Why Doesn't the Law of Karma Apply to Animals?
Acharya Prashant: It is said that human beings get bad results and punishment if they enter in bad actions. But nothing of this sort is said for animals. Why does the law of karma not apply to animals?
The law of karma does not apply to animals because animals do not really have a choice in their actions. And when there is no choice, there is no question of reward or punishment.
Human beings are in a peculiar situation. They can choose to side with their animalistic conditioning or they can choose something higher. They can choose freedom, joy, love, liberation, compassion. Therefore, humans have a responsibility. Animals don't have that responsibility.
Animals are dictated fully by their biological conditioning. If there is a road accident, here on the road outside, you do not really expect the street dogs to come to rescue and help the victims of the accident, do you? They are not supposed to. So you will not get angry at the dogs when they do not come to help the injured ones.
A couple of bike riders have met with an accident and they're lying on the road. And then there are birds on the trees and there are dogs roaming about. They will not take any special interest. There are so many insects around, aren't there? Some snake is there in the bush, right? They do not really care for these two creatures who are lying bleeding on the road. And they do not care and they will not attract any punishment because they are not supposed to.
They just do not have the option to act in compassion. No animal can be compassionate really because an animal is completely just prakriti. An animal really does not have the option to be a liberated consciousness. The animal's consciousness is completely dominated by its physical conditioning. Are you getting it?
Therefore, the animal gets neither reward nor punishment, which is comfortable in a sense because the animal lives in a secure zone. A dog is born a dog, lives as a dog, and dies as a dog. And no dog lives in a state of consciousness that is very different from that of another dog. Are you getting it?
You cannot say one dog is liberated and the other dog is not. You cannot say one dog is joyful and compassionate and the other dog is not. Dogs can have varying external situations, but internally all dogs are just dogs.
This is not the case with human beings. Human beings can vary greatly in their internal states. One human being can be full of compassion, and the other one can be spiteful, angry, vicious, and violent. Getting it?
Therefore, the one who is compassionate is rewarded. He made the right choice. The one who is vicious is punished by his viciousness itself. He made the wrong choice.
So there is this great difference between animals and human beings. Which also means that human beings must never justify their actions by taking examples of animals. For example, if you eat animal flesh, you cannot justify it by saying that a lion or a wolf too kills other animals to eat.
A lion or a wolf has no option to not kill. You have that option. Man is not necessarily a herbivore. Man is more of an omnivore. Therefore, that option is there. You could have decided to not kill, but you chose in favor of killing. Therefore, you will be punished.
A lion is never punished because the lion had no option. A lion has done nothing wrong. In fact, even if a lion kills a human being, it really has not committed a crime. That's how lions are. They are supposed to kill to eat. But if a man needlessly kills an animal, then the man will be punished — if not by law, then by existence. Are you getting it?
So that is a human being in the most clear terms. A human being is a decision maker. A human being is someone who has a choice.
How do you define a human being? He is someone who has a choice, and how you exercise these choices decides your life. Choose very, very carefully.
Right?
