Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Channa should not be condemned for causing the Buddha's death through contaminated food

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's doctrine of negligence holds that agents are culpable for harms they could have prevented through reasonable care and diligence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Channa, as the Buddha's cook, had a duty of care requiring him to verify the safety of food before serving it to such a significant recipient.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Culpable ignorance—ignorance one had an obligation to remedy—does not exculpate an agent in the way innocent ignorance does.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Pali Canon itself distinguishes between cetanā as the core of kamma and the additional moral weight assigned to consequences affecting beings of high spiritual attainment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Vinaya tradition records that acts causing harm to a Buddha carry exceptional demeritorious weight regardless of the actor's subjective intention.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A purely intention-based exculpation collapses the Buddhist distinction between the gravity of harming ordinary beings versus enlightened ones, undermining the karmic hierarchy the tradition explicitly endorses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Channa's intention was to perform a meritorious act of generosity
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Channa did not know the food was contaminated
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Buddhist ethics judges actions primarily by the intention behind them, not the harm that resulted
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.