The Law of Karma
In Buddhist teaching, the law of karma, says only this: `for every
event that occurs, there will follow another event whose existence
was caused by the first, and this second event will be pleasant or
unpleasant according as its cause was skillful or unskillful.' A
skillful event is one that is not accompanied by craving,
resistance or delusions; an unskillful event is one that is
accompanied by any one of those things. (Events are not skillful in
themselves, but are so called only in virtue of the mental events
that occur with them.)
Therefore, the law of Karma teaches that responsibility for
unskillful actions is born by the person who commits them.
Let's take an example of a sequence of events. An unpleasant
sensation occurs. A thought arises that the source of the
unpleasantness was a person. (This thought is a delusion; any
decisions based upon it will therefore be unskillful.) A thought
arises that some past sensations of unpleasantness issued from this
same person. (This thought is a further delusion.) This is followed
by a willful decision to speak words that will produce an
unpleasant sensation in that which is perceived as a person. (This
decision is an act of hostility. Of all the events described so
far, only this is called a karma.) Words are carefully chosen in
the hopes that when heard they will cause pain. The words are
pronounced aloud. (This is the execution of the decision to be
hostile. It may also be classed as a kind of karma, although
technically it is an after-karma.) There is a visual sensation of a
furrowed brow and downturned mouth. The thought arises that the
other person's face is frowning. The thought arises that the other
person's feelings were hurt. There is a fleeting joyful feeling of
success in knowing that one has scored a damaging verbal blow.
Eventually (perhaps much later) there is an unpleasant sensation of
regret, perhaps taking the form of a sensation of fear that the
perceived enemy may retaliate, or perhaps taking the form of
remorse on having acted impetuously, like an immature child, and
hping that no one will remember this childish action. (This regret
or fear is the unpleasant ripening of the karma, the unskillful
decision to inflict pain through words.)
If there are no persons at all, then there is no self and no other.
There is no distinction between pain of which there is direct
sensual awareness (which is conventionally called one's own pain)
and pain that is known through inference (conventionally called
another person's pain). Whether pain is known directly or
indirectly, there is either an urge to quell it or an urge to
cultivate it. Whether joy is known directly or indirectly, there is
either an urge to nourish it or to quell it. In the conventional
language of speaking of events personally, the urge to quell all
pain and to nourish all joy is known as being ethical or skillful
or (if you like) good. The urge to nourish pain and quell joy is
known as being unskillful, unethical or bad.
Being fully ethical is said to be impossible for those who make a
distinction between self and other and show preference for the
perceived self over the perceived other, for such perceptions
inhibit being fully responsive. Being fully ethical is possible
only for those who realize that all persons are empty, that is,
devoid of personhood.
