I don’t like the idea of Sin as something inherently, absolutely wrong- something so intrinsically vile that even thinking about it might be a bad thing. This strikes me as oversimplistic, sub-optimal.

I’m guessing that it was originally conceived as a sort of blunt educational prop, a tool of social control. It was used to scary, bully and intimidate the common (probably illiterate) man into behave in a way that was perhaps socially optimal at the time. Perhaps it once served that purpose well, and some may argue that it continues to serve that purpose today.

I think it’s a rather outdated concept, and one that’s potentially harmful in today’s complex world. I feel that simplistic ideas of Sin impel us to constantly feel guilt, judgment, frustration and inadequacy. We feel it ourselves, and we project it onto  When we use these ideas, we are both the accuser and the accused. I think we can do better.

Slightly more refined (and scientifically accurate, it would seem) is the Buddhist notion that thoughts are transient and fleeting- everything is flux, nothing is absolute. Sinful thoughts come and go, if you let them. What matters more than thought is action, focus, mindfulness.

But even Buddhism doesn’t entirely appeal to me. The idea of detachment is useful to practice and meditate on, but can you see how it can be taken a little too literally? I have always found something a little bit contemptible about ascetic renouncement of the world. (Sadhus do this, and I don’t really see anything “holy” about it.) Who is anybody, really, to separate themselves from the world, to cloister themselves in a monastery? But perhaps I’m just ignorant.

I know, I’m oversimplifying both Christianity and Buddhism into soundbites. “It doesn’t matter if it is a black cat or a white cat,” said Deng Xiaopeng. “If it catches mice, it is a good cat.” Following that train of thought, it doesn’t matter which system you use, as long as you use it effectively. Sure.

Both frameworks can be melded together, used together or separately as and when separately, blah blah blah. I’d like to offer you what I believe is a more convenient and effective perspective.

The seven “deadly sins” are probably something we cannot altogether transcend anytime soon. (Perhaps in the distant future.) They are powerful drives that are wired deeply into our minds, as individuals and collective. There is a reason why Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Envy and Pride are such powerful concepts- because they are woven into the very fabric of humanity.

I’m here to propose that we can’t simply “overcome” or “do away” with them- they are far too deeply woven into our fabric. We have to work with them, hack them, leverage them. In this series, I will attempt to demonstrate how.

The 7 Deadly Sins could, and should, be described as the 7 Axiomatic Passions instead- because there’s no reason why they must be inherently deadly, or sinful. (I say axiomatic because they can be taken to be rather self-evident, yet they’re rather difficult to prove!)

Presenting:

Lust is the desire for Conquest.

Gluttony is the desire for Consumption.

Greed is the desire for Acquisition.

Wrath is the desire for Destruction. 

Vanity is an obsession with Self. Thoughtful contemplation will lead to the realization that the Self is an illusion. You are a vessel, a conduit. You are the sum of biology, of culture, of family, friends, ideas and perspectives- almost none of which you had any real choice or control over.

Envy is an obsession with Others. The others are defined as “Not-Self”. If the Self is an illusion, then “Not-Self” ceases to be a meaningful concept.

Sloth is the desire for Comfort. Silence. Neutrality. Safety. Peace.