Karma pt.2: take it or leave it
[Pt. 1 on karma can be found here]
“Some modern Buddhists don't like the idea of karma, and want to create a Buddhism without it. They believe that belief in karma is a holdover from overtly religious forms of Buddhism that is unnecessary in modern forms of the Buddhist tradition.”
PROMPT
How do you feel about this? How necessary is karma to Buddhist thought?
It is hard for me to conceive of a Buddhist outlook that does not include a belief in karma. At the same time, I think there are many aspects of Buddhist thought that could help alleviate suffering for modern agnostic or atheist people (or even practicing other religions), that could be transmitted without them needing to agree with the entire worldview. It seems to me that a lot of good would be necessarily lost in this process, but I think the outcome is overall positive— better to have bits and pieces of Buddhist philosophy to inform one's actions than none at all.
For me personally, karma is an empirical reality. I see no difference between the Buddha’s conception of karma and Newton’s third law of thermodynamics— For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. It doesn’t need to happen immediately and visibly for that to hold true. When paired with the concept of interdependence, it makes sense that those karmic repercussions would be spread out through spacetime. To deny that truth because it appears too mystical strikes me as a great loss, but I think the Buddhist philosophy of practicing mindfulness and non-attachment to lessen suffering can still hold without needing to ‘believe’ in karma. That viewpoint strikes me as more ignorant of observable facts than acceptance of karma as a reality, but that is shaped by my own lived experience of these truths. To argue that karma is at odds with a scientific view makes no sense to me, as I think every physics experiment is a lesson in karma.
At the same time, I think there exists the potential that one can be a good Buddhist without adhering any doctrine at all. I don’t think any belief system holds a monopoly on acceptance of impermanence and the experience of interconnection, and I think any person could come to those conclusions from their own journey and personal metaphysics without ever encountering Buddhist philosophy. While having a rational defensible Buddhist metaphysics was important for establishing legitimacy, I think the core of the teachings speaks to a state and experience far beyond the constraints of worldly explanation. I think the truth that leads to liberation is self-evident and universally accessible, but living in a time where we are indoctrinated with values so antithetical to that state, it takes most people a great amount of logical explanation and rationalization to get there. This is why I think the Buddha's teachings on karma are important and helpful, it is a piece that does a great amount of deprogramming the individualistic views that keep us trapped in a cycle of suffering. But ultimately, I think the core of the Buddha's teachings speak to the fact that liberation is beyond language and doctrine, and is freely available to anyone, anywhere, anytime.