I got this off a website, I don't remember where, but no attempt to infringe on copyright, etc... My comments are going to be in yellow.
In Buddhist teaching, the law of Kamma, 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.)
Just because you donate a bunch of money to a worthy cause doesn't mean it has good kamma attached to it. If you did it because you were going to get a good tax break, that is unskillful, selfish, and is accompanied by a craving (in this case for a benefit of paying less taxes). Same thing about helping that nice girl get home from a party. You can do it to get her phone number; that just can't be the only reason.
Therefore, the law of Kamma teaches that responsibility for unskillful actions is born by the person who commits them.
It's the thought that counts...
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 Kamma.) 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 Kamma, although technically it is an after-Kamma.) 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 Kamma, the unskillful decision to inflict pain through words.)
A breakdown: For some reason, I think my friend Pippin has done something to piss me off intentionally (that is a delusion). I think about times he has done stuff to piss me off (more delusions). I plan on what I say so that it upsets him (a willful action, Kamma, based on a delusion). I call Pippin a tool. Temporarily, I feel good since I shut Pippin up. Later, I feel bad, either because of regret, or the fact that he may badmouth me later, or drink all my beer, or say something to a girl so that she won't like me, or that I looked stupid insulting him. (this is is the return of Kamma, bad action for bad action).
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.
The joy that your experience yourself should be expressed to all, and the pain of others should be soothed. Spreading joy and happiness is good, spreading pain is 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.
We're all part of this together, and part of something that is greater than ourselves. When doing good, you should not make a distinction between what is good for you and what is good for others. Just do good, for yourself as well as others, and we'll beat this big suck of a world...
We'll, I hope this helped. Feel free to e-mail me if you have any comments.
Back to Buddha Nature
Back to Dystopian Kamma