Karma Without the Judge: From Cause and Effect to Religious-Moral Authority examines the conceptual distinction between ordinary causality and the religious interpretation of karma. The paper argues that actions can produce consequences through physical, biological, psychological, social, and environmental processes without requiring a supernatural judge, divine authority, cosmic ledger, or system of reward and punishment. It critically examines the transformation of consequence into moralized consequence, particularly when suffering is interpreted as deserved punishment or prosperity as deserved reward. The paper further explores how karmic interpretations can become systems of religious authority by claiming knowledge of invisible causes, previous lives, moral debts, and future consequences. Rather than denying responsibility or the significance of action, the paper proposes understanding responsibility through observable consequences, relationships, transformation, and direct awareness. Its central thesis is that causality does not require moral judgment: cause and effect can be understood without converting existence into a cosmic courtroom.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mayank Singh (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: