Appearances as Reflections of Karma

During and after the Dharma@Cinema session of ‘Handsome Suit’ recently, there were some issues raised on whether one’s appearance is conditioned by one’s karma. Here is a summary of the interesting discussion.

Since one’s form is related to one’s karma,
and since one’s karma changes, one’s form will change –
till one attains the Buddha’s perfect form with pure karma.

– Stonepeace

Introduction: When one has done much good, one’s appearance improves in time. This is so in the general sense, even though worldly beauty is subjective. Looks are thus karma-related, as a result of past karma ripening in the present, though one’s present looks do not always reflect one’s present virtues accurately.

E.g. one who looks good might have abandoned goodness to do evil, and one who is not so good-looking might be doing much good now, which leads to better looks later – in this or a future life. In fact, there is often a delay effect of one’s goodness or lack of goodness being reflected in one’s appearance. E.g. a virtuous person in a past life might be reborn good-looking as one of the results, but might since become non-virtuous due to rise of great vanity, pride or anger… while still generally looking good for some time, though the looks are fading away at the same time. As such, one’s appearance is not a good gauge of a person’s present character. We should not judge by impermanent appearances, and practise equanimous loving-kindness to all we encounter best we can.

Question: I think many Buddhists deterministically attribute everything (including looks) experienced to karma, but karma is only one of the five laws (niyamas; cosmic orders) in the universe. What do you think?

Answer: If we look at the five niyamas, we will realise that we are only in direct control of karma niyama, while the other four niyamas are impersonal workings of nature. Yet, how we unwittingly experience these four niyamas are results of personal karma expressed through them in an interconnected way. Let us see some examples…

1. Utu Niyama – Physical inorganic order
(Eg. Seasonal phenomena of the elements)
2. Bija Niyama – Physical organic order
(Eg. Order of germs and seeds, similar to genetics)
3. Karma Niyama – Order of an act and result
(Eg. Un/Skilful intentions leading to positive/negative results)
4. Dharma Niyama – Order of the norm
(Eg. Natural phenomena occurring at last birth of a Bodhisatta, gravity and other similar laws of nature)
5. Citta Niyama – Order of mind and psychic law
(Eg. Processes of consciousness, telepathy, telesthesia, retrocognition, premonition, clairvoyance, clairaudience and other psychic phenomena inexplicable to science)

Respectively based on the above…

Example 1: Karma can affect how the weather is experienced.
E.g. Global warming is the fault of humans.
Example 2: Karma determines our genes as our physical form is never random or ‘passed down’. Karmic ‘birds’ of some similar feathers flock together as family, giving the illusion of genetic inheritance.
Example 3: The human experiences of the above and below examples pivot around karma niyama.
Example 4: Karma affects how laws of physics affect us.
E.g. Not all who fall from the same height due to gravity suffer the same)
Example 5: Karma affects our developed our minds are and how easily we can develop them.

If we think we are totally at the mercy of the four niyamas, while karma niyama cannot intervene, that is quite fatalistic. Some things that might happen include… The Buddha ‘inheriting’ of poor genes, thus looking ugly. However, according to the suttas, the Buddha’s 32 magnificent physical characteristics manifest specifically and naturally through the pure meritorious karma of his spiritual cultivation – not by genetic inheritance from say, his father – especially since his father did not have the 32 characteristics. If this applies for the Buddha’s case, it should apply to all sentient beings too, as the law of karma is impartial. That the Buddha’s looks come from positive karma is reflected in the Lakkhana Sutta too:

“Monks, in whatever former life, former existence or dwelling place the Tathagata, being born a human being, undertook mighty deeds to good purpose, unwavering in good conduct of body, speech and thought, in generosity, self-discipline, observance of the fast-day, in honoring parents, ascetics and Brahmins and the head of the clan, and in other highly meritorious acts; by performing that kamma, heaping it up, lavishly and abundantly, at the breaking up of the body after death he was reborn in a happy state, in a heavenly world, where he was endowed beyond other devas in ten respects: in length of heavenly life beauty, happiness, splendor, influence, and in sights, sounds, smells, tastes and contacts. Falling away from there and coming to be reborn here on earth, he acquired this mark of a great man: feet with level tread, so that he places his foot evenly on the ground, lifts it evenly, and touches the ground evenly with the entire sole. – http://tipitaka.wikia.com/wiki/Lakkhana_Sutta

Question: I think whether one is born good or bad-looking, handicapped or not is not so much due to karma niyama, but due to biji niyama, e.g. just a chance of genetics and other factors such as environment. What do you think?

Answer: For general explanations to beginners on the cause of one’s appearance, the four niyamas are often left out. This is understandable due to the above – that our personal experience of life pivots around the experience of personal karma (as expressed through the four niyamas) – both that created in the past and in the present (e.g. choice of attitude). If the way one is born is not always an expression of karma, the law of karma actually breaks down. For instance, a great Bodhisattva on the brink of Buddhahood might be born ugly and crippled despite being the most meritorious being next to a Buddha. This clearly cannot be the case – as his karma would work with and through the other niyamas to result in a very magnificent and able form – for ease of Dharma practice and outreach in teaching. Here are passages from the Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta which state how karma affects appearances:

10. “But here some woman or man is not angry or much given to rage; even when much is said, he is not furious, angry, ill-disposed, resentful, nor does he show ill-temper, hate or surliness. Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a happy destination… If instead he comes to the human state, he is beautiful wherever he is reborn. This is the way that leads to beauty, that is to say, not to be angry or given to much rage; even when much is said, not to be furious, angry, ill-disposed or resentful, or to show ill-temper, hate or surliness.

19. “So, student, the way that leads to short life makes people short-lived, the way that leads to long life makes people long-lived; the way that leads to sickness makes people sick, the way that leads to health makes people healthy; the way that leads to ugliness makes people ugly, the way that leads to beauty makes people beautiful; the way that leads to insignificance makes people insignificant, the way that leads to influence makes people influential; the way that leads to poverty makes people poor, the way that leads to riches makes people rich; the way that leads to low birth makes people low-born, the way that leads to high birth makes people high-born; the way that leads to stupidity makes people stupid, the way that leads to wisdom makes people wise. Beings are owners of kammas, student, heirs of kammas, they have kammas as their progenitor, kammas as their kin, kammas as their homing-place. It is kammas that differentiate beings according to inferiority and superiority.” – http://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.135.nymo.html

As above, I would see one’s genes as an expression of one’s past karma. There is cause and effect for everything. And when it comes to human experience, there is karmic cause and effect embedded too. Even for genes, their effects are not deterministic as their influences can be conscientiously tweaked in one’s present life. How we choose to face our present conditions creates fresh karma.

Question: I think karma affects looks in simple ways – e.g. being kind-hearted and happy, one is more likely to be smiling, and this facial radiance makes one more pleasant. What do you think?

Answer: Yes – this would be the result of fresh karma created and sustained in this present life.

Question: I think we should adopt a less deterministic perspective towards karma, such as attributing things that happened as definitely due to karma, when they could only be influenced or conditioned by karma. What do you think?

Answer: If you look at the five niyamas, you will realise that the only way karma niyama can be expressed is through the other four niyamas. Actually, I think it is much more deterministic to assume that the effects of all the four niyamas cannot be determined by us. My belief is that they are all tweakable by our choice of karma created in this lifetime. If not, karma niyama would be in conflict with the other niyamas too. E.g. ‘It’s unfortunate that so-and-so died in that freak car accident. Looks like his great store of good karma could not win dharma niyama (laws of physics).’ The truth is the other way round – immense good karma has protective effects that prevent or lessen the effects of freak ‘random’ accidents.