The Analysis of Deeds
Lecture Notes
The question behind the discourse
A young man named Subha comes with the oldest question there is: why are people so unequal? Some die young, others live long; some are sickly, others strong; some beautiful, some not; some poor, some rich; some obscure, some influential; some dull, some wise. Why? The Buddha's answer is the heart of what the West calls "karma" — though the word simply means action:
His claim is not that a god rewards and punishes, nor that blind fate rules. It is a claim about cause and effect in the moral life: what we repeatedly intend and do shapes what we become. Our actions are not events that happen and vanish — they are seeds.
The pattern of cause and fruit
He then lays out pairs — a habitual action and the kind of life it tends to grow toward:
- Harming and killing → a short, fragile life; reverence for life → vitality and length of days.
- Cruelty to beings → affliction; gentleness → health.
- Anger and irritation → an unlovely presence; patience → a serene, attractive one.
- Envy of others' good → little influence; gladness at others' good → real standing.
- Stinginess → want; generosity → abundance.
- Arrogance → low regard; humility → honor.
- Never asking the wise what is wholesome → confusion; inquiring → understanding.
Read the list as a description of tendencies and trajectories, not a courtroom verdict. The Buddha is pointing at the grain of the moral universe: kindness tends toward conditions where kindness can flourish; cruelty corrodes the very ground the cruel person stands on. Over time, habits become character, and character shapes a life.
This teaching is easily and badly misused. It does not mean a sick person "must have been cruel," or that the poor "deserve" poverty, or that anyone's suffering is their fault. Turning karma into a tool to explain away others' misfortune — or to blame victims — is a misreading the Buddha's own compassion contradicts everywhere else in these discourses.
Karma points forward, not backward, and it is meant to be applied to oneself, not wielded against others. Its real force is this: your actions matter, they are shaping you right now, and you are not the passive product of fate — you are, in part, the author of who you are becoming. That is a teaching of responsibility and hope, not of blame.
- Karma means action, not fate. Not a cosmic judge — a description of how what we do shapes who we become.
- It's a mirror for yourself, not a verdict on others. Applied to others' misfortune it becomes cruelty; applied to your own choices it becomes responsibility.
- Habits are seeds. Small repeated actions quietly grow a whole life's conditions. Which seeds are you watering?
Primary TextRead & annotate
Read MN 135 — Subha's question, the Buddha's principle, and the seven pairs. As you read, mark up your copy:
Use ~ freely — genuine objections are the point this week. Next to any pair that troubles you, write why, then check it against the caution above and see whether the objection still stands.
Open MN 135 — full text & quiz →
Discussion Questions
- What's the difference between "my actions shape who I'm becoming" and "misfortune is deserved"? Why does the first heal and the second harm?
- The Buddha applies karma to oneself, looking forward. How does that change the teaching from how "karma" is often used casually in the West?
- Take one pair — say, anger tending toward an unlovely life. Setting aside future lives entirely, is there a plainly observable truth in it within this life?
- Does believing your actions genuinely matter make you more free, or more burdened? Or both?
- Which "seed" in your own daily habits would you most want to stop watering — and which to water more?
AssignmentChoose one · bring it next session
Choose one small, habitual action of yours — kind or unkind, generous or grasping. Over the week, watch honestly where that habit leads: how it shapes your mood, your relationships, the conditions around you. Write half a page on the trajectory you can actually observe, no future lives required.
Imagine a friend says, "So Buddhism thinks poor and sick people deserve it?" Write the reply you'd give — one that's honest about what MN 135 says and clear about what it does not mean. Teaching yourself to answer this well protects the teaching from misuse.
Self-Check
Take the short quiz for MN 135 on its reading page. Aim to hold two things at once: what the discourse claims, and the guardrail against misreading it. Bring anything that still sits uneasily.
Session 9 — Not-self, part 1
We return to a discourse you already know. Back in Session 2 we read the first half of MN 22 — the raft and the water-snake. Next week we go into its deeper second half, where the Buddha turns to his most disorienting teaching: anattā, not-self. "This is not mine; this I am not; this is not my self." We'll take it slowly, and gently.