Karma — it’s all Karma!
I’ve long been obsessed with the concept of Karma. Something about it seems naturally appealing. In a world of incoherent and inconsistent statutory justice, the idea of an omniscient cosmic justice is a hopeful conception. One gets what one deserves — maybe not consciously or intentionally, but definitely polemically. Karma is the ultimate arbiter of truth and justice. As someone who very much likes both of those ideals, Karma is an attractive force.
So much so, in fact, that I use Karma as a guide for a lot of my actions. This can be both positive and negative. Thinking about not composting that coffee cup? I better, because if not I might hit a rock on my bike later and tumble off into the dirt. Give up my seat on the bus for a woman holding two grocery bags? Well, I might get a message out of the blue from an old friend I haven’t connected with in several years. This is seriously my internal monologue quite often. And I justify such a moral code by telling myself that as long as my actions have some wider social benefit I can hope for Karma to deliver some just desserts.
But this raises an interesting question: Why is receiving benefit — whether that be the presence of a positive outcome or the prevention of a negative outcome — necessary to do things that are just plainly good? Shouldn’t the nice feeling that you’ve done something positive for someone else be enough to motivate future positive actions?
Karma originally had a fairly narrow definition in the traditional Hindu text, the Rigveda, where it denoted ritualistic actions only. It’s meaning expanded to its more contemporary understanding within the Upanishads, the foundational religious texts in Hinduism. Here is where Karma gained its moral or ethical weight through an attachment to a system of cause-and-effect; what one puts into the universe through their “actions”, the universe will return upon them.
Part of the expansion of Karma within the Upanishads is an extension from our material world to the universe more broadly. This is why Karma is often compared to the notion of heaven and hell in Abrahamic religions, where God determines one’s ultimate fate by judging the moral weight of their actions in accordance with a religious code. But in the absence of an omnipotent God, Karma occupies a more distinct space in Hinduism and as an accompanying concept in Buddhism. Instead of a focus on the afterlife, Karma in eastern religions pervades all actions that ripple widely throughout the universe. In a world that is perceived as completely connected, Karma is a powerful way to help ensure one considers the full weight of acting one way or another. If you put good out into the world, the world will summarily return good to you; vice versa with bad.
If you buy this view, then Karma is necessary to enforce such a doctrine of interconnectedness. Personally, I really enjoy feeling like my existence is in some way tied to the existence of all other beings in our world, so, likewise, I really enjoy the concept of Karma.
That’s why simply feeling good about your actions isn’t enough, in my view. It misses this core tenet of what Karma represents. Not only can Karma be an ultimate arbiter of truth and justice, but it can also help us all understand our existence in the universe through the actions we take. One should, before they act, consider what kind of energy they’re putting out into the world. Then one can align their actions with Karma and be promised a commensurate return for their positive or negative energy.
But I think, as a consequentialist, a belief in Karma isn’t necessary to lead a virtuous life by any means. However, I would advocate for a firm understanding of Karma as a grounding doctrine for one’s day-to-day actions because I believe a more profound realization of our interconnectedness could help solve at their roots a number of deep-lying social problems. Thinking climate change, for example. A major part of the problem in trying to reverse a rapidly changing climate and seek positive environmental outcomes is an individualistic thinking. We see this philosophy even in supposedly progressive climate legislation like cap-and-trade. A major company can do as much bad to the earth as they want as long as they pay for it in some way as an individual entity.
This is no way to go about correcting the type of rut that seems to persist in our society. Embracing Karma as a guiding moral principle and complete interconnectedness as its worldly foundation can, I think, help start to correct such a rut. That’s why I like it so much; it can be good both individually and, even better, cosmically.
