This study will examine and compare the different views of karma in Hinduism and Buddhism, including consideration of the Buddhist theory of dependent origination, the role of actions vs. intentions in karma, and the difference between the Hindu concept of reincarnation and the Buddhist concept of rebirth.
The concept of karma in general is not as simple as the popular interpretation of it would hold. Comparing the two religions' views brings out additional subtleties and complexities. On one level, karma would seem to lock the individual into a cycle of behavior from which he has no hope of breaking free, as Schroeder writes with respect to the Hindu definition of the concept:
Karma: "deed, action, impression": The law of causality: all events have causes and results; the principle of universal determinism applies to the mental and the moral sphere: our conditioning produces the impulse for every thought and action. Good/Evil acts have immediate psychological effects; good acts tend to break down our ego-centeredness and lead to liberation, while evil acts reinforce our ignorant assumption of the reality of the ego and inhibit our realization of all-inclusive consciousness.
Clearly, the Hindu concept of karma does give the individual freedom in choosing his actions, or such "liberation" through good acts would not be possible. The prison in which the ego entrap[s itself is composed of ignorance and ego, rather than a cycle from which the individual cannot break free.
Kinsley, continuing with Hinduism, writes of karma that it is seen as the force behind the division of castes, and is also seen as related to the Hindu concept of rebirth:
The philosophical ideas underlying the caste system are karma, the moral law of cause and effect according to which a person reaps what he or she sows, and samsara, rebirth according to the nature of a person's karma. The basic idea is that what one is now is the result of all that on...