Please enter verification code
Confirm
Reinterpreting Buddhist's No-self Theory: A Philosophical Study on Human Actions and Moral Responsibilities
International Journal of Philosophy
Volume 8, Issue 3, September 2020, Pages: 82-88
Received: Aug. 29, 2020; Accepted: Sep. 14, 2020; Published: Sep. 21, 2020
Views 129      Downloads 158
Author
Nishant Kumar, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
The relation between human actions and moral responsibility for the consequences of the actions is a debatable topic in contemporary Buddhism. The reason is each action has either good or bad consequence(s). If consequence(s) of an action are good, the action is praiseworthy and rewarding. But if consequence(s) of an action are disastrous then the action is blameworthy. Buddhists endorse the concept of human actions and their consequences as they uphold the doctrine of karma. However, they deny the existence of a ‘permanent self’. Few questions arise in this regard. If a permanent self does not exist then who guides a person to decide the course of an action? How does a person choose to perform an action of the many alternatives in a situation? Who takes responsibility for the consequences of an action? This paper attempts to answer these questions by reinterpreting the Buddhist’s ‘no-self’ theory from epistemological and logical perspectives. While answering these questions, the paper discusses libertarianism, paleo-compatibilism, hard-determinism, and soft-compatibilism theories. It finds out which theory supports Buddhist’s claim on human actions and moral responsibility for consequences of the actions. This paper argues that Buddhists while rejecting the existence of a ‘permanent self’ affirm the existence of impermanent psychophysical entities (five skandhas). The mereological sum of these psychophysical entities is known as a ‘person’ who performs an action. A person becomes morally responsible for the consequences of an action for the reason that it justifies the Buddhist’s doctrine of karma.
Keywords
No-self theory, Moral Responsibility, Human Actions, Buddhism, Theory of Karma
To cite this article
Nishant Kumar, Reinterpreting Buddhist's No-self Theory: A Philosophical Study on Human Actions and Moral Responsibilities, International Journal of Philosophy. Vol. 8, No. 3, 2020, pp. 82-88. doi: 10.11648/j.ijp.20200803.14
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Adam, Martin T. 2010. “No Self, No Free Will, No Problem: Implications of the Anattalakkhaṇasutta for a Perennial Philosophical Issue.” Journal of International Association of Buddhist Studies 33 (1-2): 239-265.
[2]
Aronson, Harvey B. 2004. Buddhist Practice on Western Ground: Reconciling Eastern Ideals and Western Psychology. London: Shambhala.
[3]
Bareau, Andre. 1955. “The Concept of Responsibility in Ancient Buddhism.” East and West 6 (3): 216-223.
[4]
Chadha, Monima. 2014. “A Buddhist Explanation of Episodic Memory: From Self to Mind.” Asian Philosophy 24 (1): 14-27.
[5]
Dasti, Matthew R., and Edwin F. Bryant, eds. 2014. Free Will, Agency, and Selfhood in Indian Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.
[6]
Duerlinger, James. 2003. Indian Buddhist Theories of Persons: Vasubandhu’s ‘Refutation of the Theory of a Self’. London: Routledge Curzon.
[7]
Edelglass, William, and Jay L. Garfield, eds. 2009. Buddhist Philosophy: Essential Readings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[8]
Fan, Wenli. 2017. “On Recognition and Self: A Discussion on Nyāya, Mimāṃsā, and Buddhism.” Asian Philosophy 27 (4): 292-308. https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2017.1389388.
[9]
Finnigan, Bronwyn. 2020. “Karma, Moral Responsibility, and Buddhist Ethics.” In Oxford Handbook of Moral Psychology, edited by Manuel Vargas and John Doris. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Forthcoming.
[10]
Garfield, Jay L. 2001. “Nāgarjuna’s Theory of Causality: Implications Sacred Profane.” Philosophy East and West 51 (4): 507-524.
[11]
Gier, Nicholas F., and Paul Kjellberg. 2004. “Buddhism and Freedom of the Will: Pāli and Mahāyānist Responses.” In Freedom and determinism, edited by Joseph Keim Campbell, Michael O’Rourke, and David Shier, 277-304. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[12]
Gomez, Luis O. 1975. “Some Aspects of the Free Will Questions in the Nikāyas.” Philosophy East and West 25 (1): 81-90.
[13]
Goodman, Charles. 2002. “Resentment and Reality: Buddhism on Moral Responsibility.” American Philosophical Quarterly 39 (4): 359-372.
[14]
Goodman, Charles. 2009. Consequences of Compassion: An Interpretation and Defense of Buddhist Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
[15]
Griffiths, Paul J. 1982. “Notes Towards a Buddhist Critique of Karmic Theory.” Religious Studies 18 (3): 277-291.
[16]
Harvey, Peter. 2007. “Freedom of Will in the Light of Theravāda Buddhist Teachings.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 14 (1): 35-98.
[17]
Horner, Isaline B., trans. 1969. Milinda’s Question. Vol. 1. London: Luzac and Company Limited.
[18]
Inwagen, Peter Van. 1983. An Essay on Free Will. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
[19]
Kalupahana, David J. 1976. Buddhist Philosophy: A Historical Analysis. Honululu, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.
[20]
Kalupahana, David J. 1992. A History of Buddhist Philosophy: Continuities and Discontinuities. Honululu, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.
[21]
Kalupahana, David J. 1995. Ethics in Early Buddhism. Honululu, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.
[22]
Mitchell, Donald W. 1971. “Analysis in Theravāda Buddhism.” Philosophy East and West 21 (1): 23-31.
[23]
Ñāṇamoli, Bhikkhu and Bhikkhu Bodhi, trans. 1995. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha. Boston: Wisdom Publication.
[24]
Pereboom, Derek. 2001. Living without Free Will. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[25]
Pruden, Leo M. 1988. Abhidharmakośabhaṣyam. Vol. 4. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press.
[26]
Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli, trans. 1950. The Dhammapada. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
[27]
Rahula, Walpola. 1974. What the Buddha Taught. 2nd ed. New York: Grove Press.
[28]
Raju, Poolla Tirupati. 1985. Structural Depths of Indian Thought. Albany, New York: SUNY Press.
[29]
Repetti, Rick. 2010. “Early Buddhist Theories of Free Will: Compatibilism.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 17: 279-310.
[30]
Repetti, Rick. 2012a. “Buddhist Reductionism and Free will: Paleo-Compatibilism.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 19: 31-95.
[31]
Repetti, Rick. 2012b. “Buddhist Hard Determinism: No Self, No Free Will, No Responsibility.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 19: 129-197.
[32]
Repetti, Rick. 2014. “Recent Buddhist Theories of Free Will: Compatibilism, Incompatibilism, and Beyond.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 21: 275-352.
[33]
Repetti, Rick. 2017. “Agentless Agency: The Soft Compatibilist Argument from Buddhist Meditation, Mind-mastery, Evitabilism, and Mental Freedom.” In Buddhist perspectives on free will: Agentless agency?, edited by Rick Repetti, 193-206. New York: Routledge.
[34]
Sarao, Karam Tej Singh, trans. 2009. The Dhammapada: A Translator’s Guide. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers.
[35]
Siderits, Mark. 1987. “Beyond Compatibilism: A Buddhist Approach to Freedom and Determinism.” American Philosophical Quarterly 24 (2): 149-159.
[36]
Siderits, Mark. 2003. Personal Identity and Buddhist Philosophy: Empty Persons. England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
[37]
Siderits, Mark. 2007. Buddhism as Philosophy: An Introduction. England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
[38]
Siderits, Mark. 2008. “Paleo-compatibilism and Buddhist Reductionism.” Sophia 47: 29-42.
[39]
Siderits, Mark. 2017. “The Importance of My Being Single: A Response to Jiri Benovsky.” Philosophy East and West 67 (2): 553-558.
[40]
Story, Frances. 1976. Dimensions of Buddhist Thought: Essays and Dialogues. Kandy, Sri Lanka: Buddhist Publication Society.
[41]
Toso, Krishna Del. 2011. “Is Cognition an Attribute of the Self or it Rather Belongs to the Body? Some Dialectical Considerations on Udbhaṭabhaṭṭa’s Position Against Nyāya and Vaiśesika.” Open Journal of Philosophy 1 (2): 48-56.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186