Do the good and bad deeds of a person pay off? I had seen many of such examples and even heard of many, but I'm quite unsure of whether this is just a belief or are there any ideal principles behind it. If a person does something bad to someone, does he really get back on to himself or it might be just a coincidence? I would like to clear that I'm not a philosophy student, though I'm quite interested in and wanna study also. So please do not use such words which may pose more difficulty.
In the perennial philosophy the laws of causation (in an ethical context) apply to intentions and motivations, not to deeds. If we help an old lady across the road and she gets run over half way across we are not marked down for this since it has nothing to do with our intentions. A teaching story has it that Buddha committed a murder in a previous life in order to save others from being murdered. The deed seems reprehensible, but the motive is what counts.
The punishment and rewards would be self-administered and this would be why we cannot escape our fate, that we will be our own judge and jury. We were there and know exactly our state of mind and intentions at the time. Socrates indicates this view when he says,'The price of a lack of virtue is a disordered soul'. A disordered soul would be its own punishment, just as virtue would be its own reward.
Ignorance of the effects of actions would be a valid excuse, but a failure to make any attempt to dispel our ignorance would have no excuse. Feigning ignorance would be impossible and pointless because no outside agency would be judging us. When a rock falls off a cliff it follows the laws of the universe all the way to the bottom, and the laws of karma would be just the same for falling humans.
What this would mean is that are no blanket rules. As the OP says, murder, criminal acts etc. are not always wrong since context is everything. Purity of heart would overcome all ethical errors and this would be connected to the teaching that those who are enlightened, thus free from any egoic tendency to think or act to the detriment of others, transcend the legacy of their karmic history.
This seems to be in line with the idea mentioned in another reply that it is the state of our consciousness that matters, and that determines the strength of the connection between our deeds and their consequences.
The answer is simple: Yes and No.
People who perform good deeds are certainly rewarded with the good feelings that come from doing good deeds. They are also likely to be esteemed and supported by the community.
On the other side of the coin is the adage crime doesn't pay. Criminals are often caught and prosecuted. Even those who aren't caught may be forced into hiding or may suffer from a "guilty conscience."
However, those are generalizations. In the political arena, crimes pays big time. Corrupt politicians can exploit and even murder millions of people and never spend a day in jail. They can become millionaires. Just about any U.S. President could be used as an example.
Ditto for CEO's, like Bill Gates. The same applies to the media and contemporary labor unions.
So one can be variously punished or rewarded for bad deeds. In general, I think it's safe to say that those who profit from crime tend to be more powerful and are generally associated with "organized crime," which can include governments.
Good deeds are probably more likely to pay dividends, even if they aren't monetary. However, they can be punished - especially in the political arena.
For example, activists who fight for social justice are typically insulted, harassed and even murdered.
On a bit of a tangent, I find it interesting that evil seems to ordinarily prevail over good, at least at the higher levels of the political system. Think about the Roman Empire, the European colonial empires and the United States. There are amazingly few stories about "good leaders."
One of the political/psychological questions I've long pursued is why it's so hard for good to triumph over evil. Ironically, one of the problems may be the victims, who are often too "good" to fight back.
According to Indian Vedic scriptures The answer to above question depends on what kind of person he/she is. There are three main kinds of people, namely, 1) Sattvik 2) Rajas 3)Tamas
Then there are thousands of types derived of permutations of these basic types. IF the person is more on Sattvik side, He becomes more aware of his consciousness and so the results of his deeds come faster and clearer, while if he lies near the Tamasik side , He becomes more and more unaware of his consciousness and consequently his deeds, Therefore the results of his deeds come slower and unclear . An animal or a plant are towards Tamasik side , as the level of there consciousness is very low compared to most of the humans , while the gods and goddesses depicted in scriptures have a higher level of consciousness than humans as they are near the Sattvik side of this scale of consciousness. So, it depends on the consciousness of person.