A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
SunWuKong
Posts: 636
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:15 pm
Location: Alexandria, Virginia, USA
Contact:

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by SunWuKong »

So, try the fruit and vegetable eating iguana, maybe. To tame them, you feed by hand, to keep them healthy form a habit of eating many different foods
"We are magical animals that roam" ~ Roam
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1663
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:50 pm
Location: South Florida, USA

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by seeker242 »

Iguanas! Total vegetarians and make good pets. And there is usually plenty of them available for adoptions, as they are a commonly discarded pet...
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe!
User avatar
cyril
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 5:47 am

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by cyril »

Aspiring.Monk wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 9:30 am
Grigoris wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 7:54 am I am always delighted to observe the range of problems that people have existential issues over...
Well, if I had access to a teacher or fully understood these things, I would not have to ask the questions here. Since this is really, my only resource, I turn here, to people that possibly know more than I to help me get an answer.
You might find this helpful

https://www.lamayeshe.com/advice/karma-killing
"You have to make the good out of the bad because that is all you have got to make it out of."
- Robert Penn Warren -
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by Simon E. »

Aryjna wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 5:06 pm
Simon E. wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 2:07 pm I suspect that we have a very different idea of the way that the animal world functions, and of the way that vipaka is accrued Aryjna.
Maybe, but the idea above is the one taught in Mahayana/Vajrayana.
I think you will find that the questions around intent, which is an essential element in the creation of vipaka, is in the case of the animal world, rather more complex.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
User avatar
Aryjna
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:45 pm

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by Aryjna »

Simon E. wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 9:30 pm
Aryjna wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 5:06 pm
Simon E. wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 2:07 pm I suspect that we have a very different idea of the way that the animal world functions, and of the way that vipaka is accrued Aryjna.
Maybe, but the idea above is the one taught in Mahayana/Vajrayana.
I think you will find that the questions around intent, which is an essential element in the creation of vipaka, is in the case of the animal world, rather more complex.
There is clear intent when an animal kills another. An accidental killing is one where there is no intent. Also, the motivation is negative emotions, either attachment or aversion. Everything needed is present for the full effect. Unfortunately, not knowing any better is not enough to prevent the creation of a primary cause. If not knowing any better was enough for that, there would be barely anyone in this world, including humans, who would have to experience the effects of their actions.

As far as I know, this is not in dispute in the slightest. But, if there are any sources that say the opposite, it would be interesting to read them.
User avatar
PeterC
Posts: 2739
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by PeterC »

Does the keeping of animals as pets - not for any practical purpose but your amusement, and in conditions that are necessarily unfamiliar and undesirable to the animal - not create negative karma?
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by Simon E. »

Aryjna wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 9:42 pm
Simon E. wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 9:30 pm
Aryjna wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 5:06 pm

Maybe, but the idea above is the one taught in Mahayana/Vajrayana.
I think you will find that the questions around intent, which is an essential element in the creation of vipaka, is in the case of the animal world, rather more complex.
There is clear intent when an animal kills another. An accidental killing is one where there is no intent. Also, the motivation is negative emotions, either attachment or aversion. Everything needed is present for the full effect. Unfortunately, not knowing any better is not enough to prevent the creation of a primary cause. If not knowing any better was enough for that, there would be barely anyone in this world, including humans, who would have to experience the effects of their actions.

As far as I know, this is not in dispute in the slightest. But, if there are any sources that say the opposite, it would be interesting to read them.
This is an argumentum ad absurdum based on an anthropomorphic and hinayanic view of a translation of an ancient text.
Are you going to keep polar and grizzly bears in captivity for their own karmic good?
And what of those animals including some reptiles that only eat live prey?
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
User avatar
Aryjna
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:45 pm

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by Aryjna »

Simon E. wrote: Sat Jun 30, 2018 9:47 am
Aryjna wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 9:42 pm
Simon E. wrote: Fri Jun 29, 2018 9:30 pm

I think you will find that the questions around intent, which is an essential element in the creation of vipaka, is in the case of the animal world, rather more complex.
There is clear intent when an animal kills another. An accidental killing is one where there is no intent. Also, the motivation is negative emotions, either attachment or aversion. Everything needed is present for the full effect. Unfortunately, not knowing any better is not enough to prevent the creation of a primary cause. If not knowing any better was enough for that, there would be barely anyone in this world, including humans, who would have to experience the effects of their actions.

As far as I know, this is not in dispute in the slightest. But, if there are any sources that say the opposite, it would be interesting to read them.
This is an argumentum ad absurdum based on an anthropomorphic and hinayanic view of a translation of an ancient text.
Are you going to keep polar and grizzly bears in captivity for their own karmic good?
And what of those animals including some reptiles that only eat live prey?
I'm not going to keep anyone captive. The point is that animals are subject to the effect of their actions exactly like humans. Are you saying that they aren't? This is not a view of a translation, this is what is taught by teachers and what is found in texts and commentaries. However, as I said, I am open to suggestions of particular teachers or texts who think otherwise.
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by Simon E. »

What I have been taught by my teachers is that intentionality works in a different way in the animal kingdom and that weakens karma/vipaka.

With a few exceptions ( a fox in the hen house comes to mind) when an animal kills its intention is not to cause harm, that is to posit an anthropomorphic motive which is inappropriate. The killing behaviour has no moral dimension. An animal kills primarily to eat or defend. 'Harm' is an inevitable secondary result not the result of volitional activity.

You are projecting a moralistic and incidentally a hinayanic view.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
User avatar
Aryjna
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:45 pm

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by Aryjna »

Simon E. wrote: Sat Jun 30, 2018 4:50 pm What I have been taught by my teachers is that intentionality works in a different way in the animal kingdom and that weakens karma/vipaka.

With a few exceptions ( a fox in the hen house comes to mind) when an animal kills its intention is not to cause harm, that is to posit an anthropomorphic motive which is inappropriate. The killing behaviour has no moral dimension. An animal kills primarily to eat or defend. 'Harm' is an inevitable secondary result not the result of volitional activity.

You are projecting a moralistic and incidentally a hinayanic view.
I am not projecting anything personally. I am merely stating how karma is explained in whatever teachings I have heard and read.

There does not have to be a murderous intent to create a primary cause, and it does not have to be killing out of spite only. Negative emotions are necessary. Killing for food is killing out of attachment to your well-being, or aversion to hunger, or both. Defending, the same, attachment to your life.

Who was the teacher who taught that? Was it an oral teaching or is it available in a book somewhere?
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by Simon E. »

Oral teachings in response to questions about the culpability of animals, on two separate occasions.
The first time was during teachings from Thrangu Rinpoche.
The second time I heard it discussed it was with Situ Rinpoche.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
User avatar
Aryjna
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:45 pm

Re: A question on raising reptiles and the first precept of no killing.

Post by Aryjna »

Simon E. wrote: Sat Jun 30, 2018 5:19 pm Oral teachings in response to questions about the culpability of animals, on two separate occasions.
The first time was during teachings from Thrangu Rinpoche.
The second time I heard it discussed it was with Situ Rinpoche.
There's not much that can be said without more details, but even if the effect is weaker than in humans, that does not change that it is perpetuated and countless negative deeds are accumulated. Unless this somehow stops, such as by creating a connection to the dharma.
Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”