dhammapada

MORAL RESPONSIBILITY

"By self is one defiled,
By self is one purified."
-- DHAMMAPADA

Is it the doer of the act or another who reaps its results in the
succeeding birth? [1]

To say that he who sows is absolutely the same as he who reaps is
one extreme, and to say that he who sows is totally different from
he who reaps is the other extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the
Buddha teaches the doctrine of the middle way in terms of cause and
effect. "Neither the same nor another" (na ca so na ca a��, writes
the Venerable Buddhaghosa in the Visuddhi Magga. The evolution of
the butterfly may be cited in illustration.

Its initial stage was an egg. Then it turned into a caterpillar.
Later it developed into a chrysalis, and eventually into a
butterfly. This process occurs in the course of one lifetime. The
butterfly is neither the same as, nor totally different from, the
caterpillar. Here also there is a flux of life, or a continuity.

Venerable Nâgasena explains this point by citing the illustration of
a lamp that burns throughout the night. The flame of the first watch
is not identical with that of the last watch, yet throughout the
night the light burns in dependence upon one and the same lamp. As
with the flame so there is a continuity of life -- each succeeding
stage depending upon the preceding one.

If there be no soul, can there be any moral responsibility? [2]

Yes, because there is a continuity or identity in process, which is
substituted for an identical personality.

A child, for instance, becomes a man. The latter is neither
absolutely the same as the former -- since the cells have undergone
a complete change nor totally different -- being the identical
stream of life. Nevertheless, the individual, as man, is responsible
for whatever he has done in his childhood. Whether the flux dies
here and is reborn elsewhere, or continues to exist in the same
life, the essential factor is this continuity. Suppose a person
was 'A' in his last birth, and is 'B' in this. With the death of 'A'
the physical vehicle, the outward manifestation of Kammic energy is
relinquished and, with the birth of 'B' a fresh physical vehicle
arises. Despite the apparent material changes, the invisible stream
of consciousness (cittasantati) continues to flow, uninterrupted by
death, carrying along with it all the impressions received from the
tributary streams of sense. Conventionally speaking, must not 'B' be
responsible for the actions of 'A' who was his predecessor?

Some may object that in this case there is no memory owing to the
intervening death.

But is identity or memory absolutely essential in assessing moral
responsibility?

Strictly speaking, neither is essential.

If, for instance, a person were to commit a crime and suddenly,
losing his memory, were to forget the incident, would he not be
responsible for his act?

His forgetfulness would not exempt him from responsibility for the
commission of that crime. To this, some may ask: "What is the use of
punishing him, for he is not aware that he is being punished for
that crime? Is there any justice here?"

Of course, there is not, if we are arbitrarily governed by a God who
rewards and punishes us.

Buddhists believe in a just and rational law of Kamma that operates
automatically and speak in terms of cause and effect instead of
rewards and punishments.

In the words of Bhikkhu Silâcâra:

"If a person does something in sleep, gets out of bed and walks over
the edge of a verandah, he will fall into the road below and in all
likelihood break an arm or leg. But this will happen not at all as a
punishment for sleep-walking, but merely as its result. And the fact
that he did not remember going out on the verandah would not make
the slightest difference to the result of his fall from it, in the
shape of broken bones. So the follower of the Buddha takes measures
to see that he does not walk over verandahs or other dangerous
places, asleep or awake, so as to avoid hurting himself or anyone
who might be below and on whom he might fall."

The fact that a person does not remember his past is no hindrance to
the intelligent understanding of the working of Kammic law. It is
the knowledge of the inevitability of the sequence of Kamma in the
course of one's life in Samsâra that helps to mould the character of
a Buddhist.

(Narada Mahathera)