Our Efforts And Karmic Retribution

 When we speak of karma, in its simplest sense, we are talking about the laws of cause and effect. It is a self-evident fact that people's actions have consequences. It is also clear that by performing actions, a person strengthens certain qualities within themselves and weakens their opposites. These qualities will subsequently attract similar ones and repel dissimilar ones. Consequently, the events that befall a person are related to their previous actions.

In a more specific sense, karma is almost always a question of ethics and justice. In simple terms, it can be viewed as a reward for good and punishment for evil. Of course, in practice, this viewpoint runs up against the need to more precisely define good and evil and be able to distinguish them in specific situations where they are often intertwined.

In this article, I would like to dwell in more detail on the extent to which karmic retribution for good and evil done to people depends on the agreements between people themselves. Even a cursory analysis reveals that it depends greatly. "Good" and "evil" are categories inextricably linked to what people themselves perceive as good and its opposite. Let me give you a small example.

A friend of mine took money from me. If I didn't allow it, it was theft, but if I did, it was a gift. In the first case, he committed a crime and should be punished; in the second, he shouldn't. If, say, we agreed that all our property is shared and can be used by either of us without restriction, we made theft essentially impossible between us.

It's easy to see that a similar principle applies in other areas as well. If two people have consensual sex, they're simply giving each other pleasure, but if one of them objects, it's an act of violence (rape), which is considered a criminal offense in any society.

However, the situation is complicated by the fact that there may still be a duality between the intent of the agent and the consent of the recipient. What if, for example, the thief didn't know I was willing to give him my money? He, for his part, knowingly committed the theft and would have committed it even if I had actively objected. However, I (the victim) don't consider myself a victim and automatically forgive the aggressor. A situation arises in which his thieving tendencies have become stronger and, presumably, will cause him further trouble in the future. However, there is no specific offense on my part (since I have forgiven), and there is no additional negative karmic charge hanging over the thief, ready to strike him at his moment of vulnerability.

Here, the question also arises of whether there is any karmic compensation for the victim. If some injustice has been done to me, an innocent person, does this mean I deserve a reward for my suffering?

The question is not so simple. Those religious systems that instill in people the idea that all sufferers will inevitably receive some kind of good reward from God omit or understate many things.

After all, we already established earlier that justice and injustice depend on the system of agreements between the parties to the relationship. If I agree to someone else taking my money, it's not theft, but a gift. Then, as the giver, there's no reason for me to expect to be "compensated" in any way, since I'm not the victim, but the one who fulfilled my desire.

Therefore, it can be said that the victim can expect karmic good retribution only if they clearly identify the injustice committed against them as a real injustice and protest it. If they wallow in thoughts like, "If this happened to me, then I deserve it," then God winks at them and says, "Well, my friend, you got what you wanted. What else do you expect from me?"

However, this whole line of thought raises another important question. Isn't the actual suffering we endure justice in some higher sense? Shouldn't God be justified for everything good and bad that happens to us?

All this leads to the understanding that two different systems of calculation and evaluation must operate in parallel within us. According to the higher system, everything that happens is a good thing, coming from God, for which we can constantly thank Him. According to the lower system, we must recognize the evil committed as evil and, if possible, fight it, otherwise karma will cease to function.

To illustrate, here's an example.

A merchant was transporting his goods to a ship to sell in another country. Along the way, he was met by robbers. They detained him and stole his goods. Ultimately, he returned home empty-handed. Meanwhile, the ship sailed and sank at sea the next day. The merchant survived only because the robbers prevented him from getting on board. Should he thank the robbers for his salvation?

Based on all of the above, the correct answer is this: our merchant should thank God for saving him and condemn the robbers for their robbery. And all this despite the fact that in this case, the robbers turned out to be God's instrument in saving the merchant.

It is precisely the confusion between these two parallel systems of evaluation that often leads to great confusion in people, when they either begin to justify evil, thereby further contributing to its spread, or descend into hopeless pessimism and bitterness, failing to understand that all evil has a higher, good meaning.

Those who succeed in separating these things—in effect, learning to live in two parallel worlds, the material and the spiritual—have the opportunity to develop and improve in any situation, steadily accumulating "bonuses" for their karma.