Karma
is the law of moral causation. The theory of Karma is a fundamental
doctrine in Buddhism. This belief was prevalent in India before the
advent of the Buddha. Nevertheless, it was the Buddha who explained
and formulated this doctrine in the complete form in which we have
it today.
What
is the cause of the inequality that exists among mankind?
Why should one person be brought up in the lap of luxury, endowed
with fine mental, moral and physical qualities, and another in
absolute poverty, steeped in misery?
Why should one person be a mental prodigy, and another an
idiot?
Why should one person be born with saintly characteristics and
another with criminal tendencies?
Why should some be linguistic, artistic, mathematically inclined,
or musical from the very cradle?
Why should others be congenitally blind, deaf, or deformed?|
Why should some be blessed, and others cursed from their
births?
Either
this inequality of mankind has a cause, or it is purely accidental.
No sensible person would think of attributing this unevenness, this
inequality, and this diversity to blind chance or pure
accident.
In
this world nothing happens to a person that he does not for some
reason or other deserve. Usually, men of ordinary intellect cannot
comprehend the actual reason or reasons. The definite invisible
cause or causes of the visible effect is not necessarily confined
to the present life, they may be traced to a proximate or remote
past birth.
According
to Buddhism, this inequality is due not only to heredity,
environment, "nature and nurture", but also to Karma. In other
words, it is the result of our own past actions and our own present
doings. We ourselves are responsible for our own happiness and
misery. We create our own Heaven. We create our own Hell. We are
the architects of our own fate.
Perplexed
by the seemingly inexplicable, apparent disparity that existed
among humanity, a young truth-seeker approached the Buddha and
questioned him regarding this intricate problem of
inequality:
"What
is the cause, what is the reason, O Lord," questioned he, "that we
find amongst mankind the short-lived and long-lived, the healthy
and the diseased, the ugly and beautiful, those lacking influence
and the powerful, the poor and the rich, the low-born and the
high-born, and the ignorant and the wise?"
The
Buddha’s reply was:
"All
living beings have actions (Karma) as their own, their inheritance,
their congenital cause, their kinsman, their refuge. It is Karma
that differentiates beings into low and high states."
He
then explained the cause of such differences in accordance with the
law of cause and effect.
Certainly
we are born with hereditary characteristics. At the same time we
possess certain innate abilities that science cannot adequately
account for. To our parents we are indebted for the gross sperm and
ovum that form the nucleus of this so-called being. They remain
dormant within each parent until this potential germinal compound
is vitalised by the karmic energy needed for the production of the
foetus. Karma is therefore the indispensable conceptive cause of
this being.
The
accumulated karmic tendencies, inherited in the course of previous
lives, at times play a far greater role than the hereditary
parental cells and genes in the formation of both physical and
mental characteristics.
The
Buddha, for instance, inherited, like every other person, the
reproductive cells and genes from his parents. But physically,
morally and intellectually there was none comparable to him in his
long line of Royal ancestors. In the Buddha’s own words, he
belonged not to the Royal lineage, but to that of the Aryan
Buddhas. He was certainly a superman, an extraordinary creation of
his own Karma.
According
to the Lakkhana Sutta of Digha Nikaya, the Buddha inherited
exceptional features, such as the 32 major marks, as the result of
his past meritorious deeds. The ethical reason for acquiring each
physical feature is clearly explained in the Sutta.
It is
obvious from this unique case that karmic tendencies could not only
influence our physical organism, but also nullify the potentiality
of the parental cells and genes – hence the significance of the
Buddha’s enigmatic statement, - "We are the heirs of our own
actions."
Dealing
with this problem of variation, the Atthasalini, being a commentary
on the Abhidharma, states:
"Depending
on this difference in Karma appears the differences in the birth of
beings, high and low, base and exalted, happy and miserable.
Depending on the difference in Karma appears the difference in the
individual features of beings as beautiful and ugly, high-born or
low born, well-built or deformed. Depending on the difference in
Karma appears the difference in worldly conditions of beings, such
as gain and loss, and disgrace, blame and praise, happiness and
misery."
Thus,
from a Buddhist point of view, our present mental, moral
intellectual and temperamental differences are, for the most part,
due to our own actions and tendencies, both past and
present.
Although
Buddhism attributes this variation to Karma, as being the chief
cause among a variety, it does not, however, assert that everything
is due to Karma. The law of Karma, important as it is, is only one
of the twenty-four conditions described in Buddhist
Philosophy.
Refuting
the erroneous view that "whatsoever fortune or misfortune
experienced is all due to some previous action", the Buddha
said:
"So,
then, according to this view, owing to previous action men will
become murderers, thieves, unchaste, liars, slanderers, covetous,
malicious and perverts. Thus, for those who fall back on the former
deeds as the essential reason, there is neither the desire to do,
nor effort to do, nor necessity to do this deed, or abstain from
this deed."
It
was this important text, which states the belief that all physical
circumstances and mental attitudes spring solely from past Karma
that Buddha contradicted. If the present life is totally
conditioned or wholly controlled by our past actions, then
certainly Karma is tantamount to fatalism or determinism or
predestination. If this were true, free will would be an absurdity.
Life would be purely mechanistic, not much different from a
machine. Being created by an Almighty God who controls our
destinies and predetermines our future, or being produced by an
irresistible Karma that completely determines our fate and controls
our life’s course, independent of any free action on our part, is
essentially the same. The only difference lies in the two words God
and Karma. One could easily be substituted for the other, because
the ultimate operation of both forces would be
identical.
Such
a fatalistic doctrine is not the Buddhist law of Karma.
According
to Buddhism, there are five orders or processes (niyama)
which operate in the physical and mental realms.
They
are:
Every
mental or physical phenomenon could be explained by these
all-embracing five orders or processes which are laws in
themselves. Karma as such is only one of these five orders. Like
all other natural laws they demand no lawgiver.
Of
these five, the physical inorganic order and the order of the norm
are more or less mechanistic, though they can be controlled to some
extent by human ingenuity and the power of mind. For example, fire
normally burns, and extreme cold freezes, but man has walked
scatheless over fire and meditated naked on Himalayan snows;
horticulturists have worked marvels with flowers and fruits; Yogis
have performed levitation. Psychic law is equally mechanistic, but
Buddhist training aims at control of mind, which is possible by
right understanding and skilful volition. Karma law operates quite
automatically and, when the Karma is powerful, man cannot interfere
with its inexorable result though he may desire to do so; but here
also right understanding and skilful volition can accomplish much
and mould the future. Good Karma, persisted in, can thwart the
reaping of bad Karma, or as some Western scholars prefer to say
‘action influence’, is certainly an intricate law whose working is
fully comprehended only by a Buddha. The Buddhist aims at the final
destruction of all Karma.
WHAT IS KARMA?
The
Pali term Karma literally means action or doing. Any kind of
intentional action whether mental, verbal, or physical, is regarded
as Karma. It covers all that is included in the phrase "thought,
word and deed". Generally speaking, all good and bad action
constitutes Karma. In its ultimate sense Karma means all moral and
immoral volition. Involuntary, unintentional or unconscious
actions, though technically deeds, do not constitute Karma, because
volition, the most important factor in determining Karma, is
absent.
The
Buddha says:
"I
declare, O Bhikkhus, that volition is Karma. Having willed one acts
by body, speech, and thought." (Anguttara Nikaya)
Every
volitional action of individuals, save those of Buddhas and
Arahants, is called Karma. The exception made in their case is
because they are delivered from both good and evil; they have
eradicated ignorance and craving, the roots of Karma.
"Destroyed
are their germinal seeds (Khina bija); selfish desires no
longer grow," states the Ratana Sutta of Sutta nipata.
This
does not mean that the Buddha and Arahantas are passive. They are
tirelessly active in working for the real well being and happiness
of all. Their deeds ordinarily accepted as good or moral, lack
creative power as regards themselves. Understanding things as they
truly are, they have finally shattered their cosmic fetters – the
chain of cause and effect.
Karma
does not necessarily mean past actions. It embraces both past and
present deeds. Hence in one sense, we are the result of what we
were; we will be the result of what we are. In another sense, it
should be added, we are not totally the result of what we were; we
will not absolutely be the result of what we are. The present is no
doubt the offspring of the past and is the present of the future,
but the present is not always a true index of either the past or
the future; so complex is the working of Karma.
It is
this doctrine of Karma that the mother teaches her child when she
says "Be good and you will be happy and we will love you; but if
you are bad, you will be unhappy and we will not love you." In
short, Karma is the law of cause and effect in the ethical
realm.
KARMA AND VIPAKA
Karma
is action, and Vipaka, fruit or result, is its reaction.
Just
as every object is accompanied by a shadow, even so every
volitional activity is inevitably accompanied by its due effect.
Karma is like potential seed: Vipaka could be likened to the fruit
arising from the tree – the effect or result. Anisamsa and Adinaya
are the leaves, flowers and so forth that correspond to external
differences such as health, sickness and poverty – these are
inevitable consequences, which happen at the same time. Strictly
speaking, both Karma and Vipaka pertain to the mind.
As
Karma may be good or bad, so may Vipaka, - the fruit – is good or
bad. As Karma is mental so Vipaka is mental (of the mind). It is
experienced as happiness, bliss, unhappiness or misery, according
to the nature of the Karma seed. Anisamsa are the
concomitant advantages – material things such as prosperity, health
and longevity. When Vipaka’s concomitant material things are
disadvantageous, they are known as Adinaya, full of
wretchedness, and appear as poverty, ugliness, disease, short
life-span and so forth.
As we
sow, we reap somewhere and sometime, in his life or in a future
birth. What we reap today is what we have sown either in the
present or in the past.
The
Samyutta Nikaya states:
"According
to the seed that’s sown,
So is the fruit you reap there from,
Doer of good will gather good,
Doer of evil, evil reaps,
Down is the seed and thou shalt taste
The fruit thereof."
Karma
is a law in itself, which operates in its own field without the
intervention of any external, independent ruling agency.
Happiness
and misery, which are the common lot of humanity, are the
inevitable effects of causes. From a Buddhist point of view, they
are not rewards and punishments, assigned by a supernatural,
omniscient ruling power to a soul that has done good or evil.
Theists, who attempt to explain everything in this and temporal
life and in the eternal future life, ignoring a past, believe in a
‘postmortem’ justice, and may regard present happiness and misery
as blessings and curses conferred on His creation by an omniscient
and omnipotent Divine Ruler who sits in heaven above controlling
the destinies of the human race. Buddhism, which emphatically
denies such an Almighty, All merciful God-Creator and an
arbitrarily created immortal soul, believes in natural law and
justice which cannot be suspended by either an Almighty God or an
All-compassionate Buddha. According to this natural law, acts bear
their own rewards and punishments to the individual doer whether
human justice finds out or not.
There
are some who criticise thus: "So, you Buddhists, too, administer
capitalistic opium to the people, saying: "You are born poor in
this life on account of your past evil karma. He is born rich on
account of his good Karma. So, be satisfied with your humble lot;
but do good to be rich in your next life. You are being oppressed
now because of your past evil Karma. There is your destiny. Be
humble and bear your sufferings patiently. Do good now. You can be
certain of a better and happier life after death."
The
Buddhist doctrine of Karma does not expound such ridiculous
fatalistic views. Nor does it vindicate a postmortem justice. The
All-Merciful Buddha, who had no ulterior selfish motives, did not
teach this law of Karma to protect the rich and comfort the poor by
promising illusory happiness in an after-life.
While
we are born to a state created by ourselves, yet by our own
self-directed efforts there is every possibility for us to create
new, favourable environments even here and now. Not only
individually, but also, collectively, we are at liberty to create
fresh Karma that leads either towards our progress or downfall in
this very life.
According
to the Buddhist doctrine of Karma, one is not always compelled by
an ‘iron necessity’, for Karma is neither fate, nor predestination
imposed upon us by some mysterious unknown power to which we must
helplessly submit ourselves. It is one’s own doing reacting on
oneself, and so one has the possibility to divert the course of
one’s Karma to some extent. How far one diverts it depends on
oneself.
Is
one bound to reap all that one has sown in just
proportion?
The
Buddha provides an answer:
"If
anyone says that a man or woman must reap in this life according to
his present deeds, in that case there is no religious life, nor is
an opportunity afforded for the entire extinction of sorrow. But if
anyone says that what a man or woman reaps in this and future lives
accords with his or her deeds present and past, in that case there
is a religious life, and an opportunity is afforded for the entire
extinction of a sorrow." (Anguttara Nikaya)
Although
it is stated in the Dhammapada that "not in the sky, nor in
mid-ocean, or entering a mountain cave is found that place on earth
where one may escape from (the consequences of) an evil deed", yet
one is not bound to pay all the past arrears of one’s Karma. If
such were the case emancipation would be impossibility. Eternal
recurrence would be the unfortunate result.
WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF
KARMA?
Ignorance
(avijja), or not knowing things as they truly are, is the
chief cause of Karma. Dependent on ignorance arise activities
(avijja paccaya samkhara) states the Buddha in the
Paticca Samuppada (Dependent Origination).
Associated
with ignorance is the ally craving (tanha), the other root
of Karma. Evil actions are conditioned by these two causes. All
good deeds of a worldling (putthujana), though associated
with the three wholesome roots of generosity (alobha),
goodwill (adosa) and knowledge (amoha), are
nevertheless regarded as Karma because the two roots of ignorance
and craving are dormant in him. The moral types of Supramundane
Path Consciousness (magga citta) are not regarded as Karma
because they tend to eradicate the two root causes.
Who
is the doer of Karma?
Who reaps the fruit of Karma?
Does Karma mould a soul?
In
answering these subtle questions, the Venerable Buddhaghosa writes
in the Visuddhi Magga:
"No
doer is there who does the deed;
Nor is there one who feels the fruit;
Constituent parts alone roll on;
This indeed! Is right discernment."
For
instance, the table we see is apparent reality. In an ultimate
sense the so-called table consists of forces and
qualities.
For
ordinary purposes a scientist would use the term water, but in the
laboratory he would say H 2 0.
In
this same way, for conventional purposes, such terms as man, woman,
being, self, and so forth are used. The so-called fleeting forms
consist of psychophysical phenomena, which are constantly changing
not remaining the same for two consecutive moments.
Buddhists,
therefore, do not believe in an unchanging entity, in an actor
apart from action, in a perceiver apart from perception, in a
conscious subject behind consciousness.
Who
then, is the doer of Karma? Who experiences the effect?
Volition,
or Will (tetana), is itself the doer, Feeling
(vedana) is itself the reaper of the fruits of actions.
Apart from these pure mental states (suddhadhamma) there
is no-one to sow and no-one to reap.
CLASSIFICATION OF
KARMA
(A)
With respect to different functions, Karma is classified
into four kinds:
1.
REPRODUCTIVE KARMA
Every
birth is conditioned by a past good or bad karma, which
predominated at the moment of death. Karma that conditions the
future birth is called Reproductive Karma. The death of a person is
merely ‘a temporary end of a temporary phenomenon’. Though the
present form perishes, another form which is neither the same nor
absolutely different takes its place, according to the potential
thought-vibration generated at the death moment, because the Karmic
force which propels the life-flux still survives. It is this last
thought, which is technically called Reproductive (janaka)
Karma, that determines the state of a person in his subsequent
birth. This may be either a good or bad Karma.
According
to the Commentary, Reproductive Karma is that which produces mental
aggregates and material aggregates at the moment of conception. The
initial consciousness, which is termed the patisandhi
rebirth consciousness, is conditioned by this Reproductive
(janaka) Karma. Simultaneous with the arising of the
rebirth-consciousness, there arise the ‘body-decad’, ‘sex-decad’
and ‘base-decad’ (kaya-bhavavatthu dasakas). (decad = 10
factors).
(a)
The body-decad is composed of:
(b)
The four derivatives (upadana rupa):
These
eight (mahabhuta 4 + upadana 4 = 8) are
collectively called Avinibhoga Rupa (indivisable form or
indivisable matter).
(c)
Vitality (jivitindriya) and Body
(kaya)
These
(avinibhoga 8 + jivitindriya 1 + Kaya 1 = 10) ten
are collectively called "Body-decad" = (Kaya
dasaka).
Sex-decad
and Base-decad also consist of the first nine, sex (bhava)
and seat of consciousness (vathu) respectively (i.e. eye,
ear, nose, tongue, and body).
From
this, it is evident that the sex of a person is determined at the
very conception of a being. It is conditioned by Karma and is not a
fortuitous combination of sperm and ovum cells. The Pain and
Happiness one experiences in the course of one’s lifetime are the
inevitable consequence of Reproductive Kamma.
2.
SUPPORTIVE KARMA
That
which comes near the Reproductive (janaka) Kamma and
supports it. It is neither good nor bad and it assists or maintains
the action of the Reproductive (janaka) Karma in the course of
one’s lifetime. Immediately after conception till the death moment
this Karma steps forward to support the Reproductive Karma. A moral
supportive (kusala upathambhaka) Karma assists in giving
health, wealth, happiness etc. to the being born with a moral
Reproductive Karma. An immoral supportive Karma, on the other hand,
assists in giving pain, sorrow, etc. to the being born with an
immoral reproductive (akusala janaka) Karma, as for
instance to a beast of burden.
3.
OBSTRUCTIVE KARMA OR COUNTERACTIVE KARMA
Which,
unlike the former, tends to weaken, interrupt and retard the
fruition of the Reproductive Karma. For instance, a person born
with a good Reproductive Karma may be subject to various ailments
etc., thus preventing him from enjoying the blissful results of his
good actions. An animal, on the other hand, who is born with a bad
Reproductive Karma may lead a comfortable life by getting good
food, lodging, etc., as a result of his good counteractive or
obstructive (upabidaka) Karma preventing the fruition of
the evil Reproductive Karma.
4.
DESTRUCTIVE (UPAGHATAKA) KARMA
According
to the law of Karma the potential energy of the Reproductive Karma
could be nullified by a mere powerful opposing Karma of the past,
which, seeking an opportunity, may quite unexpectedly operate, just
as a powerful counteractive force can obstruct the path of a flying
arrow and bring it down to the ground. Such an action is called
Destructive (upaghataka) Karma, which is more effective
than the previous two in that it is not only obstructive but also
destroys the whole force. This Destructive Karma also may be either
good or bad.
As an
instance of operation of all the four, the case of Devadatta, who
attempted to kill the Buddha and who caused a schism in the Sangha
(disciples of the Buddha) may be cited. His good Reproductive Karma
brought him birth in a royal family. His continued comfort and
prosperity were due to the action of the Supportive Karma. The
Counteractive or Obstructive Karma came into operation when he was
subject to much humiliation as a result of his being excommunicated
from the Sangha. Finally the Destructive Karma brought his life to
a miserable end.
(B) There is another classification of Karma, according to the
priority of effect:
This
is either weighty or serious – may be either good or bad. It
produces its results in this life or in the next for certain. If
good, it is purely mental as in the case of Jhana (ecstasy or
absorption). Otherwise it is verbal or bodily. On the Immoral side,
there are five immediate effective heinous crimes
(pancanantariya karma): Matricide, Patricide, and the
murder of an Arahant, the wounding of a Buddha and the creation of
a schism in the Sangha. Permanent Scepticism (Niyata
Micchaditthi) is also termed one of the Weighty
(garuka) Karmas.
If,
for instance, any person were to develop the jhana
(ecstasy or absorption) and later were to commit one of these
heinous crimes, his good Karma would be obliterated by the powerful
evil Karma. His subsequent birth would be conditioned by the evil
Karma in spite of his having gained the jhana earlier.
Devadatta lost his psychic power and was born in an evil state,
because he wounded the Buddha and caused a schism in the
Sangha.
King
Ajatasattu would have attained the first stage of Sainthood
(Sotapanna) if he had not committed patricide. In this
case the powerful evil Karma acted as an obstacle to his gaining
Sainthood.
This
is that which one does or remembers immediately before the moment
of dying. Owing to the great part it plays in determining the
future birth, much importance is attained to this deathbed
(asanna) Karma in almost all Buddhist countries. The
customs of reminding the dying man of good deeds and making him do
good acts on his deathbed still prevails in Buddhist
countries.
Sometimes
a bad person may die happily and receive a good birth if he
remembers or does a good act at the last moment. A story runs that
a certain executioner who casually happened to give some alms to
the Venerable Sariputta remembered this good act at the dying
moment and was born in a state of bliss. This does not mean that
although he enjoys a good birth he will be exempt from the effects
of the evil deeds which he accumulated during his lifetime. They
will have there due effect as occasions arise.
At
times a good person may die unhappy by suddenly remembering an evil
act of his or by harbouring some unpleasant thought, perchance
compelled by unfavourable circumstances. In the scriptures, Queen
Mallika, the consort of King Kosala, remembering a lie she had
uttered, suffered for about seven days in a state of misery when
she lied to her husband to cover some misbehaviour.
These
are exceptional cases. Such reverse changes of birth account for
the birth of virtuous children to vicious parents and of vicious
children to virtuous parents. As a result of the last thought
moment being conditioned by the general conduct of the
person.
It is
that which on habitually performs and recollects and for which one
has a great liking. Habits whether good or bad becomes ones second
nature, tending to form the character of a person. At unguarded
moments one often lapses into one’s habitual mental mindset. In the
same way, at the death-moment, unless influenced by other
circumstances, one usually recalls to mind one’s habitual
deeds.
Cunda,
a butcher, who was living in the vicinity of the Buddha’s
monastery, died yelling like an animal because he was earning his
living by slaughtering pigs.
King
Dutthagamini of Ceylon (Sri Lanka) was in the habit of giving alms
to the Bhikkhus (monks) before he took his own meals. It was his
habitual Karma that gladdened him at the dying moment and gave him
birth in the Tusita heaven.
(C) There is another classification of Karma according to the time
in which effects are worked out:
Immediately
Effective Karma is that which is experienced in this present life.
According to the Abhidhamma one does both good and evil during the
javana process (thought-impulsion), which usually lasts for seven
thought-moments. The effect of the first thought-moment, being the
weakest, one may reap in this life itself. This is called the
Immediately Effective Karma.
If it
does not operate in this life, it is called ‘Defunct or
Ineffective’ Karma.
The
next weakest is the seventh thought-moment. Its effect one may reap
in the subsequence birth. This is called ‘Subsequently Effective’
Karma.
This,
too, is called Defunct or Ineffective Karma if it does not operate
in the second birth. The effect of the intermediate thought-moments
may take place at any time until one attains Nibbana. This type of
Karma is known as ‘Indefinitely Effective’ Karma.
No
one, not even the Buddhas and Arahantas, is exempt from this class
of Karma which one may experience in the course of one’s wandering
in Samsara. There is no special class of Karma known as
Defunct or Ineffective, but when such actions that should produce
their effects in this life or in a subsequent life do not operate,
they are termed Defunct or Ineffective Karma.
(D) The last classification of Karma is according to the plane in
which the effect takes place, namely:
QUESTIONS ON THE THEORY OF
KARMA
Question: Do the Karmas of parents determine or affect the
Karmas of their children?
Answer: Physically, the Karma of children is generally
determined by the Karma of their parents. Thus, healthy parents
usually have healthy offspring, and unhealthy parents have
unhealthy children. On the effect or how the Karma of their
children is determined: the child’s Karma is a thing apart of
itself – it forms the child’s individuality, the sum-total of its
merits and demerits accumulated in innumerable past existences. For
example, the Karma of the Buddha-to-be, Prince Siddhartha was
certainly not influenced by the joint Karma of his parents, King
Suddhodana and Queen Maya. The glorious and powerful Karma of our
Buddha-to-be transcended the Karma of his parents which jointly
were more potent than his own.
Question: If the Karma of parents do not influence those
of their children, how would the fact be explained that parents who
suffer from certain virulent diseases are apt to transmit these
evils to their offsprings?
Answer: Where a child inherit such a disease it is due to
the force of the parents’ characteristics because of the force of
the latter’s Utu (conditions favourable to germination). Take, for
example, two seeds from a sapling; plant one in inferior, dry soil;
and the other in rich, moist soil. The result is that the first
seed will sprout into a sickly sapling and soon show symptoms of
disease and decay; while the other seed will thrive and flourish
and grow up to be a tall and healthy tree.
It
will be observed that the pair of seeds taken from the same stock
grows up differently according to the soil into which they are put.
A child’s past Karma may be compared to the seed: the physical
disposition of the mother to the soil; and that of the father to
the moisture, which fertilised the soil. Roughly speaking, to
illustrate our subject, we will say that, representing the
sapling’s germination, growth, and existence as a unit, the seed is
responsible for one-tenth of them, the soil for six-tenths, and the
moisture for the remainder, three-tenths. Thus, although the power
of germination exists potentially in the seed (the child), its
growth is powerfully determined and quickened by the soil (the
mother) and the moisture (the father).
Therefore,
even as the conditions of the soil and moisture must be taken as
largely responsible factors in the growth and condition of the
tree. So must the influences of the parents (or progenitors, as in
the case of the animal world) be taken into account in respect to
the conception and growth of their offspring.
The
parents’ share in the Karma determining the physical factors of
their issue is as follows: If they are human beings, then their
offspring will be a human being. If they are cattle then their
issue must be of their species. If the human being is Chinese, then
their offspring must be of their race. Thus, the offspring are
invariably of the same genera and species, etc., as those of the
progenitors. It will be seen from the above that, although a
child’s Karma is very powerful in itself, if cannot remain wholly
uninfluenced by those of it parents. It is apt to inherit the
physical characteristic of its parents. Yet, it may occur that the
child’s Karma, being superlatively powerful, the influence of the
parent’s joint Karma cannot overshadow it. Of course, it need
hardly be pointed out that the evil influences of parents can also
be counteracted by the application of medical science.
All
beings born of sexual cohabitation are the resultant effects of
three forces:
The
physical dispositions of the parents may, or may not, be equal in
force. One may counteract the other to a lesser or greater extent.
The child’s Karma and physical characteristics, such as race,
colour, etc., will be the produce of the three forces.
Question: On the death of a sentient being, is there a
‘soul’ that wanders about at will?
Answer: When a sentient being leaves one existence, it is
reborn either as a human being, a celestial being, (Deva or
Brahama), and inferior animal, or a denizen of one of the regions
of hell. The sceptics and the ignorant people held that there are
intermediate stages – antrabhava – between these; and that
there are being who are neither of the human, the celestial, the
Deva or the Brahma worlds nor of any one of the stages of exist
recognised in the scriptures – but are in an intermediate stage.
Some assert that these transitional stages are possessed of the
Five Khandhas ( Five Aggregates: they are Matter (rupa);
Feeling (vedana); Perception (sanna); 4.
Mental-activities (sankhara); and Consciousness
(vinnana).
Some
assert that these beings are detached ‘souls’ or spirits with no
material encasement, and some again, that they are possessed of the
faculty of seeing like Devas, and further, that they have power of
changing at will, at short intervals, from one to any of the
existence mentioned above. Others again hold the fantastic and
erroneous theory that these beings can, and so, fancy themselves to
be in other than the existence they are actually in. Thus, to take
for example one such of these suppositious beings. He is a poor
person – and yet he fancies himself to be rich. He may be in hell –
and yet he fancies himself to be in the land of the Devas, and so
on. This belief in intermediate stages between existences is false,
and is condemned in the Buddhist teachings. A human being in this
life who, by his Karma is destined to be a human being in the next,
will be reborn as such; one who by his Karma is destined to be a
Deva in the next will be appear in the land of the Devas; and one
whose future life is to be in Hell, will be found in one of the
regions of hell in the next existence.
The
idea of an entity or soul or spirit ‘going’, ‘coming’, ‘changing’
or ‘transmigrating’ from one existence to another is an idea
entertained by the ignorance and materialistic, and is certainly
not justified by the Dhammas that there is no such thing as
‘going’, 'coming’, ‘changing’, etc., as between existences. The
conception, which is in accordance with the Dhamma, may perhaps be
illustrated by the picture thrown out by a cinema projector, or the
sound of emitted by the gramophone, and their relation to the film
or the sound-box and records respectively. For example, a human
being dies and is reborn in the land of Devas. Though these two
existences are different, yet the link or continuity between the
two at death is unbroken in point of time. The same is true in the
case of a man whose further existence is to be in hell. The
distance between Hell and the abode of man appears to be great.
Yet, in point of time, the continuity of ‘passage’ from the one
existence t