Karma and Rebirth by Rev Ryuei Michael McCormick Ryuei.net > Pali Canon > Mahayana > Lotus Sutra > Blog

Karma as One of the Laws of Nature

When the Buddha repudiated the three sectarian tenets above, the first of these tenets was not a denial of karma as such. Rather, it was the claim that past karma determines everything in the present, leaving no room for sentient beings to freely make new causes, as even their present actions would be predetermined by past actions. There are many problems with such a belief, one of them being the problem of infinite regress. If present causes are totally determined by the past, and the past causes were totally determined by their past, at what point in time was anything ever determined in the first place? The other major problem being the moral one, in that such a belief undercuts any need to feel responsible for our actions or their consequences as they are all predetermined. It also leads to blaming the victim, in that every bad thing that happens to people must, according to this belief, be a result of past actions and there is no room for the freely chosen actions of other people, or natural events, or anything else to be a contributor to misfortune. Unfortunately, many people, even some Buddhists, believe that this is what the Buddha taught. However, the Buddha actually rejected this view on several occasions. In one such instance the wanderer Sivaka asks the Buddha about this:

Master Gautama, there are some ascetics and brahmins who hold such a doctrine and view as this: "Whatever a person experiences, whether it be pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, all that is caused by what was done in the past." What does Master Gautama say about this? 

Some feelings, Sivaka, arise here originating from bile disorders: that some feelings arise here originating from bile disorders one can know for oneself, and that is considered to be true in the world. Now when those ascetics and brahmins hold such a doctrine and view as this, "Whatever a person experiences, whether it be pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, all that is caused by what was done in the past," they overshoot what one knows by oneself and they overshoot what is considered to be true in the world. Therefore I say that this is wrong on the part of those ascetics and brahmins.

Some feelings, Sivaka, arise here originating from phlegm disorders & originating from wind disorders & originating from an imbalance [of the three] & produced by change in climate & produced by careless behavior & caused by assault & produced as the result of karma: how some feelings arise here produced as the result of karma one can know for oneself, and that is considered to be true in the world. Now when those ascetics and brahmins hold such a doctrine and view as this, "Whatever a person experiences, whether it be pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, all that is caused by what was done in the past," they overshoot what one knows by oneself and they overshoot what is considered to be true in the world. Therefore I say that this is wrong on the part of those ascetics and brahmins.  (SN 36: 21, see Connected Discourses of the Buddha, pp. 1278-1279)

In his reply to Sivaka, the Buddha asserts a variety of other causes and conditions besides karma that contribute to what is experienced in the present. In his book, Exploring Karma & Rebirth, Nagapriya explains the later analysis of this discourse in the commentarial tradition and how it places karma in the larger context of several different types of causality:

While the schema outlined in the Moliyasivaka Sutta is a bit obscure, Buddhist scholastic philosophy (known as Abhidhamma) classified five modes,technically known as niyamas, of dependent origination. These modes are (1) physical inorganic (utu-niyama), (2) biological (bija-niyama), (3) non-volitional mental (mano- or citta-niyama), (4) ethical (kamma- or karma-niyama), and (5) spiritual (dhamma- or dharma-niyama).

Examination of these niyamas can give us a better understanding of the scope and importance of Karma in human life. The utu-niyama embraces natural laws such as those of physics and chemistry. For example, when seeking an explanation for the occurrence of an earthquake we may be served better by the theory of plate tectonics than by the theory of Karma. The bija-niyama governs the physical organic order, including the laws of biology. For example, if I catch a cold it would seem more sensible to explain this by supposing the presence of a virus rather than by supposing moral causes. The mano- or citta-niyamagoverns the laws of the mind and to some extent relates to psychology. The phenomenon of shock or post-traumatic stress may, for example, be best explained under this heading. The karma-niyama governs the sphere of volitional human conduct (including body, speech, and mind). In practice, it does not seem easy to separate the non-volitional and volitional mental spheres. The exact meaning of dharma-niyama and what it governs is not clear. A traditional account links it to miraculous events in the Buddha's life, but it can also be thought of as the principle that underlies spiritual evolution. Seen in this way, the dharma-niyama explains the process by which we can transcend our selfishness, hatred, and ignorance and achieve generosity, compassion, and understanding. In traditional terms, it explains how it is that we can break free from the determining influence of Karma and rebirth and so put a stop on the wheel of perpetual re-becoming. It underlies the dynamics of spiritual development.

A further way of thinking about the dharma-niyama is to see it as the "undeserved" compassionate influence that someone may exert on our life. In other words, it is the impact of the saint on the world. The saint does not act towards others in accordance with their karma but deals compassionately with everyone, regardless of merit. (Exploring Karma & Rebirth, pp. 36-38)

The Buddha's general theory of dependent origination is as follows: When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises. When this does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases.  (SN 12: 37, see Connected Discourses, p. 575) This means that all things come to be only due to causes and conditions and have no inherent existence in and of themselves. These causes and conditions operate according to these five niyamas or categories of natural law, of which the law of karma is only one of the five, and all five interact with each other in order to bring about life as we experience it. As Nagapriya so eloquently explains:

The five niyama analysis of experience shows that Karma is just one application of the general principle of dependent origination and, therefore, many circumstances and outcomes are likely to be governed by conditions only very indirectly related to Karma itself. But we should beware of seeing these different orders of conditionality as completely discrete. In reality, they are not five distinct orders of conditionality. This is only a map of what happens. Every experience comprises a vast network of conditions; our previous moral conduct will often have a bearing on our present experience, but in many situations non-moral factors may well exert a more decisive influence. The teaching of the five niyamas thus presents a more complex and subtle account of why things happen as they do than the crude view of Karma criticized above. We need also to remember that the actions of other people may be more decisive in any given situation that our own karmic stream; it may be their evil or their goodness that causes us to suffer or benefit, rather than our own. (Ibid, p. 39)

Of course, though each situation we are faced with in life is brought about by many forces, in each present moment it us up to us to determine whether we will act in that situation in a wholesome or unwholesome way, mentally, verbally, and physically. We have the freedom to make a good cause or a bad cause in relation to whatever situation we are faced with. In each moment, our mental, verbal, and physical actions will change the way we relate to, interact with, and experience the situation for better or worse. The causes we freely make will also have an effect on the future, whether they come to fruition later in life or in some future life. So while not all is determined by karma, karma is our own particular responsibility and a decisive factor in shaping the course of our lives.