many people are disillusioned with karma because we don't see the universe follow up on the pretense that if we act immorally, we will suffer. in fact, it seems wholly indifferent to our actions- and more often than not, those acting immorally and selfishly enjoy their lives the most. this can lead to the belief that the universe is unjust or even cruel, as well as create nihilistic attitudes that may motivate immoral behaviours- particularly among young men who have not actually read Nietzsche.

but if we shift our ideas of karma to be dependent on understanding and mindfulness, instead of relying on an external divine force, it becomes a lot more plausible. instead of waiting for karma to be enacted, we should take responsibility for our actions and morality. this idea can be extracted from various schools of thought, including stoicism, which suggests we focus on what we can control, instead of worrying about whether the universe will act in our favour. our actions are one of the few things we can control, meaning that as long as the universe is indifferent, the responsibility of karma falls on us. we can rise to this by analysing our behaviour and attitudes to determine whether they align with our sense of morality. if they don't, we tend to feel shame, guilt, or regret, which motivate us to change. this is a much more reliable and realistic karmic system than that of divine punishment, and is arguably more noble, since we take responsibility for our actions and work hard to do the right thing, instead of leaving morality to the 'top-down' approach we expect of the universe.
this can be linked to two tenets of Christianity: the Holy Spirit, and salvation through good work. the first is defined as the presence of God in everything around us, which acts as our conscience and guides us towards the path of righteousness. this mirrors my stance that karma is enacted through our own conscience, since the Holy Spirit projects God's morality onto us and encourages us to follow it, instead of relying on eventual punishment to show us where we have gone wrong. salvation through good work, though not practiced by all denominations, further asserts that virtue is achieved by taking control of our actions and ensuring they are morally righteous. though this isn't applicable when considering karma alongside nihilism, it is otherwise a useful comparison, especially for those of faith.

even so, people who act immorally often seem the happiest. yet, if these people felt guilt, regret or shame, they would surely change their actions. this poses the suspicion that the divine does involve itself in our lives, but only to reward things we generally condemn.
however, i strongly disagree with this. i would argue that this lack of guilt isn't a reward from the universe, but caused by a cycle inevitable to acting immorally. immoral acts tend to be fuelled by emotion or the ego, which are indulgent motivators that hinder reasoning and contribute to ignorance. hence: reason has not been applied to the motives for the action (what allows the immoral action to be carried out in the first place); nor has reason been applied to the results of the action, allowing a person to focus on the results they want, instead of the negative consequences inherent to an immoral act. the action can then be repeated with ignorance.

for instance, let's consider addiction, though through an incredibly simplified lens for ease of our analogy. though my analogy isn't compassionate, i don't write with ill intent, as i understand the nuances of addiction and have faced it myself. while there are many factors that motivate and prolong addiction, for this analogy i have had to simplify it by shifting responsibility wholly to the person facing addiction, though this reductive and callous attitude isn't something i believe in.
initially, reason hasn't been applied before developing the addictive behaviour, since if it had, the risks would have been clear enough that the person wouldn't be facing addiction. considering that addictive behaviours typically numb a negative feeling and provide a positive one, we can understand how reason is further hindered by desire for the positive result and ignorance of the negative ones. in this case, the person is too caught up in their indulgent motivations to properly reason and understand the detrimental effects of their addiction.

to summarise this analogy: emotion and ego cause immoral motivations, then hinder reflection that can lead to change by indulging in the positive results of an ultimately harmful action. the cycle of indulgent motivations means that the person hasn't considered the negative consequences of the action beforehand or in hindsight, allowing them to resist any feelings of guilt so that they appear happier than others. this is also applicable to acts of violence, revenge, hedonism, exploitation, overindulgence, or any case where emotion or the narrow-mindedness of the ego interferes with our ability to reason.
therefore, when we act solely under the influence of indulgent motivations, we defend our desires from our conscience, and our actions from reason. this allows us to focus on the benefits of overall detrimental or immoral behaviours, and creates the notion that we are rewarded for ignorance and immorality.

but is this really karma? you could argue that this sort of reflection can't live up to the promise of karma, and can't be compared to the cosmic force we often imagine- after all, we can only take responsibility for our own actions, and this may not be considered a severe enough response.
even so, i feel that this is the closest to any karmic force we're going to get: if the world can't promise us karma, we have to promise it to ourselves. guilt acts in the same way as karma, pointing out where we have gone wrong and motivating us to change our behaviours to avoid further punishment, as well as encouraging reparations. as for karma as a force of revenge, i would again suggest reassessing our notion of karma to be more guiding than punishing, since this is a more productive response to immorality, and causes no unnecessary suffering.




'When somebody comes to us and asks if [they] should stop drinking before recieving the five mindfulness trainings (the precepts), we always tell them that they can continue to drink, but they must drink mindfully. If you drink your wine mindfully, if you practice deeply, you will stop drinking after a few weeks. Nothing is forced on you; it is your own understanding, your wisdom, that tells you how to behave, that tells you how to conduct your everyday life.'
'If you meet the Buddha on your way, you must kill him.'