[Buddha-l] Re: buddha-l Digest, Vol 8, Issue 121

[Tom Troughton]

On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 11:39:59 +0100, Andrew Skilton wrote:

>Thu, 20 Oct 2005  Mike Austin wrote:
>
>>>>Do dogs collect bad kharma for eating meat? and if not, why not?
>
>>>Well, the start of an answer must surely be the Buddha declaring that 
>>>'karma' is 'intention'. When mine gobble food down, I guess they have no
>intention of
>>>harming other creatures, whatever it is that I have put in their bowls.
>
>>If I eat like this (not gobbling, but having no intention to harm other 
>>beings), do I create bad karma. Or is that only for dogs?
>
>But choosing to eat flesh when one knows and is capable understanding what is
>involved in its acquisition is 'an intention to harm other beings'. 
>
>My point, clearly not clearly expressed, was that when I feed my dogs they
>probably do not analyse what is in their bowl and are therefore capable of
>neither knowing nor understanding its provenance (and thereby precluding the
>possibility of their making an ethical choice). Whereas I am, and therefore the
>'bad karma' is mine.

Andrew

Does this not remove all ethical characteristic from the action? I am
under the impression that Buddhist theory does distinguish betweeen 1)
actions that are to abandoned or adopted according to vow, and 2)
actions that 'unmentionable', which seems to amount to a conception
that some actions carry some moral power due to their nature. The power
may be attenuated and so forth, but it remains. Perhaps Theravadin
traditions draw this distinction differently - could someone throw some
light on this?

You do not seem to wish to maintain this distinction, by making
morality only apply to knowing and understanding, i.e. human. It
appears to me that you are standing dangerously close to a slippery
slope. You could move away from that slope simply by assenting that
dogs do accumulate negative karma, attenuated through circumstance no
doubt, but still a stain imprinted on the mind.

This raises a question. In general do you think that the Buddhist
theory of karma, an explanation of our lack of control over our
experience and fate, is taught so we may assert control? Might it be
taught for some other reason(s)?

Best wishes

Tom