According to the Buddha's teaching, is it more wholesome to feed a domesticated cat meat or let a cat catch it's own food? Is it wholesome to feed a cat at all or possess a cat? How should one who lives by the Buddha's teaching approach cats?

I live with my mother in her house. There have been a mouse for a few months, living in the ceiling of my bedroom, and since a few weeks, it has been a nuisance for it scratches something, day and night, to the point of preventing me to sleep, even when wearing ear plugs. The mouse does not seem to understand that it is not alone in the house and that it causes distress. I remember that There were mice long before and the rat poison was successful, until another mouse set in. They always find their way in, and always end up breeding and making a noisy mess. I cannot access the ''thermal material'' which is between the ceiling of my bedroom and the attic, because the attic has been covered up by some thermal blanket to better protect the house thermally. I do not wish to kill the mouse with some rat poison per se. but I also fear that the mouse could chew some wires, electrical and telephonic, which pass above the ceiling and causing damage to the house. I also fear that the mouse breeds leading to even more mice, especially if I end up killing them. There are cats in the neighbourhood, and it is not clear to whom they belong, but they clearly did not catch the mouse thus far. I cannot get a cat myself, since there is no place and no means to sustain having a cat. I do not know the path to the garden that the mouse takes to leave the house, because there are plants and small trees preventing me to watch the ground and weed. Is there another solution than killing it in disposing some rat poison, in order to stop the noises and be assured that the house will not be damaged ?

Is the thought of killing someone without actually killing him bad Karma? How powerful is it? I think it is certainly bad karma. But I am willing to know the Buddhist explanation of it with more detail. What will happen, if a person forcefully resit those thoughts when thoughts are arriving?

In the **Kammapatha sutta** **AN 3.164(A i 297)** a note concerning the meaning of a passage (written by the author of the page dedicated to the sutta it seems) makes me question, the sutta and note are stated as follows : > Endowed with these three things, bhikkhus, as if one was carried off > and put down there, one is in hell. Which three? One destroys life > oneself, one incites others to destroy life, and one approves of > destroying life.**{1}** Endowed with these three things, bhikkhus, as if > one was carried off and put down there, one is in hell. > Note > > > 1. one approves of destroying life: purchasing dead animals' flesh, in a context where other reasonable harmless choices are available, > cannot be carried out without approving their killing. https://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/anguttara/03/an03-164.html It appears the author of the page establishes a link between approving the killing of an animal with the purchase of meat. I would appreciate understanding more about this link being established. (As a personal background I had been a vegetarian for around 5 years but due to digestive issues decided to revert to the consumption (and therefore purchase) of meat which seem to be helping a lot). With mettā.

As to Buddhism killing is wrong and planning such things is also wrong. So what is the difference between the Karma of a person who killed someone and a person who only planned but never killed.

Hi may I know what is the karma of killing a dog please? My neighbours dog starts barking from 5am daily and I don't get enough sleep. I am so tired at work and cannot focus. I've tried soundproofing my walls and using ear plugs but they don't work I can still hear the barking. I've spoken to the neighbour but he tells me that he is a human and he can't ask ask his dog to keep quiet (whatever that means). I am at my wits end, I am so tired, I never get enough rest. Can I kill the dog? May I know what is the karma for killing a dog?

Buddha said to his disciples (monks), meat can be eaten if they are not seen, heard or suspected to have been killed on purpose for a monk. Eating meat is different from killing animal, it's clear. Lay people on the other side do not obtain meat like monks do, lay people buy meat. The money then goes to meat seller and abattoir. Is this the same as "Causing another to kill"?

I have questions regarding hospitalization and its morals 1. Are monks/nuns allowed to be hospitalized and can they go to a hospital or doctor if sick? (because aren't they not allowed to request anything according to the vinaya?) 2. Can a monk/nun take painkillers or will that be a breach of the fifth precept? 3. If there is a parasite or other being inside of someone, can they take medicine to cure themselves of it, or would that break the first precept, or is it not if the being isn't sentient?

I know that killing virtuous beings is a grave bad karma. But when it comes animals, virtue is irrelevant. I have heard from monks that bigger the animal greater the sin it is to kill it. How is that so? Why does physicality matter at all? Isn't it just a matter of your intention when it comes to karma?

Of course one of the 4 imponderables is the results of karma. I am just asking if there is any sutta explanation on the effect of killing with malice compared to mercy killing? Difference between mercy killing and assisted suicide: Assisted suicide is what it is, killing someone after they ask you to assist their suicide. Mercy killing is killing others out of mercy. For eg if you see an animal in extreme pain who is dying of whatever illness or blood loss, they cannot actually ask you to kill them for themselves so one is killing the other person out of mercy to alleviate their suffering. Or if you were on a battlefield and an enemies legs and limbs are blown to pieces so they cannot harm you any more and are no longer a threat but are in vast amount of suffering and pain so you kill them out of mercy.

At work, a tiny little flying insect landed on my desk. At first I thought he was dead because he wasn’t moving, so I gently pushed him to see if he reacted, and he moved so I left him alone. Some time later, when I picked up a call, I shoved my electronic cigarette and it unfortunately crushed him. So I thought I killed him unwittingly, I felt guilty. I took a closer look, and I could see that although crushed his antenna was still moving, probably in agony. I felt bad, now right away a being was suffering and was going to die because of me, was perhaps afraid? I decided to crush him for good, voluntarily this time, to alleviate his suffering. What do you think of this story? Was I wrong the first time? The second? If so, how can I mitigate this bad kamma? And finally, how can we help him have a better rebirth, if at all possible?

As part of a volunteering job where endangered animals are taken care of they have to feed them with dead chicks recuperated from the agro industry, which is blameless and doesn't break precepts, though they also feed them worms that are alive. Is it breaking the first precept since they don't kill them ?

It happened to me during dinner, yesterday: I wanted to move a mosquito that was in my plate and accidentally killed it :( What's the appropriate thing to do in such cases? Is there any mantra to recite in order to have some benefit for the insect? I'm asking this because I read about a mantra to be recited "in front of your shoes" so that, in case of walking on top of an animal, then it would be "less bad". But probably I'm totally wrong :) In any case, I don't think my question is a duplicate of the guy who killed a mosquito on purpose because it was suffering. I killed it because my intention was to move it from my plate, but I didn't pay much attention and did it wrongly.

I jog everyday and teach children how to play basketball. There are some insects on the path where I jog and on the basketball court, and I’m sure we unintentionally kill a few of them. We live in a place where there are lots of trees and forests so it would be difficult to get rid of bugs. Am I violating the first precep?

I recently noticed that perhaps fewer than 10 bugs seem to be in my shower. I can try to remove all of the bugs from the shower before using it so that they don’t get washed away and killed. However, some of the bugs are very small and hard to see, so I can’t be sure I can remove all of them. Also, even if I remove all of the bugs in the shower, it is possible bugs will return, so I don’t know if I need to check the shower for bugs before each time that I use it.

I'm thinking a lot about the animal issue right now, and a question came to me. Are the five precepts universal? If so, are animals required to respect them? If not, what morals must animals follow? There is obviously a form of morality involved because, if I understand correctly, an animal can generate bad kamma and be reborn in an inferior realm . Even if, according to this site , animals cannot generate good kamma? > (...) Animal behavior is also run by instinct, which means that animals cannot generate good karma, they are simply working off the bad. (...) On Wikipedia , I read that : > (...) The Buddha expounded that sentient beings currently living in the animal realm have been our mothers, brothers, sisters, fathers, children, friends in past rebirths. One could not, therefore, make a hard distinction between moral rules applicable to animals and those applicable to humans; ultimately humans and animals were part of a single family. They are all interconnected. (...) So, how to understand the first precept? Does an animal like a lion, which kills another animal for food, generate bad kamma? I don't think so, because his intention is not bad. Does that mean that the first precept would only concern torture? For example, a dolphin that tortures his prey before eating it would generate bad kamma? But isn't it in the instinct of animals to do such things? A cat almost always tortures his prey before killing it. In short, many questions, but I wondered if there were any Buddhist texts or philosophers who had spoken about the question of morality in other realms of existence, the animal realm in particular. I read in "*An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics *" of Peter Harvey , chap. *Attitude to and treatment of the natural world*, that : > (...) Buddhist Jataka stories often attribute noble actions to such animals as monkeys and elephants, and there is also a reference to some animals keeping the five precepts (Vin. II.162). (...) Would this mean that being a herbivore is a better rebirth, because it is easier to keep the precepts, where a carnivore is almost doomed to produce bad kamma and be reborn in an inferior realm? > (...) in one Jataka story, (...) the Buddha in a past life is said to have been a crane who only ate fish when he found them already dead (J. I.206–8). (...)

Why in Buddhism plants are not recognized as sentient beings? Can it be immoral to kill a plant? Can a plant be reincarnated as an animal? Is a plant alive? **Edit:** I read somewhere a theory according to which Buddhism did not consider plants as sentient beings, part of saṃsāra, because although they are alive they do not have the 5 khandhas and especially they do not have consciousness (*viññāṇa*) although they have perception (*saññā*). A sunflower perceives the sun and reacts by turning towards it but it is not conscious of its perception, it has no metacognition. I found this idea interesting but I don't know how true it is since Buddhism seems to define consciousness more as what allows discrimination than as what allows metacognition.

My girlfriend does oral sex and she likes to swallow my sperm during sex. Will these activities violate any precep? Will swallowing of semen violate the no killing precet and are sperm cells considered sentient beings? I would prefer simple answers since I have a little understanding of Buddhism as this point.

The first precept goes something similar to > I undertake the training rule to abstain from killing. Now, I understand that, for instance, eating meat is allowed, but what about, for instance, killing vermin which might damage food or cause disease (such as mosquitos in places where malaria is common)? Is killing justifiable then?

An extension of this question posted earlier: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/10465/how-not-to-kill-the-mouse-in-my-house Where does one draw the line for which forms of life are ok to destroy, and which ones are not? Is it just a calculation of causing the least suffering? A human has a more complex nervous system than a worm, so to reduce his suffering is paramount? I can think of many ways to spin the issue so that the human must allow himself to die, and ways to spin it so that killing living creatures is acceptable. Are there some general guidelines?