitimized their right to rule (be it divine or some other belief). Therefore leaving any kin alive, even those without the rank of nobility, could lead to problems if their future generations continued the bloodline. This creates a cause for concern from both a political and spiritual perspective. As such, most royal families and dynasties tied loose ends of collateral bloodlines, or kept them under tight surveillance, and snuff any claim to the throne to rally the factions and consolidate power.
Lots of fratricide in regicide- when it comes to bloodlines and playing kingmaker.
Depending on the period and system, there are points in time where kings and rulers had an average shorter lifespan than the very same slaves in their empires. I guess from another perspective, slaves were viewed as tools and thus people tended to want them not dead, as opposed to a king, where a king is useful in two states, dead or alive. The Crown was more of a hot seat for the next useful idiot to sit, until they were assassinated and exchanged for a new puppet. Of course, some kings broke through the marionette, but not all kings or slaves can escape the chains that bind them.
So it’s not all good to be the king.
Bloodlines by definition are something that you’re born into, whether a gift or a curse, a boon or a hex, it can be argued as a original sin or obligation. The weight of the chains, or the crown, both a heavy burden.
The story typically results into; Being born a slave, die a slave. Born a king-candidate, die a king or on the way to the crown. Yet death finds you equal and your skeleton alone neither tells them apart. For perhaps they are one and the same.
In another light, being born with a ‘destiny’ for something you have an obligation to fulfill, is another form of original sin.
Reparations
One of the ideas that follow debt, is not the debt of a family lineage but one of a tribe or a nation. Reparations are compensation or amends given for an injury or wrong which can occur between individuals or private parties to include that of nations and conglomerates. They are a form of giving back to the people to make amends for past grievances, typically done to repay the damaged party in one lump sum or over a period of time.
The problem being, that if the payment is over a long enough period of time, and causes the next generation to owe that debt, then they could likely see it as generational debt where we are paying for the sins of our forefathers and thus are creating a new financial original sin.
If your grandparents lost a war, would you feel good about paying debts for something that didn’t even happen while you were alive? Would you feel justified in being born with a debt or new original sin merely for being born?
You can research how post World War 1, treaty of Versailles treated the Germans. They didn’t start World War 2 based on vibes alone.
When the terms of a deal or contract is beyond reason and passed down to the future generations, the natural instinct is rebellion. You can also see how the system of Social Security in the United States is facing rebellion from the younger and newer generations, not wanting to pay into a system with no guarantees of being around amongst other persisting issues.
The short and simple is that people don’t want to pay debts for other people, especially for having owed the debts for merely being born.
In terms of White Privilege
White Privilege is a sort of new original sin manufactured by the liberal arts colleges and mindsets of critical race theory proponents. The narrative is; because you were born with advantages in life for the color of your skin, you are now somehow responsible as both victim and perpetrator to pay back reparations to society and cultural self-policing.
These advantages also include societal perspectives, from white-monkey do-nothing jobs in Asia, to simply existing in white dominant societies and culture. As such, regardless of wealth, your skin color is a new justification for your privilege and advantages, even if you haven’t actually reaped any advantages or privileges.
I think it’s bunk and racist. To hold someone to a different standard based on the color of their skin, and to expect them to act or be treated differently based on that.
Let alone to write off an entire person as an advantaged or privileged person merely for the color of their skin and not the content of their character or past actions. It’s quite literally racist.
But the point is, that this form of racism is a new original sin. People exist and are trying to undermine specific people based on tribe or nation or creed merely for being born.
In terms of -isms
The idea of being born a specific skin color or gender resulting in racism or sexism is another form of original sin. That we’re born slightly different and thus we are artificially limited by societal rules or norms to keep specific castes of people in roles or stations, whether it’s to die in the front lines as a slave, or relegated to house work as a slave.
It goes back to the idea of kings and slavery in terms of bloodline, if we’re merely born a different location or race or gender or whatever, and are subject because of those things, then it creates a dynamic of original sin. That we are to pay off this lifetime burden that we were shackled with the moment we were born.
The burden of an identity for being born a specific way. To be of a specific tribe or skin color or gender or anything else, is an identity assigned to us at birth. As such, this identity can become a sort of boon or hex, a blessing or a curse. An original sin in the specific light.
In a meritocracy, skill and efficiency and results would be rewarded. The idea of the contents of the character rather than the cover of the book.-
As such, the original sin here is the predispositioning people based on the cover of their look. Pre judgement, is pre-judice, or pre-judicial. To rule out without due process.
In terms of Capital Punishment
There is the idea that we don’t get to choose where or whom we are born to. That it’s not a choice. Other people believe differently, but generally speaking we have very limited materialistic means to prove whether we do or don’t choose our birth parents and our lives. As such, I’m going to follow the narrative that we don’t choose our birth parents or life prior to living it as the template for further discussion.
If we go along with the idea that birth isn’t a choice, then naturally why should we incur debts which are man made and assigned? You could additionally argue that sins or even criminal punishments are also man made and subjectively and artificially assigned.
As such, the Idea of Capital punishment or execution is a prevalent draconic measure in many countries to institute harsh methods to instill law and order. In a low trust society, people trust in the idea of death more than their neighbors, hence these laws would rapidly overturn the lawlessness if adhered properly (although I’m not making a moral argument for such).
Point being, sometimes Capital punishment is enacted on generations. If one person does a crime, their neighbors and peers and family above and below get executed per X number of generations.
In this sense, you are collectively paying for a sin of someone else by mere association. For those who die based on being related, then you can imagine that- the only sin was that you were born related. As such that is akin to an original sin.
A sin based on birth. Punished for association based on birth.
In another collective term
Collective punishment is also a war crime under the Geneva Conventions. Not that that matters seeing as most nations disregard it.
To collectively punish one ethnic group or an entire family or an entire group based on the actions of individuals is (generally agreed upon as) wrong, and it further reinforces the point that it is a punishment for mere associations which, for bloodlines, is not a choice.
With the rise of COINTEL PRO and other agent provocateurs, an ‘easy’ fascistic route would be to implant saboteurs to justify the labeling of a group as a terroristic threat and to have it’s members subsequently disband or be collectively punished to stifle political opposition (which is antithetical to freedom of assembly). I’m not agreeing with this, I’m just saying it’s a thing and it technically has happened and probably will continue to happen. I’m just a political realist, cynicality is a byproduct.
So an entire group is charged with a crime via mere association, and that is a form of collective punishment. If one was to be born in this group, then they’d be punished with them.
Whether it’s a government raid on a private group or another nation attacking another nation or tribe, this can be viewed as a form of collective punishment or sin by mere association through birth. In this sense, I am conflating the idea of being collective punishment being that of charging an entire group as well as a declaration of war from another nation.
Sending the ATF and Fed Bois to essentially fire bomb a building with family members inside, killing young children and babies in a Waco event, is essentially the same things as collective punishment and generational execution.
Ethnic cleansing of a whole tribe or people based on blood lines or generation is also a collective punishment.
Point being, the original sin can be viewed as being born into a house destined to be firebombed or being born in a tribe destined to be executed by the government.
Collective punishment for mere association, means you were punished for merely existing in tandem with another existence. Therefore it’s an original sin in a way, because it punishes you for existing.
If someone, government or otherwise, want’s to kill you for merely existing, then I’d argue that your existence is a defiance to them and that they would view that as a sin. Whether you are a heathen or infidel or terrorist or born in the wrong place at the wrong time, or whatever. You can argue that these collective forms of punishment and war declarations are akin to original sin. People sinned for merely existing, I’d argue that’s an original sin.
For National-ism
Nations might conscript or impress people to service or indentured servitude as a sin for being born as a national citizen. A socially implied contract that a Citizen has a civic duty for X, Y, and Z.
The British Royal navy used to drug, blackout, beat up, and kidnap young men onto British ships as ‘impressment’ to ‘impress’ them into service. Most of these kids never got to say goodbye or see their family ever again. (This added to the many reasons piracy was huge and rampant)
Many Feudalism states used to conscript peasants and farmers with mediocre farming equipment to bolster numbers and fight. Fluffing the size of conscripts by having stand in soldiers to look somewhat put together as a moral booster and psychological attack against the enemy.
In both the United States and Nazi Germany, many young men were drafted into the war efforts. With many people denying the conscription and also running away or fleeing to other countries neighboring their own. Ukraine has similar issues. More Nations have similar issues.
If you have the resources to flee and seek refuge in another nation, then you’re in another nation and are responsible for their rules and obligations. If you naturalize and become a citizen then you are also subject to their civic duty requirements. If all of the world is captured by the interests of nations and you can’t escape that label or idea of civic duty, then by virtue, you are born in a world where national citizenship is an original sin that is infectious to the lands. You can’t escape it because there’s no land left, or if you evade it then you’re punished for it.
Thus I pose the idea that being told to fight in a war by a government based solely on the birth right or naturalization citizenship is a form of original sin. Some people in government want you to be armed and trained and sent over as troops to fight people you’ve never personally met- to the death, mind you- for some war efforts, resources, or ideologies. Whether it be Poland, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Libya, etc.
You have to work for X person or entity because you were born in the wrong place or wrong time with a specific status (citizenship) and now have to fight even against your will. I’d argue that’s an original sin.
Is citizenship by being born itself an original sin? Possibly, it is a boon with strings attached, and if the strings become heavy enough it can be viewed as more of a burden than a boon.
In terms of United States’ Debt
The United States owes an absurdly large trillions of amount of Dollars and everyone is taxed to pay down not even a modicum of the interest that are in the ballpark of hundreds of Billions.
As such, the taxes rise continuously to pay off a debt that is never able to be paid off. Arguably these tax hikes are a form of collective punishment to pay for the fiduciary sins of those before us. The Collective being the nation, and the punishment being more taxes.
This in turn punishes people for existing and thus they are paying taxes to pay off a debt that appears to only grow and not shrink based on previous government spending and deficit ceiling raises. A game of financial can kicking and fiduciary musical chairs.
If we look throughout history, other nations faced similar situations such as the Weimar Republic, in which the post war reparations and ‘treaty of Versailles’ instituted a massive amount of debt that disenfranchised generations. (as mentioned earlier)
If you look at it from an esoteric angle, the debt of a nation per it’s generation is akin to debt slavery. And if a debt slave decides to uprise and no longer honor or pay their debts, which is common in the subsequent generations, then they would rebel and institute a new order for the financial system or accounting or balance of ledger. It’s a natural human thing to go against unjust powers. It’s also unnatural to be born to a international caste system between nations.
From a psychological perspective (or sociological), if you continuously ignore and mock and meet with derision the demands of one entity, they will turn inward and through spite they may manifest outward excursions or acts of violence. Whether that entity is a bullied individual gone postal or a bullied nation radicalized to supremacy and a rejection of the world order. It appears our natural human response is either to die in a suffering silence or to reject the world entirely. To go out with a whimper or a bang.
In another idea, the form of debt forgiveness or a national debt jubilee is an interesting concept that can absolve the nation of it’s financial burdens in terms of original sin. It has some problems attached so it’s not rainbows and butterflies, but it has been used in other civilizations and empires. So a debt jubilee is a way to absolve the financial obligations or this specific peculiar original sin.
Jokingly on the internet, people joke to find a random person as a scape goat and place all the US debt on that person and have them die for everyone else’s financial sins. Akin to a monetary or financial Jesus.
In terms of Wealthism
If I were to say “fuck the poor” and you feel offended, then that’s shadow work and a you problem.
If I were to say “fuck the rich” and you feel offended, then that’s more shadow work and a you problem.
Dark shadow work -stare at your own reflection- jokes aside-
The point is, people find themselves in situations where they are on a relative position on the axiomatic spectrum of “rich and poor”. Between have and have-nots, and therefore people judge based on this positional scaling system. Some people are born into poverty, and some people are born super rich.
To assign a curse or a hex based on one’s upbringing is also a form of original sin. Your sin is being poor. Your sin is being rich. People may judge you based on your background, some people don’t trust you simply because you were born a poor orphan as a rag and lived a life of squalor. Other people won’t trust you because you were born with a golden spoon and your ancestral lineage has a strong backing in being a part of all the same clubs that maintain the status quo.
As you can reasonably see, those on either side would judge based on the background and lineage. From having no lineage and no track record of a creed, to having one painted on top the assumed blood or exploitation of others. In totality, it’s not really about the wealth in this version of original sin, more or less how the wealth was accumulated and how much of that is blamed on you for being merely born.
It’s quite insulting to think someone born from poverty can’t have a meritorious or fortuitous encounter to rise and accumulate wealth. As if being born poor was the equivalent of some sort of genetic disability. This form of original sin, is like a financial ableist take, to view people as inferior for being born to some arbitrary measure of wealth.
It’s a destructive duality if we tether strongly our identity and value to these socio-economic labels. If you have hatred for someone being better off because of the system yet also see it as pity for someone being abused because of the system, then that’s equally the same thing in terms of leaps of logic. Meaning hating someone for benefiting from the system while pitying someone for suffering under it is the same logical leap. You’d be blaming someone for being born in a subjective relational position to this idea or ideology of wealth. It’s stupid (my opinion) but alright.
Imagine who determines who is rich or poor? It’s subjective. Do you chastise yourself for being born rich or poor? In relation to what? The world? The Universe? Your local village? Were you born slightly more north or south of this ideological arbitrary point? And is being born this way is an original sin that you ought to repent for the rest of your life?
Does a person’s origins make the person bad because they benefit from the system? You can’t blame both the system and the person only when it’s favorable to your narrative. That’s biased reasoning and quite frankly short sighted.
You can blame the system or the people, but if you blame the system and the people only when it fits your narrative or bias, then you’re playing into the sin. Whether you hate the poor or hate the rich, if you’re biased on one side of the aisle, you’re playing into and feeding the original sin of wealth.
To hate people for merely existing, is the grandest original sin there could quite possibly be.
To try to justify your hate with some story or narrative or memory or mythos on why your hatred is justified, is just an ego-boosting massage that assuage and fluffs your bias.
Karma
Karma simply means ‘action’, and there are various teachings of karma to include cause and effect. The consequences of your actions are a karmic boomerang in the mirror universe of your reality.
Some schools of thought see Karma as something you achieve in one lifetime, others view it as a spiritual undercurrent that follows you through multiple lifetimes, and others believe that there is a morality of karma that there is good karma and bad karma. Karma, It’s a mixed bag.
Some Buddhist interpretations of karma is attachment, and to free yourself from the karmic cycle is to unbind yourself from the dharmic wheel of life and transcend to nirvana or moksha and reach the realm outside of this maya or Vidya-Video Simulation/matrix reality that we are in. (Of course, I’m using a bunch of other borrowed and loaned words from other religions and such, but they generally are different perspectives of what I subjectively view as the same thing).
As such, if we were to reincarnate and carry over the karma or the sins of our past lives, then we have original sin in a way. The ledger carries our debts into our new life, and we are met with misfortune for bad debts, or fortune for good debts. This narrative or story of reincarnation and original sin and karma is a very powerful political tool to maintain the status quo. You were born a slave because of your sins, therefore all you can be is a slave. You were born a king, therefor you have the divine right to rule because of your past life good karma.
It’s even more ‘fucked’ in a way because the average person or majority can’t materially verify this as an objective reasoning. What are you gonna do about it? Pull up someone’s past life regression block chain ledger to review whether they deserve to be a king and live in luxury?
As you can see, the idea of Karma has definitely been co-opted and used as a political weapon to enforce status quo.
It gives the story that you are to work off your debts and karmic debts in your lifetime and cycles, and that those who are wealthy are enjoying their station from their past life achievements rather than their current nepotic station. As you can see, this reinforces the status quo creating a social conservatism for a caste system or social strata.
The Carrot is being reincarnated into a heavenly state of luxury like a king. While the stick is being beaten to work off your debt to avoid being a slave in your next life.
As such, you can see how the John Lockean Humanist in me likes to reject the idea or concepts of original sin or karmic debts from previous lifetimes. Why should you pay for debts you don’t even have recollection of incurring? What sort of lesson is there? Seems a bit backwards to be given the punishment without given the reason for the punishment. If you don’t have a memory for the crimes you are allegedly working off, isn’t that like taking a test without any study material? kind of stupid, my opinion.
Of course, though, in the real world, if you were to drink to be blackout drunk and incur a large bar tab, it’s rather reasonable to pay such a debt (unless the host or hostess bar is running a yakuza racket swindling you after having drugged you via unsavory practices), but generally speaking we are indebted to our actions whether we are conscious of them or not. It’s a matter of framing in the eyes and laws of man.
However, I personally reject the notion that we have original sin that we ought to pay for any story or reason unless provided with enough convincing evidence. I mean, call me an empiricist penny-pincher for wanting evidence of the past lives and specifically what I owe.
And arguably, as time moves on and as technology gets weirder, we could be shown deep-fakes of alternate realities generated by artificial simulations to gas light us into believing we’ve committed multi-dimensional crimes and enslave us in a hyper-strange-loop of a new Samsara Matrix. Call me old-fashioned or Nu-aged, but I reject outright a metaphysical bureaucracy of debt that cannot be audited. I like the idea of truth and transparency, again, my opinion.
Honestly, humans always run rackets on everything, so I wouldn’t be surprised if we ran a racket on transhumanism ledgers, whether they are consciousness records or some other simulated realities. I mean, imagine being the scape goat or taking the fall on crimes you committed in a simulated reality, like the murders you might have partaken in during a playthrough of Multiplayer Call of Duty. Not a big fan of an elite oligarchy gatekeeping any sort of control mechanism system.
But of course, I’m just speculating. That’s not the point, the point is that Karma can be used as an original sin to maintain the ‘current harmony’ of the status quo.
In Terms of Technology
We live in a world full of technology, and after each new invention and wide adoption, we no longer can simply go back to the days of old. There is momentum for widespread adoption combined with the Fear of Missing out marketing and the competition between nations to win a technological-arms race.
After the invention of Nuclear Bombs and Nuclear Powerplants, we can no longer escape the threat of thermonuclear winter. Select Nations are armed with Weapons pointed for contingency in a cold thermonuclear war of fragile armistice based on the implied threat of reciprocity or retaliation. These Select Nations are also the gatekeepers to the national equalization of this technology as they vet who else can have a gun pointed at humanities’ head. As such, we are born into a world where there are enough nukes to destroy it, or rather humanity, many times over -And yet we build more. Is that not some form of original sin? The proliferation of Nuclear Armaments?
Likewise, after the invention and adoption of the internet worldwide, we can no longer escape the influence of the internet. Even the Amish benefit from cellphones and technology. Even remote settlements interact with people who have internet access. As such the internet or it’s indirect influences have captured the ideas or minds of many.
Even the five lane highways we put through small towns in the United States have created a road infrastructure network to promote car use. The use of automobiles has created a reliant system on petrol and oil resulting in a black-gold infecting the greed and fueling the wars of humanity amongst nations of brothers against brothers. With the mosquito sucking of oil, comes the invention of plastics and that has inevitably infected the world with polycarbonic structures littering our oceans and choking our rivers. For cheap convenience, mind you.
To be born in today’s world is to be born in the Atomic Age or Internet Age or Oil Age or Plastic Age. We are essentially carrying on the direct or indirect sins of those humans before us, our human ancestors (not bound to one particular nation). We can’t physically escape these ideas and concepts that threaten and infect our Lives.
To be fair, there is positive influences and negative influences, I’m merely painting the overly negative one to highlight it’s connection with original sin.
If you consider technology like an apple of original sin, then it’s quite a symbolic representation for what sort of sin and problems we have to wrestle with. I’m not calling out Apple the company, but also it’s not a mere coincidence, it’s more of a synchronicity. Each new technology that revolutionized our way of living also enslaves and ensnares us into a new matrix simulation construct for society, I mean, how are you even reading this article? Technology.
So, in a way, to be born in today’s age is to be born with the ongoing original sin from the works of those before us and the problems of those before us. Which is of course, natural. I mean, think about it, if you were born in a tribe with no food and that’s your struggle because the last Chieftain might have ate all the food, then you’ll have to overcome it or die. As humanity is a large not-so-unified tribe, we have to overcome the hardships that comes with plastics and oil and internet brainrot slop as well as Thermonuclear warfare. We are continuing to play the card game with the hand we were dealt by those before us, the original sin is a bad hand.
It’s a Sisyphean task, and because working to overcome this feels like a burden or suffering, perhaps that’s why we view it as a sin. A Sin that we are not born with, but rather born into.
Our task is merely to survive, but to do so with hopes of generational progeny also succeeding, we have to chip away at the burden for new solutions, and with each new solution comes more problems and complications that the “future versions of us” will have to worry about. That’s life.
When you’re born into a whole bunch of problems, people tend to either take responsibility and accountability and/or blame the previous generation or ancestors. People are already blaming baby boomers for the US housing market and economy, which, I mean, is generationalist. Generationalism is just a chronological tribalism, and i’ve covered -isms already.
Likewise, people born into the world care about their future and their progenies’ future. As such, some ideas and philosophies of ‘long-termism’ seek to make sacrifices in our life for the betterment of a promised future. This is sort of an original sin if it becomes forced or deeply implemented in the psyche, because we’re sacrificing ourselves based on our existence to pay for the debts of those unborn.
So we are born into the world as it is, and if it’s got new problems from our old solutions, that’s a form of original sin that we are born both with and into. It just is what it is, and that’s the burden we can either ignore or deal with, and eventually someone is going to feel the gravity of our solutions both long term and short term. The game of can kicking hopes that the kicker doesn’t feel the pain. This includes technology and all the advancements and regressions that come with it.
In terms of Legacy
I long hold the idea that the taboo of the book of the dead was not in peering into old stories but reliving them in our life times. That reading the book of the dead was to pick up the mantle of dead people and vicariously survive their ideas forward into the future at a possible detriment.
Of course, not all ideas that perished under those before us were bad. . . nor were they all good.
But when we are born and we learn of a story from our ancestors or someone else and live those stories as if they were factual truths, then we carry forward their ideas and pervert them in modern context to our current lives without formulating the same conclusions or aspiration. Like picking up a baton from a skeleton and running across an imaginary finish line.
If we were born into a second generation family that was making it’s trek across the United States to the promise land of Oregon on the Oregon trail, then we would essentially be adapting to the original sin in a way. We are living out the will of our forefathers and ancestors and they bind us. Which can be a good thing, but can also rob us of our personal agency. It can give us a story, a purpose, a meaning to our life, or it can combine with our story, or it can replace and consume our story, or it may be ignored to provide a new story unrelated to the grip that the dead once had. Our story being our own will or destiny our own choices that are influenced by the ideas and stories of the past we relive and revive and reanimate like the dead with each retelling and subvocalization in our head.
In this sense, the book of the dead is essentially reanimating the stories of those past to carry out their legacy. By reading into the book of the dead deeply, you become a skeleton or a robot, ready to be programmed by ideologies of the past and subvert your own agency for this grand vision from someone long gone. In this case you become like a zombie to fulfill the will of those before you.
Maybe your great grand uncle was a King of some empire and vowed for his descendants to demolish a specific country, and now you are living by that story and that decree. You carry forward the old thoughts and ways of your forefathers because that’s what they believed in, and your legacy is the history of your lineage as well as their stories carried forward to your future generations.
I mean, there’s literally holy wars and religious disputes over things that happened more than centuries ago. It’s quite the real stuff for better or worse.
In a sort of political doctrine, people are rising up and adopting politics from long gone thinkers, that of philosophers or even that of Karl Marx. In this case, people are carrying forward the ideas of communism and are survived by it via an ideological possession. In other cases, some people believe in the idea of a free market laissez faire capitalism without understanding the rise of cartelization and monopolization.-
Which, again, I’m not saying it’s good nor bad nor assigning a moral value. -Because there is merit with resolving or wrestling with these thoughts or ideas. Instead, I’m rather pointing out that the will of those long gone can be an original sin in a way. It binds our thinking to the spirits of ideological possession.
Especially if we subvert all of our agency and critical thinking faculties to the language and will of the dead. If we don’t wrestle with these ideas, then we submit to the spirit of old ideas. We would be no different from an obedient slave or reanimated corpse, acting as if we were some soulless being possessed by some dead ideas or rules.
The Book of the dead in this sense is following a dying wish for those who have departed. If you are born into that dying wish, then you can consider that mental or spiritual bondage as a form of original sin.
Other ideas such as Religion or Racism or Sexism or whatever, can also invade and infect the minds of the youth. Presenting a forwarding narrative or story that the future generations hold true, that they adopted into the idea or are born into it. Not born in the sense that they were born in a family that practice it, but rather that the idea burrows itself into the person and the person can be reborn, like a born again Christian or Aryan or Marxist or whatever. To be renewed or reinvigorated with a new lease on life, is akin to being born again, and with it can come new ‘original sins’ based on the ‘new birth’ or new narratives and mythos you subscribe to.
Essentially, the Book of the Dead is the Stories of the dead possessing us to enact their spiritual will as a spiritual successor. In this sense, it is akin to being possessed by an original sin or an originational ideology. And these ideas can justify our actions to allow us to justify committing all sorts of atrocities, gulags, crusades, jihad, holocausts, etc. Which, the atrocities themselves could be the second order action or event of the original sin of the thought.
A thought leads to action, and adopting or accepting the thought or idea is akin to the originational sin, and the action leading to real sin is the atrocity which is the manifestation of our original sin.
Genetically speaking
If you look at generational trauma in which we have trauma that can genetically and epigenetically impact our DNA. We are born with DNA with some form of memory for events occurred to us, whether it was to our parents, or whether it was during our conception or time in the womb. Many things affect us, and thus when we are born we are given a new original sin.
My brother is deaf, because my mother inadvertently took medications that had contraindications of use during her pregnancy. And this is the story my family tells to reconcile the idea of his disability with the sequence of events. It’s the meaning making we give.
As such, what happens to our DNA, whether by parents or in the womb, gives birth to us, and we carry the sins of such travesty.
In our lifetimes we may be able to solve for these issues. Perhaps we ‘cure’ being deaf. Perhaps we have a generational trauma from past lives or even ancestral DNA lineage that we have to address. Perhaps it’s spiritual or perhaps it’s chemical.
Perhaps we were gifted trauma and maladies to generate mechanisms and ways of being to further our understanding, and perhaps that’s the karmic take on why we live the way we live. Perhaps oour suffering inspires or innovates humanity as a whole.
As such, when we do the work living our lives, we resolve these traumas to free ourselves, or pass it on to the next generation. In hopes we can ‘break family curses’ or ‘generational curses’, which is akin to an original sin.
Hopefully we incur less trauma than we can handle in our lifetime, and hopefully we resolve more trauma of the ones we were born with. Ideally a net positive endeavor.
I personally do not want to resign myself to die a dog’s death without fighting, to include overturning generational trauma and breaking the bonds and bindings of original sin. Whether or not the concept of original sin is accurate in these depictions above, the words and phrases do exist, and the meaning is something we are all collectively and actively wrestling with for hopes of salvation through our own make or by an extension of some external power.
Super Niche Esoteric angle
There’s a theory floating out there that all humans were born with the right blueprint to self heal and autophagy and auto regenerate themselves into the ideal form of human that they can be. That anything from speech or mental impediments to include deformations or maligned bones and such can be healed.
It’s niche because I’m not sure how to reconcile that idea with people who were born with maladies, but I guess technically the DNA itself can be structured in a way to be the blueprint itself. So arguably that’s true, but whether the ideal form of ourselves can be unlocked via natural expression is debatable.
As such, if this theory were to be true, then the only thing holding us back is our belief and access. Our belief or story that we carry forward, these ideas infected us by our peers and loved ones -after we are born- to make us doubt our birth as a birthright and rather see it as some birth-debt or a birth sin. The essence of an Original Sin is to make us somehow lesser for merely being born or merely existing.
In this way, if we absolve ourselves of this idea that we are resigned to our assigned station or state of being or circumstances, and that we don’t have any choice or willpower to change it, then we are doomed to have the original sin as our self fulfilling prophecy.
Meaning those who are born sick or born a slave – die sick or die a slave. As such the original sin is a death sentence the moment a person comes into the knowledge or concept of it, making us give up hope and despair stuck holding onto our station or maladies.
Maybe hope is the catalyst for change. Just the idea that the issue we have or the sin we hold can be solved or absolved is worth considering, especially if it can materialize results that do benefit us. It might be worth pursuing.
Of course we have to consider what it means to ‘access’ this blueprint and have some way of genetically and spiritually recombinate our being or essence. But that’s a journey we’re discovering even now.
Again, I’m not sure if it’s true, it’s just one of those niche theories floating around.
Back to a Jesus discussion
I was discussing the other day with someone who heard a lecture about the sacrifice of Jesus and the symbolism of his blood and how Christians can receive salvation through acceptance.
I took it a step further and imagined that if there were no competing stories against the idea of original sin, then the concept of original sin would run rampant. What I’m saying is, that the concept of accepting that someone cleared your debt of original sin is an important story, regardless if you believe in Jesus or not. Regardless of whether it was a divine act or not, the meta narrative is realistic and empirically true as it’s survived by literally me retelling you. (yea, I break fourth walls all the time)
Meaning, that Christians have a story or reason or purpose to believe the power in themselves to overturn and overwrite the concepts of original sin. They have a counter narrative, a weapon to fight against meta-narrative tyrannical oppression of the original sin mythos.
What I’m trying to say is, that if we have all these meta stories and concepts about why a person has original sin, then that person has to find ways to break those mental shackles. They have to find ways to prove that birth doesn’t make one a slave or one poor or one sick for the rest of their life. That the time or area in which you’re born doesn’t set in stone your entire legacy or destiny.
So the story of Jesus absolving original sin is an important story that combats and balances out the meta-narratives in the world. If you want to go further into esoterica, consider the spiritual warfare implications and the idea of principalities governing and ruling domains of the world.
If the story of Jesus didn’t exist, and if there were no other stories of absolving original sin, then the world would be captured into darkness by ideas left and right about original sin. We’d quite literally live in a hellscape where our actions and thoughts are judged to the value or idea of an original sin that works as a mental shackle binding us like robot-slaves.
In terms of Duality, a person has to make a reason for why they don’t have original sin under a rational base to counteract the dualistic thought that they have original sin. And the story of Jesus dying on the cross to absolve humanity of original sin is an important story that shaped Western Christian doctrine and thinking and society. It definitely has inspired a lot of interpretations, arguments, schisms, reformation, and philosophy leading to John Locke and his ideas of individuality resulting in reinterpretations for what defines a ‘Human’ today.
Slavery is not always directly overt, yet it exists through matrixed systems of economic oppression. If we learn to seek the guidance from various religions, we’d come to overturn concepts of original sin, generational debt, and usury, giving us more freedom to explore. My opinion.
Physical slavery, mental slavery, and spiritual slavery exists. I’d argue that we need to understand original sin to not buy into it as a scam of sorts, to wrestle with the idea and absolve us for unjust attributions to our existence.
As such, there is an element of Original Sin that has to be overturned to overturn ideas of inequality between humans. (As described in the writings all above)
Side note
Many religions talk about some sort of blood covenant and original sin for the menstrual cycle for women. There are a lot of arguments for and against an original sin towards this, along with the idea that Eve was the first to eat the apple. However, if you look at other mammals that also have the menstrual cycle, then that doesn’t make sense. So from an macro-evolutionary standpoint, Menstrual cycles originated from something before humans. -Or from this apple interpretation, a lot of different animals ate from the same apple. Idk, just worth throwing this side piece of info here just to draw a reference.
Epilogue
Original sin broken down is either the Sin of Humanity, the Sin you are born with, or the Sin you are born into. Of course, we all have different takes on what makes a sin a sin and how to absolve ourselves from it.
Additionally, you can be reborn into sin, as an originational sin, when you adopt new ideas or read too deeply the book of the dead.
Original sin can be like a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you believe in having it, you are subject to it and subscribed under it’s tyranny. That’s the tricky thing we ought to consider when dealing with these abstract ideas or meta-narratives.
So, I detail many connections between the ideas of financial debt, generational debts, karmic life cycle debts, etc. all of which I tie with the lens of perspective of the concept of ‘original sin’. I wrestle with these ideas and I have qualms with them. I’m not here to tell you what to think, I’m merely drawing a conjecture for how I see some things as they ebb and flow from one segment to the next.
Ultimately at the end of the day, whatever you believe to be true for yourself, and what those around you in society uphold to be true, are what effects the environment you are in, and as such will reflect in the culture and your own psychology and way of life.
The story for your life is your story. The story for his life is history. Her life, herstory. The story we tell from our origins gives rise to the reason for why we can do things, and reasons can bind us to motivation towards destruction, salvation, or both.
If we know our past, and if we know our present, then we know our future direction. Like a stop motion film, we can see the current frame and the previous frame and predict the next frame. This is, in essence a perspective of the causality of the world, the universe, the will of the world, the Dao, the Flow, the state, etc.
As such, many political, philosophical, and psychological pundits want to manufacture consent for future actions by controlling the narratives, our stories, in the present, and rewriting the past, to shape and dictate our direction and future. This includes the control over the idea of original sin.
So, it’s up to you to wrestle with these ideas of original sin and karmic debts and find something that is agreeable within your heart of hearts to live life in congruent to your understanding and perspective. I’m sure as new information and truths reach you via insight or enlightenment that you find yourself either more reinforced in your position or more grounded in a new deeper understanding.
Afterall, I’m just using the concept of the phrase ‘original sin’ and drawing different parallels with many different subjects and ideas. Don’t let meta-narratives rule you like archons of despair. Remember,
Words Mean Things.
Post Script
I always joked about the idea or name of being a Curse eater or Sin Eater. To eat sins rather than absolve them.
In my journeys when I perform Shadow Work or Shadow Magic, I help people overcome their internal demons and break bindings and fetters that shackle them. You’d be genuinely surprised how strong humans are by the demons and trauma they hold and hold back.
And as such, I debate the idea that you could harness the spirit or power of the sin or curse. But I haven’t refined it that much. Just some behind the scenes yik-yakking of me yapping about some esoteric jazz.
Consider all the writings here a freebie in sin breaking theology or theory, it’s a gold mine for those that can see the value of forgiveness and gratitude and for a soul worker or psychopomp.
Words Mean Things 
Leave a comment