Karma As Moral Bedrock

The conceptual framework of karma, rebirth and samsara is best viewed as an empirical hypothesis and/or explanatory schema embedded in a moral argument. Crudely put, the argument goes something like this:

1.      Belief in the fair disposition of human affairs is a necessary component of the moral life. In the case that the world is unjust (or persons do not believe that the world is just, that is, if they think bad things happen to good people for no morally relevant reason), then people are less likely to be good.

2.      Apart from the actuality of universal retribution there is no compelling motivation for doing good rather than bad deeds.

3.      All the pleasant and unpleasant feelings that seem to result from apparently random and morally neutral causes and conditions, and from events initiated here and now, are in fact the consequences of past morally charged actions in this life or a previous life. Undeserved joys and sorrows, otherwise inexplicable, are really deferred rewards and punishments.

4.      The assignment of just deserts for past actions (a. k. a. punishment and reward) occurs through an impersonal causal process alluded to in various canonical and traditional sources.

5.      Moral indifference, despair, and outrage are based upon a misapprehension, for it is certain that (a) the fortunate and unfortunate circumstances and events of this life are the consequences of past deeds and (b) the good deeds of this life will cause a more auspicious rebirth in future lives, and the bad deeds will bring about renewed existence in one of the painful realms.

6.      Belief in the certainty of retribution is sufficient to coerce good moral behavior.

The factual claims about moral causation (4. and 5. above) serve as premises for the final moral claim regarding the inhibitory power of karmic retribution. The argument is intended as an antidote to the moral doubt and indecision that can follow hard upon the discovery that life is not fair. By insisting that human existence, and the whole universe along with it, is truly just despite appearances to the contrary, the Buddhist teacher hopes to support positive moral traits and pre-empt antinomian tendencies.

It should be noted that the whole of the argument depends for its force upon the further premises that (1) although the justice is delivered on a cosmic scale, justice in itself does not make life worth living because (2) in the end or, more accurately, “along the beginningless and endless way,” even the most pleasurable existence will be marred by impermanence and pain and therefore, (3) the clear choice is to put an end to life, now and forever.