Articles

Is there such a thing as free will? Is determinism right and free will a myth? If so, can our destiny change, thus transforming fate? What does the concept of karma in Buddhism say about determinism and free will?

Surprisingly, the Buddhist answer to the question of determinism and free will is that, yes, our destiny is, to a large degree, pre-determined by karma. Thus Buddhism agrees with modern science-and fortune-tellers-that our future, including disease, physical traits and our behavior, is controlled by circumstances present at our birth. Fortune-tellers believe that our astrological birth sign influences our behavior, while science says it's our genes. (Side-note: how interesting would it be if a study determined that our genes uniquely expressed themselves in a predictable manner in the palm, or that people born at certain times of the year had discernible gene differences!) Science believes that, in addition to genes, environmental circumstances, including culture, family and events, also influences behavior strongly. The consensus in psychology, especially, is that genes and environment serve as an explanation for and predictor of behavior. Science does appear to leaning in the direction of a genetic explanation for behavior. The Buddha taught that it is karma that determines both the present and future circumstances of one's life, as well as behavior.

Which brings us to whether destiny change and transforming fate is impossible, and what wins in the battle between determinism and free will. Science is firmly on the side of fatalism and determinism, and therefore leaves absolutely no room for free will. How could it? In science, the assumption, the belief, and, ironically, the FAITH, is that everything, including human behavior, is the result of causes and conditions, and thus pre-determined-which is, for the most part, what Buddhism also teaches. To the scientist, a human being is a complexly programmed robot, and nothing else. This is the only conclusion to be drawn from numerous scientific and psychological hypotheses.

And we cannot expect science to explain something it does not believe.

But free will DOES exist. (We will discuss how later) However, since science denies its existence, it is in no position to define it, and define it we must, to ensure understanding. The realm of free will belongs to religion. (Perhaps the conflict between religion and science could relax a bit if we simply allowed science to have the non-free will realm and religion to have the free will side?) The Buddha defined free will. Implicitly, he defined both the non-free will realm and the free will realm in terms of the Four Noble Truths. The Buddha expressed the first two Noble Truths very scientifically: there is an illness, suffering, which has causes: aversion, craving and ignorance of how we constantly create a false self. But there is more, much more, to suffering than this.

The truth is that we are completely and wholly slaves, and our masters are craving, ignorance and aversion. The idea that we are free human beings is a complete and utter delusion. We really are a complexly programmed robot. Free will loses, determinism wins.

Hopefully, you are aware of how insulted your ego feels right now and how you might be disagreeing with me. Be aware of that, as it is that awareness that brings us, later, to the Third and Fourth Noble Truths, and where Buddhism breaks off from science.

Before moving on, let's be clear: free will is NOT the ability to do whatever one 'wants' to do whenever one wants to, as such acts are inevitably controlled by, and a cause and condition of, craving, aversion and ignorance.

Free will, then, is defined as the ability to act independently of what one wants or craves, or of what one doesn't want or crave. Determinism, the opposite of free will, can really be boiled down to acting in order to fulfill one's cravings and aversions. It is determinism because the cravings determine one's actions. Importantly, from a Buddhist perspective, one's cravings are NOT the same as the person. I am not my cravings. They are not me. Yet, cravings control me.

Science is actually great for studying phenomena up until the point of free will, at studying determinism. Science can certainly explain the origins of cravings and aversions; genetic, environmental and organic explanations of behavior cohere well with Buddhist teachings. The only difference between science and Buddhism on this point is that in Buddhism the genetic, environmental and organic causes always run through craving, aversion and ignorance. Science, therefore, is the realm of causes and conditions, of, if you will, the slave condition. This makes perfect sense, of course. However, science completely fails when it comes to helping the slave escape-it doesn't even recognize that possibility, as it doesn't even recognize the enslavement.

Religion is the realm of freedom. All of the sages and masters, the prophets, the messiahs-it is of this freedom, of escape from this slavery, that they speak.

As for the Third and Fourth Noble Truths, this is where Buddhism moves beyond science. Science is, at this point in time, completely ignorant of any possibility beyond free will. (Perhaps that is because so few people have actually achieved the state of free will, and they usually aren't willing to be studied.) The Buddhist teachings of the Third and Fourth Noble Truth teach that the end of suffering, the end of enslavement, and therefore free will, is possible by way of the Noble Eightfold Path. The Noble Eightfold Path is thus the cause and condition for freedom. As a cause and condition, therefore, science actually could study the Noble Eightfold Path.

See the link below for Part 2 of this series.