Full text PDF: Rethinking Karma: The Dharma of Social Justice

Ed. Jonathan S. Watts

Bangkok, Thailand: International Network of Engaged Buddhists, 1st edition: 2009, 2nd edition: 2014

In February 2003 at the Third International Think Sangha meeting in Thailand, a group of grassroots Buddhist activists focused on the issues of karma and social justice. In response to extreme experiences of social suffering in many parts of Southeast Asia, especially the conflict areas of Sri Lanka and Burma, questions about forgiveness, acceptance and justice were discussed at length. What is a Buddhist response to political oppression? To economic exploitation? Does Buddhism encourage passivity and victimization? Can violent perpetrators be brought to justice without anger and retributive punishment? What does Buddhism say – or imply – about collective karma, and social justice?

A common Buddhist reaction is that retributive justice is not necessary since the law of karma exacts a precise form of justice in the suffering that violent people bring upon themselves. Such a typical explanation suggests a whole host of issues and problems raised by the ways that traditional Buddhist societies have confronted (or not confronted) injustice. The subtle manner in which the Buddha distinguished his teaching of karma from the Brahmanical and Jain understandings has become blurred in Buddhist societies, giving way to:

• a rigid karmic determinism that produces an attitude of fatalism towards injustice; that is, those who experience suffering deserve it based on bad actions in a previous lifetime
• an accompanied ritualization of karmic action that views the overcoming of personal suffering not as a confrontation with social injustice but as making traditional offerings to the monastic order in order to gain karmic merit for future rebirth in more favorable circumstances

This lack of engagement with social injustice has created a “moral myopia” within traditional Buddhist societies towards the fundamental forms of structural and cultural violence underpinning the more visible acts of violence and oppression. The common understanding of karma often serves to perpetuate structural and cultural violence, such as:

• SEXISM: the devaluation of the spiritual potential of women
  Birth in female form is often seen as a result of bad karma. This also devalues women in general. Gender and domestic violence are seen as the consequences of a woman’s inferior karma which they must endure with patience or equanimity (upekkha).
• CLASSISM: the legitimization of economic inequality and oppression Those who are poor and wealthy are seen as receiving the just results of previous karma, regardless of their present moral character or behavior. The practice of generosity (dana) is distorted into a ritualistic system of giving material goods to monks. This system enables the rich to be “better Buddhists” through their ability to make larger and more conspicuous offerings.
• POLITICAL OPPRESSION: the legitimization of oppressive political systems This understanding of karma supports socially passivity in the face of oppression. To resist oppressive power is seen to involve anger and conflict, thereby engendering bad karma. The doctrine of non-violence is distorted into a rationalization of non-action.

In addition to these social issues, which contemporary Buddhism must address, some teachings within the Buddhist tradition need to be critically re-examined in light of the Buddha’s fundamental practice of non-violence (ahimsa):

• What is the true meaning of karma (literally “action”) in the Buddhist tradition? Is it ritualistic action to gain merit, the just deserts or results (vipaka) of an unforgiving cosmic force, or the quality of intention (cetana) behind present actions?
• What is the true meaning of the ideal of equanimity (upekkha)? Is it resignation and passivity in the face of violence, or a sense of detachment towards efforts to make our lives and the lives of others better?
• What is the true meaning of the ideals of generosity (dana) and doing good (punna)? Are these confined to calculated acts of giving by lay followers to the monastic order by which to gain favorable rebirth, or is there a much broader realm of intentional moral action in which Buddhist should engage?

Today such a critical re-evaluation of the Buddhist tradition is especially important for the countries of Southern Theravada Buddhism (Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Burma, Thailand, Cambodia, and parts of India, Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam).

In this volume, the authors are for the most part not academics but thinker-activists who have been deeply involved in these issues at the grassroots level and who speak from their own experience in trying to solve them. From their perspectives these issues have come to light as seminal ones for deeper contemplation and greater sharing, not only within the Buddhist community at large but among all those who seek to bridge the gaps between our idealization of human harmony, our tendencies toward violent confrontation, and the need for greater social justice.