LXNDR wrote:seeker242 wrote:
In my experience working with veterinarians, I honestly didn't see anything wrong with what they were doing. The reason why is because what would the animal choose if it could choose? What would I or you prefer if we were in the animals position? Of course all beings would want to continue living but you can't choose to continue living because that's not an option anymore. Your body is too badly damaged to continue living past tomorrow morning. Assuming that there is a 100% chance that you will be dead by tomorrow morning. Now, you're given two options. Option #1 is to just die. Option #2 is to be tortured and experience tremendous pain for the next 20 hours, and then die. Those are the only two options in this situation. Who in their right mind would choose option #2? I can't imagine any being wanting to choose option #2, especially so when there is nothing at all to be gained from experiencing that extra 20 hours of torturous pain. The veterinarians do not perceive themselves to be "killing an animal". In their mind, what they are doing is saving the animal from 20 hours of unnecessary torturous pain. One could say in a manner of speaking, that if you force the animal to choose option 2 you are, in effect, torturing the animal.
as the Biblical saying goes " [Am] I my brother's keeper?"
Spoken by Cain who had just killed his brother in a fit of anger. So, what does this text have to do with anything?
i don't think anyone is put here to make existential decisions on someone else's behalf, therefore finishing off an agonizing living being is in effect interference with its kamma
Then no need to ever render assistance to an accident victim, or to anyone in dire straights, for it is their kamma that this happened to them. No need to render assistance to another country that is being invaded by a hostile country, for it is their collective kamma that they be defeated and subsumed by the aggressor.
and the emotional suffering one experiences at the sight of an agonizing living being and due to one's own helplessness is one's own kamma to be lived through
Says who? You know what is caused by kamma and what is not?
putting out a hopeless living being could be a copout from the problems its misery creates and troubles causes, which is not a very wholesome motive
There may be an aversion in not wanting to see the animal suffering, but there can also be considerable compassion, mitigating the aversion, coloring it, and shaping it. Since there is no choice but to act this way or that, I would prefer to act with compassion.
I think I understand that part. But my point was really that if a person does honestly believe that soon to be over equals over, and some other person knows it's not, doesn't that imply that these two people, if they do the same action, will be making different kamma? Doesn't one's perception influence what kind of kamma is made? For example, a little kid squashing some bugs for fun vs us squashing some bugs. It seems to me that we would be making worse kamma than the little kid because we are fully aware of that being's sentience and the kid is not. In other words, we have a different perception of the situation and that has an influence on the making of kamma.
