my responce does not change because you are being facetious.GraemeR wrote:Hi CittasantoCittasanto wrote:Hi Graham
you are mixing up intentions here!
the intent to kill and intent to get the insurance money are two different intentions.
your example and association with buying meat are on two different levels, although are not 100% removed, are not comparable.
what you are talking about is intention, particularly good-will, and kamma which is both light and dark; not the precept and dark kamma.
I accept I'm being facetious for the sake of the debate, but try looking at it this way:
To get insurance money:
object (my wife) -> intention (to get insurance money) -> Effort (hiring agent to create a circumstance to get money) ->Effect (death of wife through agents action)
If my intention is only to get the money and I only instruct an 'agent' to create the circumstance, am I guilty if he chooses to kill her?
To eat meat
object (Piece of dead animal: meat) -> intention (eat flesh of dead animal) -> Effort (by buying meat, indirectly hiring agent to slaughter animal) ->Effect (death of animal through agents effort, part of corpse given to me)
This time I know the animal must die to achieve the objective. If I hire the agent to get the insurance money, he could choose an alternative method, perhaps fraud. If he chooses to kill her, instead of creating an insurance fraud, am I responsible for my wife's death?
yes it still falls on you. too a lesser extent but there is still culpability as there was a lack of heedfulness on your part.
you are, however, not hiring someone to get meat not already available and there is an example of this in the vinaya recently shared here.
unless meat was unavailable and then you decided to kill to get meat there is a completely different intention which has been gone over here.VinMv.6.31.12-13 wrote: 12. ....
And Sîha, the general, gave order to a certain man (among his subalterns, saying), 'Go, my friend, and see if there is any meat to be had And when that night had elapsed, Sîha, the general, ordered excellent food (&c., as in chap. 23. 5, down to the end).
'Do not mind it, my good Sir. Long since those venerable brethren are trying to discredit the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Samgha; and those venerable brethren do not become tired of telling false, idle, vain lies of the Blessed One. Not for our life would we ever intentionally kill a living being.'