Why is only intentional action considered as Karma, which gives rise to corresponding consequences?

Question

Consider a situation (just a silly example) like this:

Suppose I'm walking on a road or grass field, and I know there are living beings like ants and other insects lying down on the surface, but I don't have any intention to kill any being while I walk there to reach my destination.

But, as I'm walking, consequently, many little beings are killed by me by stomping on them, though I don't have intention to do so.

Buddhism says that only an action done with intention will account as a Karma that will affect us accordingly..

Referring to this and the situation I gave for example, does it mean that the killing of insects without intention (though I know I'm going to kill them) isn't a bad Karma?

Will I not face any effect due to that action I did unintentionally, but KNOWINGLY?

If that's the case, why can't I rob a house and say that I just did it to quench my starving stomach, not to hurt anyone?

Isn't the consequence of doing an unintentional action considered as a seed that can affect oneself? Why?

If you say I'm wrong, then how is Karma in Buddhism different from that of Jainism, where every action is a Karma?

I'd be glad if the down-voter could be able to leave a comment :) — Gokul NC, Nov 28 '15 at 14:50
Another similar question I just ran through: Karma: Intention vs knowing result of an action — Gokul NC, Nov 29 '15 at 08:15
When your state of knowledge, awareness and ability to act reach the point where you could do differently (have choice in a matter) then there is karma. So ignorance is not perfect protection because we have the responsibility to become informed. — , Nov 29 '15 at 17:01
@nocomprende So, what do you conclude? When we have a choice to make no harm, then why don't we choose it? Don't we have the appropriate knowledge & awareness to choose to do what is right (if your comment is true) ? :) That being the case, isn't it a bad karma doing the example that I've written? — Gokul NC, Nov 30 '15 at 07:08
I conclude that becoming over-focused on thinking about such questions tends to lead one down a blind alley. Do the best you can, and you will keep improving, and everything will resolve itself in time. Your are making yourself and your role too large to have a proper view. You are one of many. — , Nov 30 '15 at 13:00

score 6 · Answer 1 · edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:51

6

What you say or justify do not count. What counts is your volition.

For volition to give result the volition should have any of the 6 roots (3 wholesome - alob, adosa & amoha + 3 un wholesome - lob, dosa & moha ). When you accidentally step on an insect you do not know of its existance non of these roots arise in your mind, as you do not have any intention to kill. You know you are steeping on insects but as iterated before you do not have the intention to step on them, hence there is no un wholesome roots in your mind to create the Karma.

When you do rob someone what ever the justification you are motivated by one of the roots (loba). Even satisfying your hunger is due to loba. What ever the justification there you know and have the intention. Hence there are Karmic results. Every wilful action need intention, even an action which might not generate any karma like lifting your hand. Your body will not sleep walk you into robbing without any intention or thoughts.

Also I asked this related question which might complement the above question: Where in the Tripitaka completion of the formation of Karmic result is mentioned?

edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:51

Community

1

answered Nov 28 '15 at 12:16

Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena

36,981
3
28
82

1

"When you accidentally step on an insect you do not know of its existance so you cannot experience any of the roots" But obviously, you know that there are insects in the way you go.. You know you're going to do harm, but without intention, ie, without any lobha, dhosha and moha veiling your mind. My question is "Why will I not face any effect due to that action I did unintentionally, but KNOWINGLY?" – Gokul NC Nov 28 '15 at 13:43
Updated. See if it is more clear now? – Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena Nov 28 '15 at 14:01
1

"You know you are steeping on insects but you do not have the intention to step on them, hence there is not un wholesome root." Then, doesn't that mean we have forgotten about compassion?? I'm sorry that I'm asking too many questions. – Gokul NC Nov 28 '15 at 14:23
2

Compassion creates good mental Karma but absence of this does not necessarily create bad Karma unless to you intentionally do bad acts. – Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena Nov 28 '15 at 14:47
lifting the hand generates karma unless you are an Arahant – Sankha Kulathantille Nov 28 '15 at 16:19
Since there are no roots it is unlikely to give any result though Karmic fabrications are created. – Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena Nov 29 '15 at 03:30
No roots? Why would one lift a hand? :) – Sankha Kulathantille Nov 29 '15 at 04:47
Say to habitually close a window before you go out. What kind of Karmic result can this have? – Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena Nov 29 '15 at 04:51
habitual(acinna) karma. It may not be a strong Karma, but Karma nonetheless. It's not Karma if performed by Kiriya citta. Only Arahaths have Kiriya citta. – Sankha Kulathantille Nov 29 '15 at 04:58
@Sankha That's what I'm asking.. So do you mean every action (with or without intention) is a karma? – Gokul NC Nov 29 '15 at 06:08
Acinna is only on habitual wilful action not on habitual "knee jerk" action. We are all used to walking so in this rationalisation each step we take during walk in a acinna karma! – Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena Nov 29 '15 at 10:36
@GokulNC Karma is intention. There's no Karma without intention. – Sankha Kulathantille Nov 29 '15 at 10:45
@SumindaSirinathSalpitikorala Walking is a willful action. ex: If you practice walking like a dog or a cow like those ascetics did during the time of the Buddha, you could endup being born as a dog or a cow. – Sankha Kulathantille Nov 29 '15 at 10:48

score 1 · Answer 2 · answered Nov 28 '15 at 20:50

1

Here is the answer given by Lord Buddha to a similar matter...

There were many religious groups and cults in India at Lord Buddha's time and almost each had their own signature practices, Some were naked,Some were living like animals (Cows,Dogs) and many more.All of them had one purpose, Finding the end.

There was a group who said to their followers

"You must boil the water you drink because if you drink it any other way those very small beings in water would die" (An amazing early reference to Micro organisms).

When people asked for Lord Buddha's take on this Lord Buddha's reply was....

Yes there are beings in water and yes there is a chance they might die, but if you boil the water you are obviously going to kill them as an effect of boiling. But what can you do? you must drink water.As you have no intention to kill those beings you are not responsible for the deaths that might occur from consuming water.

Here's the answer to your last analogy....

What kinds of circumstances come in this category an what does not?

What is an accident and what is compassion?

An accident is the correct set of circumstances.And you are correct with your first example.Here you see the ants after the action really happen.

If we add another element....

What if you knew about ants before running on the grass?

Now you know there are ants and you are in a hurry.You have stepped on the grass and suddenly you remember about the ants.You see some dead because of your running.

Here it does not generate bad karma because even though you knew about the ants you still did not had any idea or a plan to kill the ants by stepping on them.

What if you saw the ants and still went on anyway?

Here you have lost Compassion and you show no regard to the lives of these ants, now this is bad. This kind of action will generate bad karma.

But there's a catch....

Say you knew about the ants and walked on the grass thinking "Hopefully there won't be any now". And you did not saw any for a moment and suddenly you see that you have stepped on some.Now you panic and try to walk away from the ants but you are surrounded.So you quickly step away trying your best to not to harm any ants.

Here when you try to walk away you might increase the amount of dead ants but you still have no idea of a killing or hurting.Strangely even after many dead ants you are still clean.

So where does the compassion comes to play?

Say you are hungry and you can hunt.

If you go hunting it is bad Karma. If you let an animal die so you can eat later it is bad Karma.

Say you are poor

If you steal that is bad karma. But if you take someone's pen thinking it is yours (given that both pens look alike) you do not gain bad karma because you had no idea.

answered Nov 28 '15 at 20:50

Theravada

3,953
15
43

1

Thank you, but that didn't answer my question "Why?". Why is only intentional action considered Karma? Is it just because one is not intentionally responsible for an intention-less action? Any theory behind it? Or can only an Enlightened one answer this? – Gokul NC Nov 29 '15 at 06:04
1

Karma arises from the ability to know that things could be different. You must have the choice to do differently, the knowledge of what is happening, and the awareness to form a thought about what is happening. This is why animals (and lower) do not have karma. Similar with children and others who cannot govern their actions. Opposite with Arahants, who are wise enough to only do what is needed. Spock's father said, "What is necessary is never unwise." The Buddha was concerned with us modifying our thoughts, not with what happens as we carry out bodily functions (like drinking water). – Nov 29 '15 at 16:56
@nocomprende , The drinking water part of my answer was a true story. the reason i added that part was that it was somewhat similar to the example in the question. – Theravada Nov 29 '15 at 17:06
@GokulNC , yes you are not responsible for anything that you may have done unintentionally. But whatever you choose to do is action and therefore you are responsible. – Theravada Nov 29 '15 at 17:08
So, the best course of action is to not choose to do anything. This sounds like a paradox, i.e.: do not drink, just sit there and die. But if you are doing what is needed it is not a choice. Drinking water is not an intention then. Arahants are beyond intention, they do not act on it. "Spontaneous Appropriate Action". The tough part is to know what is needed. Which means learning and determining one's responsibility. Which is why it is almost impossible to escape from creating karma: it wraps around and reinsinuates itself into the process of getting free. – Nov 29 '15 at 17:13
@nocomprende , OK here is the thing. Just drop the debate and listen. You drink water to overcome thirst,so it does not create any karma. You boil water to drink Coffee,This does not generate Karma either. But if you intentionally Boil water thinking "I should kill whatever's in the water" then you gain bad karma because you had the "Motive". It is not a dilemma, Even a kid can understand. – Theravada Nov 29 '15 at 17:24
1

I don't think I was disagreeing with you... I wrote in support of your Answer. The thought "I should kill whatever is in the water" could be a problem, or not. It is not a problem if it is the only water available, and you need to drink it. It has been said that a human life is more important than lower forms, as only a human can become realized, so killing some bacteria in order to remain in the body can't really be an error. If you felt fear about the bacteria, that would be karmic. Yes? I think that a kid could understand, and adults make things needlessly complex, because they are afraid. – Nov 29 '15 at 22:35
1

@Theravada So, suppose you're boiling water to drink it.. Someone comes to you and asks "Why do you boil it? Why not drink it without boiling?" What answer could you say? The only reason you could say is to kill bacteria. So, with regard to the comment you've given (above previous comment), the only intention one could have to boil water is to kill whatever is present in it. I guess we won't say something like "I'm trying to warm the shivering bacteria". Without intention of killing bacteria, one would not boil water. So, why don't you say it's intentional? How can it be done unintentionally? – Gokul NC Nov 30 '15 at 07:00
@GokulNC It can be done Unintentionally, let me explain. When you boil water to have a cup of tea you are doing it because that's how tea is made, By boiling water. But if you are in a camp,you will get your water from a tank/river nearby and you will boil it.Here the story changes, you are intentionally killing beings. – Theravada Nov 30 '15 at 19:30
@GokulNC , There is another version too. Me for example i like my water warm. So the reason i boil water is because i like it warm.Here in Asia we prepare warm water for elders, This is actually a good Karma because we are helping elderly.And there is no killing motive involved. You see,killing germs is not the only reason people boil water. And you can still do it and anything similar. What matters is not the effect but the ideology and motive behind a task or a thought. – Theravada Nov 30 '15 at 19:35
@nocomprende , sorry i got you wrong. But here is the thing about this little discussion we had here, It is only a metaphor what we are actually discussing is much complex. And by the way the value of a life as to Buddhism is from the first person viewpoint, In other words "Your life your value". It is wrong to categorize the value of a life because Lord Buddha said "every being, no matter what their condition is likes to live". And it is wrong to think we have the right to use beings in lower realms for our survival. – Theravada Nov 30 '15 at 19:41
@nocomprende , This will look a bit different but please read this. http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/12237/trolley-problem-and-its-variants-in-buddhist-ethics/12254#12254 – Theravada Nov 30 '15 at 19:43

score 1 · Answer 3 · answered Dec 02 '15 at 16:43

The Buddha and an important disciple of Mahavira, the leader of the Jains, had a debate on just this topic. Mahavira held that the body is the essential karmic factor, but the Buddha showed that intention or will is the karmic principle, because it underlies words and actions and because even in the absence of negative words and actions, karma due to wrong intention or will is effective. The classical Indian view is expressed by Jainism, but if karma operates on the level of actions, no emancipation is possible because abstinence from action is not possible. It is this view that leads to the excesses of asceticism, whcih the Buddha derided as mere mechanical practices that anyone can do and that cause harm.

Why is only intentional action considered as Karma, which gives rise to corresponding consequences?

3 Answers3