What you are saying is by and large OK, but I don't understand why you have to say that there is clinging without objects (?), or clinging without intellectual understanding that objects are objects (??).
I didn't say there is either...
I said intellectual clinging to objects, which is the realm of the intellect, and the first six consciousnesses and their objects.
This is brought up because you assert that a monkey must have a sense of ownership to be guilty of the karma
of stealing. Whereas I have stated that karma
is working at a much deeper level than the intellect, and requires no such sense to create retribution.
That there is clinging without consciousness of an outer world ??
What I was referring to was the grasping of manas
as its object, as an inner self. This grasping takes place at a deeper level than the intellect, the first six consciousnesses and their objects.
It is that which accounts for the continuity of consciousness-streams through states of dreamless sleep, fainting, samādhi
of cessation, etc.. in which the first six consciousnesses do not function.
Why would the hand move at all (to grasp at something imaginary or real) if there is no understanding of objects??
You've misunderstood the statement. Read above.
In the teaching of the 12 links of dependent arising it is said that there are three kinds of grasping ( at sense experience, at intellectual views and at existence/nonexistence). The second kind of grasping continues in the state of samadhi, this has been explained numerous times.
Know that there are different states of samādhi
. What I speak of is the samādhi
of cessation in which all of the first six consciousness are completely non-functioning, as in dreamless sleep, fainting, coma, etc..
Sense experience and intellectual views are completely cut off in such states. Yet manas
is still grasping ālaya
as its object, which accounts for karma
as consciousness as retribution, accounting for continuance of consciousness-streams upon waking up from such states or being reborn.
The point with saying all of this is to say that karma
doesn't rely on intellectual understanding, as that can be completely shut off. So your case about the monkeys not having such an intellectual idea of ownership, or the gradual development of such an intellectual sense really doesn't make a difference. Karma
is impulses as actions of manas
with its passions for selfhood. So the karma
of stealing depends on the deep passion for selfhood, not on any concept of ownership developed on an intellectual level, although that will certainly color karma
So no, monkeys are not exempt because they don't have a concept of ownership. They have manas
which is always accompanied by the passions for selfhood, and from which come the impulses that are already actions and manifest as perceived "bodily-action", etc., although it is all action of manas
As Vasubandhu explains, in the first six consciousnesses, if the eyes just see and the ears just hear, that is only functioning and is not action resulting in retribution, which is why a Buddha can function properly without creating karma
is action of manas
which such beings have completely destroyed.