Expert: Justin Choo - 12/4/2008

Question
QUESTION: Hi Justin

If one intentionally killed a dying animal out of compassion to prevent further suffering would that be wrong (unwholesome action)according to the Buddhist point of view?

I read under "Right View" that actions are distinguished as wholesome and unwholesome on the basis of their underlying motives called "roots" Ill-will, greed, and delusion. I suppose if one killed with the underlying motive of compassion then the act would not be unwholesome. Am I understanding this correctly? I have read that killing no matter for what reason will accrue unwholseome vipaka.  It also says in the 5 precepts to refrain from destroying living creatures.  Are their exceptions?

Simon

ANSWER: Hi Simon,

The Buddhist concept of killing involves 5 conditions:


1. The victim of the killing must be a living being.
2. The killer must know the victim is a being.
3. The killer must have the volition to kill the victim.
4. The action of killing must be performed by the killer.
5. The victim dies as a result of this act.

If the above conditions are all fulfilled by one killer, then he is 100% responsible for the killing.  Here we are talking about the act of killing and not the reasons for the killing.  Killing is killing.  However, there may be some mitigating factors that the bad kammic effect (vipaka) be reduced.  For example if the killing is for the greater good like preventing the culprit from killing others.

A person may have "good" reasons for mercy killing, but it is still killing.  We have to separate the "act" of killing from the "reasons" for the killing.  

Take care.

Justin Choo


[I like to invite you to visit my blog:]
http://lifeislikethat999.blogspot.com/

[And these sites by Rev. Dhammika:]
http://sdhammika.blogspot.com/
http://www.buddhismatoz.com/


---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Hello Justin

It is still not clear to me why one should take on unwholesome kamma for terminating a life if the intention behind the killing contains no ill-will, greed, or delusion. The cause and effect doesn't seem logical, and this puzzles me.

I understand Tibetan monks are not vegetarian, and that they kill animals to survive because they live in a land where vegetables cannot be grown.  So would it be correct to say that every time a monk killed an animal he be would be accruing unwholesome vipaka?

About the eating of meat in Buddhism.  It seems that not all Buddhist are in agreement when it comes to this matter.  There are some traditions where it is strongly discouraged, and yet in Japan which is very much a meat eating society, and a Buddhist country, it is ok.  It is not discouraged at all.  I even seen a Tibetan lama devour a big T-bone steak when he could have chosen a vegetarian dish.  I find this inconsistency somewhat confusing.  

I am not claiming my understanding is correct, I am just trying to see things the way they are with clear comprehension. If you could help me do this your help would be much appreciated.

By the way I am studying Buddhism on my own.  I have found that Buddhism is absolutely fascinating to study. It makes so much sense, but there are some parts that I don’t yet understand and I am trying to fit pieces of the puzzle together.


Simon


ANSWER: Hi Simon,
Thanks for coming back.  Please feel free to ask further if you are not clear.  I shall try my best to clarify your doubts.

<<It is still not clear to me why one should take on unwholesome kamma for terminating a life if the intention behind the killing contains no ill-will, greed, or delusion. The cause and effect doesn't seem logical, and this puzzles me.>>
The law of kamma is like the law of electricity.  It is logical but is amoral, meaning not having anything to do with morality.  Irrespective of one's intention or reason, if one touches a life-wire one will be electrocuted.  So it is of utmost importance that one should know the properties and nature of electricity.  Likewise, the law of kamma.


<<I understand Tibetan monks are not vegetarian, and that they kill animals to survive....  So would it be correct to say that every time a monk killed an animal he be would be accruing unwholesome vipaka?>>
Monks never commit the act of killing. They may be eating meat; but they never kill the animals.

<<About the eating of meat in Buddhism.  It seems that not all Buddhist are in agreement when it comes to this matter.....I find this inconsistency somewhat confusing.>>
Being a vegetarian actually has nothing directly to do with killing.  People tend to think that eating meat is killing.  Certainly, being a vegan is a very wholesome and healthy decision.  It certainly avoids encouraging killing animals for consumption.

I just came across this short You Tube presentation given by my late Dhamma teacher on "vegetarianism".  It explains very clearly about vegetarianism.  Take a look here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0JP_EXmmFE

<I am not claiming my understanding is correct, I am just trying to see things the way they are with clear comprehension. If you could help me do this your help would be much appreciated.

By the way I am studying Buddhism on my own.  I have found that Buddhism is absolutely fascinating to study. It makes so much sense, but there are some parts that I don’t yet understand and I am trying to fit pieces of the puzzle together.>>

Welcome to the path of peace and happiness.  Because of its freedom of thoughts, Buddhism is exposed to many interpretations.  Please take your time to study. It is only through serious thinking and analyses over time, that one will understand the teachings of the Buddha correctly.  It is not the destination, but the journey one takes that is important.  Along the way, we learn, we experience, and become wiser and happier and more peaceful with the results.

Please feel free to ask me any question anytime.  I am here only for this purpose : to share with anyone who wants to ask me; time unlimited.   

Take care.

Justin Choo.

The "Mother" of all Buddhist web sites is : www.buddhanet.net


Please remember to visit the sites below:


[I like to invite you to visit my blog:]
http://lifeislikethat999.blogspot.com/

[And these sites by Rev. Dhammika:]
http://sdhammika.blogspot.com/
http://www.buddhismatoz.com/









---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Hello Justin
     
Thanks for answering my questions. You gave me lots to think about.  In the meantime I would like to discuss the following with you:          

What you said about law governing the outcome of ones actions got me thinking. If ones personal beliefs and actions are not in harmony with universal law they will be overridden by law irrespective of how hard one tries to do the right thing (morality).  Law is law and it can’t be changed.  So it is best to know these laws and live in harmony with them.  So what exactly are these laws?  Do the Buddhists have a list?  Also I would think that it is of the utmost importance that these laws are correctly interpreted.  If not, one will still suffer and not know why, and just end up going around in circles.  Also incorrect interpretation would lead to delusion, and delusion is one of the 3 roots of suffering.
         
Would it be correct to say that it is not God (according to mans interpretation) that governs the universe, it is the universal laws of the universe that governs the universe?  God is law.  If one lives in harmony with these laws one will be happy but if one goes against these laws one will suffer.         
         
About monks not eating meat.  You say they are not creating unwholesome kamma because they eat the meat of an animal that someone else has killed for them.  But what about the people in their village who do the killing, are they not Buddhist, and if they are would they not be accruing unwholesome kamma each time they killed an animal?  They need to kill these animals to survive, they really don’t have much choice.  Same as the Eskimos who live in the arctic.  

Is the present interpretation of kammic law 100% correct, and has it been fully interpreted in all aspects?  There are conflicting beliefs even among those who believe in reincarnation or re-birth.   How can one separate truth from delusion? Looking forward to your reply.          
         
Simon

Answer
Hi Simon,

Thanks for coming back.  One of the ways to learn Buddhism is by discussing with different friends and teachers.  This will set us thinking and analysing.  Let not others (including me) influence your thoughts and decision.  Study our answers and then you decide which is the most logical.  Don't expect similar answers all the time.  This is the beauty of Buddhism.  Once you are well versed with the fundamentals of the Buddha's teachings, you will be able to come to your own conclusion when faced with questions.

It is just like studying the English language.  You learn the alphabets, grammar and sentence construction.  After you are familiar, you will be able to read and write.  How clever a person will be, will depend on his intelligence.

You have answered your own question in this sentence:
"  If one lives in harmony with these laws one will be happy but if one goes against these laws one will suffer."

   
<<So it is best to know these laws and live in harmony with them.  So what exactly are these laws?  Do the Buddhists have a list?  Also I would think that it is of the utmost importance that these laws are correctly interpreted.>>

These laws are in the teachings of the Buddha.  So take heed and learn them.  You are also correct to emphasize the importance pf understanding the teachings clearly.  This is the first of the Noble Eightfold Path....Right Understanding.  Otherwise, as you said it correctly:  "If not, one will still suffer and not know why, and just end up going around in circles."

Now coming to your next question: "They need to kill these animals to survive, they really don’t have much choice.  Same as the Eskimos who live in the arctic."

You are right again.  The sad truth is that such things happen in this world.  If one is born in the wrong place at the wrong time, then one suffers.  It is the nature of this world that suffering or unsatisfactoriness exists.  This the first of the Four Noble Truths.  If one understands the nature of this existence and the working of the law of kamma, then one will take heed to conduct one's life in a wholesome and peaceful manner so as to minimize the possibility of being born in such unconducive environment.  It is not about future lives alone.  Nasty things can happen in this present life, so we must be careful in our moral conduct.

Your last question: "Is the present interpretation of kammic law 100% correct, and has it been fully interpreted in all aspects?  There are conflicting beliefs even among those who believe in reincarnation or re-birth.   How can one separate truth from delusion?"

The Buddha's teachings are open to scrutiny and analysis.  In the process, there will be those who will not believe, while others may misinterprete.  So be careful.  Don't even believe what I wrote!  

How then can we separate truth from delusion?  When one progresses deeper into the practice of Buddhism, one will come to realize what is truth and what is not.  We do not depend  on any teacher to tell us that.  We have the intelligence of our own.  With the practice of Buddhist meditation, one's mind will become clearer eventually.  Remember, just like learning English, once you are conversant you don't rely on others to improve further.  You just practise, and each person will arrive at his/her rightful level of understanding.

(Simon, this "thread" is becoming too long.  If you need to ask further, please start a new thread by clicking the "Ask a question" prompt)

Justin Choo