▁idea ▁of ▁absolute ▁freedom ▁of ▁choice ▁( that ▁is ▁that ▁any ▁human ▁being ▁could ▁be ▁completely ▁free ▁to ▁make ▁any ▁choice ) ▁is ▁un wise , ▁because ▁it ▁den ies ▁the ▁reality ▁of ▁one ' s ▁physical ▁needs ▁and ▁circumstances . ▁Equ ally ▁incorrect ▁is ▁the ▁idea ▁that ▁humans ▁have ▁no ▁choice ▁in ▁life ▁or ▁that ▁their ▁lives ▁are ▁pre - det erm ined . ▁To ▁den y ▁freedom ▁would ▁be ▁to ▁den y ▁the ▁efforts ▁of ▁Buddh ists ▁to ▁make ▁moral ▁progress ▁( through ▁our ▁capacity ▁to ▁freely ▁choose ▁comp ass ion ate ▁action ). ▁Pub bek ata het uv ada , ▁the ▁belief ▁that ▁all ▁happiness ▁and ▁suffering ▁arise ▁from ▁previous ▁actions , ▁is ▁considered ▁a ▁wrong ▁view ▁according ▁to ▁Buddh ist ▁do ctr ines . ▁Because ▁Buddh ists ▁also ▁reject ▁agent hood , ▁the ▁traditional ▁compat ibil ist ▁strateg ies ▁are ▁closed ▁to ▁them ▁as ▁well . ▁Instead , ▁the ▁Buddh ist ▁philosoph ical ▁strategy ▁is ▁to ▁examine ▁the ▁met aph ys ics ▁of ▁caus ality . ▁An cient ▁India ▁had ▁many ▁he ated ▁arguments ▁about ▁the ▁nature ▁of ▁caus ality ▁with ▁J ains , ▁Ny ay ists , ▁Sam k hy ists , ▁C ā rv ā k ans , ▁and ▁Buddh ists ▁all ▁taking ▁slightly ▁different ▁lines . ▁In ▁many ▁ways , ▁the ▁Buddh ist ▁position ▁is ▁closer ▁to ▁a ▁theory ▁of ▁" condition ality " ▁than ▁a ▁theory ▁of ▁" ca us ality ", ▁especially ▁as ▁it ▁is ▁exp ounded ▁by ▁Nag ar j una ▁in ▁the