Acharya Prashant responds to a question about the nature of coincidence (sanyog). He explains that coincidence is simply that: a coincidence. It is causeless (akaran), it is randomness. The question of 'why' something happens is only valid when there is a cause. He illustrates this with the analogy of throwing wheat seeds into the wind; where they land and which one sprouts is a matter of chance, not a specific, attributable cause. He further elaborates by drawing a parallel between the relationship of action (karya) and cause (karan), and that of deed (karma) and doer (karta). Just as an action has a cause, a deed has a doer. Therefore, a coincidence, being an action without a cause, is akin to a deed without a doer. The ego (aham) establishes itself as the doer. For the ego to sustain itself, it must believe in causality. If the cause is removed, the doer is also removed, and the ego itself is negated. The idea of randomness is fatal to the ego because if there is no cause, there is no doer, and without a doer, the ego cannot exist. The ego is destroyed by the knowledge that events are causeless and merely coincidental. Acharya Prashant explains that the ego creates narratives to insert itself as the doer. For instance, a couple might say, "We met by coincidence, but we chose to fall in love." He points out the dishonesty in this statement. The meeting was a coincidence, the love was also a coincidence, and any children born from that love are also a coincidence. However, the ego cannot accept this complete randomness and at some point, claims doership. This act of claiming to be the doer of what is merely a natural, chemical, or coincidental process is the fundamental sin (paap) that creates bondage. True freedom and self-knowledge (atma-gyan) lie in recognizing that the ego itself is a product of coincidence and that one is not the doer. To the extent that you can accept that everything from beginning to end is a coincidence, to that extent you are free from it.
