Talk:Objections to the Doctrine of Karm and Responses:Karm and Human Apathy

By Vishal Agarwal

Objection: Some critics argue that belief in the law of karm may encourage indifference towards those who are suffering. If suffering is understood as the result of one's own past actions, they ask whether assisting those in distress amounts to interfering with the operation of the law of karm.

Response: Hindu Dharm generally reject this conclusion. They emphasize virtues such as dayā (compassion), sevā (service), and vinaya (humility), and encourage individuals to alleviate the suffering of others. Within this framework, the timing of karmaphala is regarded as uncertain, and therefore present circumstances are not considered a reliable indication of a person's past actions. The responsibility for administering the fruits of karm belongs to the Divine, whereas human beings are expected to act in accordance with dharma by helping those in need.

A modern teacher explains this perspective as follows:

“When we see a beggar, we can be certain that he is experiencing the effect of a cause he has instigated in a previous life. Probably he refused charity to someone who was desperately in need of it, and now a compassionate Nature is giving him a chance to be on the receiving end and thus balance his debts. Of course, this does not mean that you should not help him. Your duty if you have the money and the means, is to help him to your fullest capacity. It is not your duty to judge his worth or otherwise. If you refuse to help him, you will be starting another cycle of cause and effect, which you will have to experience.

Instead of trying to balance the pros and cons yourself, all you have to do is help the beggar if you have the means to do it without questioning his worth or his past karm. This is not your problem. Your problem is to make sure that you do not take in more negative karm by refusing to help a person who appears to be in need. Whether or not he deserves to be helped is not your problem.

Naturally, we are bound to see a selfish person as a selfish person and a murderer as a murderer, but we are not the ones to judge them. We cannot see the karmic debt that is being paid off by the selfishness and the murder. This does not mean that we should not act in the way that is appropriate to the situation. We can and must call the murderer to task and hand him over to the police, but that is all that we are called upon to do. The moment we start judging him from the human point of view, we become involved in the process of cause and effect. In every situation, you can either look at it from the angle of your higher Self or your personality, your lower human self.”