Another very dangerous view I would like to mention is Determinism.
Wikipedia: “Determinism is the philosophical theory that all events, including moral choices, are completely determined by previously existing causes. Determinism is usually understood to preclude free will because it entails that humans cannot act otherwise than they do.”
I recalled a colleague who has this wrong view. He told me that everything has been planned out for us. Including the conversation which is now taking place between the two of us. He ‘proved’ to me that his theory is true by asking me to go to a corner and squat down. Of course I did not do that. Then, he said I did not do as what he asked because I was not ‘programmed’ to carry out that act. And if I really did go to a corner and squat down, he would say that’s because I was ‘programmed’ to do as what was told! How ridiculous! He went on to say that we sentient beings are just like the video game characters, controlled by a powerful and mighty being above. Everything has already been dictated by this being and we are merely acting out according to his wishes.
Incidentally, I just finished listening to a bhante’s discourse on determinism and thought of sharing it with fellow dhamma friends here. And by the way, the discourse is in mandarin. Bhante mentioned that the word kamma vipaka originated from an external sect in ancient India. The external sect’s version of kamma vipaka is determinism. Bhante related two examples to illustrate some important points. 1. A lay person after attending to dhamma class, left the monastery and met a beggar outside. He was so compassionate especially after listening to bhante’s talk that he gave the beggar $50. Now, according to determinism the beggar must be a creditor and the lay person a debtor in previous life. Of all lay persons why only this lay person gave money to the beggar? Of all the places why must this beggar appear outside the monastery after the dhamma talk? Determinism said the events that take place in this present life must be due to previous life kamma. That being the case, can there be any merit for the lay person to give that $50 to the beggar? No. Because he owes it to the beggar in the previous life. And is there any wrong in the beggar to take the lay person’s money without thanking him? Again determinism said no wrong because it is only right that the creditor takes back what was owed to him. The creditor can even blame the debtor for returning the money late! 2. A motorist drives a car and knocked down a passenger. Of all places and people, why must this motorist and passenger meet in an accident? Determinism said everything is destined by past kamma. The motorist is the creditor and the passenger the debtor. Since debts must be repaid, determinism said it is only right that the motorist must knock down the passenger or the passenger to be knocked down by the motorist to repay his debt owed to the motorist in previous life. So, according to determinism, there is no wrong for the motorist to knock down the passenger. Owe debt pay debt, no wrong in present life actions right? Now, this is a very dangerous view. People who uphold this kind of view will always blame his actions and events on previous kamma and they will never strive to end suffering and see dangers in any wrong doings. He will not want to do anything and be a parasite to society. Determinism will even ‘motivate’ him to commit monstrous crime to get what he desires without considering the consequences.
Bhante mentioned that the kamma vipaka that the Buddha taught is not deterministic. It is affected, not determined, by past kamma, present actions, and external factors that relate to our present actions and vipaka brought upon us by past kamma. He gave a simile: Supposedly yesterday I bought a bottle of milk and left it in the fridge. Today I open up the bottle of milk to drink and find the taste not to my liking. The event of buying the milk took place yesterday and it is a fact. The taste of the milk which is not to my liking is the vipaka I have to endure. What I can do is to buy some oranges from the supermarket and squash them to mix with the milk to make the drink tastier. The supermarket and oranges are external things that influence the vipaka from past kamma and my present actions to yield a desirable outcome. The supermarket and oranges are built and grown by someone. I have no control over them. But through skilful means, I would be able to change the vipaka (of the bad tasting milk) to my liking. I think bhante is trying to say we have free-will to change our destiny. He summarises his talk by giving an analogy of 3 persons lifting a table, representing kamma vipaka, present life actions, and external factors. 2 of the 3 persons will influence that 1 person as much as this one person influencing the other 2. How high the table was lifted, how fast the 3 of them walk , and the height of the 3 persons will influence any one of them.