Fairness, The Golden Rule, and Karma
Part 3 of my Trilogy about Rules, Discipline, and Fairness
This article is the final installment in our Trilogy about the topics of the Standards of Business Transactions and Self-Discipline.
Our journey through these topics have taken us from the rather mundane yet common sense ideas of Self-Discipline for the Newbie Entrepreneur to the broader concept of Expected Rules of Behavior in commercial transactions.
At this point, we depart from the world of commerce and explore a deeper realm: How our common human expectation of fairness is expressed as The Golden Rule, how that mirrors certain fundamental Laws of Physics in the material world and also the Law of Karma in the spiritual.
At this point, the concepts in this article are merely the musings of a man who has meandered a few decades along the path of life. Perhaps they will interest you dear reader, as well, on your entrepreneurial journey.
the human concept of fairness
is uniformly understood and accepted,
across time, culture, and class
At the Societal Level (The Golden Rule)
It seems to me that the human concept of fairness is uniformly understood and accepted, across time, cultures, and classes.
Some cultures have placed boundaries around fairness by distinctions based on clan, class, or caste. But within any given grouping, fairness (meaning equal treatment before others and the law) appears to be an expected prerogative.
Prior to the 14th century, almost all societies were rural, agrarian, and clan-oriented. They functioned in geographical and societal isolation from others. Perhaps only 5% of those people were involved in trade; meaning they were the only ones interacting across boundaries of place, culture, and thus expectations. Those few who did so, had to learn how to survive and thrive in foreign milieus. They had to understand common expectations of fairness in their dealings to achieve win-win scenarios. Over time these practices became standards in commerce.
The concept of fairness has been expressed throughout history in a generic principle called "The Golden Rule" – treat others as you would like to be treated – which has appeared in various forms across various religions. The fundamental idea is to consider others' well-being and treat them with the same respect and kindness one desires for oneself. It forms an understood basis of empathy, reciprocity, and ethical conduct towards others.
Each of the major religions has a principle similar to The Golden Rule.
Christianity: "So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets." (Matthew 7:12)
Islam: "None of you [truly] believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself." (Forty Hadith of An-Nawawi 13); "Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you." (The Farewell Sermon of Prophet Muhammad)
Hinduism: "One should not behave towards others in a way which is disagreeable to oneself. This is the essence of morality. All other activities are due to selfish desire." (Mahabharata, Anusasana Parva 113.8)
Buddhism: "Just as one's own self is dear, so are other selves; therefore a self-controlled man should not strike another." (Sutta Nipata 3.70)
Judaism: "You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord." (Leviticus 19:18) "What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. This is the whole Torah; all the rest is the explanation." (Talmud, Shabbat 31a)
Sikhism: "Treat others as you yourself would like to be treated." (Adi Granth, p. 266)
Can we posit that the twin concepts of self-preservation and fairness were the attractive force which pulled humans together into societal frameworks? Whether it was a force evolutionary or conscious?
The absence of any principle that considers the impact of one's actions on others would likely lead to highly unstable and unsustainable social structures. A society where individuals acted with complete disregard for the well-being of others would likely be characterized by constant conflict and a lack of cooperation. So the larger the social group, the greater a common need for a principal such as The Golden Rule to maintain group cohesion and cooperative benefit.
we observe similar principles of action and consequence in Physics
At the Material Level (Laws of Physics)
Beyond the realm of human interaction, we observe similar principles of action and consequence at play in the fundamental laws of the material world.
The Law of Least Action leads to The Law of Conservation of Momentum which in turn leads to Newton’s Third Law of Motion. Newton’s Third law is almost a formulation of karma for the motion of physical objects.
The Principle of Least Action: It's a way of saying that nature is "economical" or "lazy"; it chooses the path that requires the "least effort". A system's path between two points in time is the one that minimizes a specific mathematical quantity called "action." This principle describes how the system evolves and from which other physical laws, including conservation laws, can be derived.
The Law of Conservation of Momentum: In an isolated system (one with no external forces acting on it), the total momentum (mass times velocity) of the system remains constant over time. This means momentum can be transferred between objects within the system, but the overall amount never changes.
Newton's Third Law of Motion: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." This means forces always express reciprocally in pairs; if object A pushes object B, object B simultaneously pushes object A back with the same force but in the opposite direction.
At the Spiritual Level (The Law of Karma)
The Law of Karma is central to Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism. It posits that:
Every action (physical, verbal, or mental) has a consequence.
These consequences may not be immediate but will inevitably manifest, either in this life or in future lives.
The nature of the action determines the nature of the consequence: positive (good) actions lead to positive outcomes, and negative (bad) actions lead to negative outcomes.
Karma is not about punishment or reward in a judgmental sense but rather a natural law of cause and effect governed by intentionality.
The Golden Rule and the Law of Karma
Emphasis on Consequences of Actions:
Both principles highlight that actions have repercussions. The Golden Rule suggests that treating others poorly will likely lead to negative consequences in our interactions with them (e.g., resentment, retaliation). The Law of Karma extends this to a broader cosmic and temporal scale, asserting that negative actions will ultimately lead to negative experiences for the actor.Importance of Ethical Conduct:
Both encourage ethical behavior. The Golden Rule provides a practical guideline for ethical interaction, while the Law of Karma offers a deeper metaphysical reason for ethical conduct – it shapes our future experiences and our journey through the cycle of rebirth.Focus on Intention and Action:
While the Golden Rule often focuses on outward behavior, the Law of Karma emphasizes the importance of intention behind the action. A seemingly good deed done with selfish intent may yield different karmic results than one done with genuine compassion. This aligns with the spirit of the Golden Rule, which implicitly encourages genuine empathy rather than just superficial compliance.Underlying Principle of Interconnectedness:
The Law of Karma often operates on the understanding that all beings are interconnected. Hurting another ultimately harms oneself within this interconnected web. The Golden Rule, by asking us to consider the perspective of others, also hints at this interconnectedness – recognizing that their experience is relevant to our own.
Whatever I do with intention and attachment to another part of my great Self,
I also do to my own little self, some time in the future
Deeper philosophical mechanism between Golden Rule and Karma
Background concepts of self
In Hindu philosophy, there are three concepts of self and consciousness — Ahamkara, Atman, and Brahman — often loosely equated in the West with the terms Ego, Soul, and Spirit, respectively.
Ahamkara is the ego or the "I-maker." Ego is the sense of individual self or "I-ness" that distinguishes one from others. It's the part of us that says, "I am this, I am that." It is a delusive state of the soul (atman) identifying with the physical mortal body and thus isolating itself from its existence as consciousness.
Atman is the individualized soul or true Self. It's the pure conscious essence, which is eternal and unchanging, distinct from the physical body and mind. It is an individualized part of the Universal Self.
Brahman is the ultimate reality, the Cosmic or Universal Self, Spirit, God. It's the source and essence of all Consciousness. It's often described as infinite, eternal, and unchanging. Its nature is termed Sat-Chit-Ananda: Ever Conscious, Ever Existing, Ever New Joy.
In essence, Ahamkara is the false self, Atman is the true Self, and Brahman is the Cosmic Self of which all individual selves are a part. The goal of many spiritual paths within Hinduism is to first unite (yoga) the consciousness from Ahamkara (ego) to Atman (Self) and then from Atman to Brahman, thus realizing the ultimate unity (yoga).
The concepts which tie the Golden Rule to Karma
Both “laws” stem from a notion of a Cosmic Self and involve the Hindu concept of Atman. Whatever one does (with intention and attachment) to another part of the great Self, one also does to one’s own little self, a subset of the great Self. (“Love your neighbor as your self.”)
The Golden Rule as Applied Understanding: When one truly understands the unity of Atman, the Golden Rule becomes a natural and logical extension of this understanding. Treating others with kindness and respect is not just a matter of social convention but a recognition that the "other" is not truly separate from oneself. Harming another is, in essence, harming one's own deeper Self. Because the individual self (Atman) is part of the universal Self (Brahman), the consequences of one's actions ripple through this interconnected reality and ultimately return to the actor.
Karma as the Mechanism of Consequence: Karma must be, has to be, the eventual accounting mechanism which returns – at some eventual point of time – causal intentionality back as action. The Law of Karma, in this context, enforces this interconnectedness. Actions performed with intention and attachment create karmic imprints that must eventually be resolved.
Intentionality and Attachment: The role of intention (bhava) and attachment (raga-dvesha - likes and dislikes) in the workings of Karma. Actions performed without selfish intention and thus without attachment to a result have no binding karmic consequences. This aligns with the spirit of the Golden Rule, which ideally stems from genuine empathy and a recognition of shared humanity rather than a calculated expectation of return.
Conclusion
We have explored the concept of fairness, its societal expression as The Golden Rule, its echo in the fundamental laws of physics, and its deep connection to the spiritual Law of Karma. For a Newbie Entrepreneur, you might wonder about the direct practical implications of these profoundities for business decisions, transactions and commerce.
Parts I and II of this trilogy already talked about the practical applications of business standards and self-discipline. This final installment, Part III, offers something different: an intriguing journey into the interconnectedness of some universal principles not typically thought of as interconnected.
I posit that an appreciation for how deeply these principles are woven into the fabric of existence might inspire and encourage their thoughtful application in your everyday business and individual life.