CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 24Indian and Buddhist StudiesStudy and Philosophy of ReligionReligion, Ecology, and Ethics

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Unfortunate Destiny

Ohnuma, Reiko·2017·Oxford Scholarship Online
DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190637545.003.0001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This chapter examines the animal realm of rebirth in early Buddhist doctrine and cosmology and shows that the animal rebirth was characterized very negatively in comparison to rebirth as a human. Rebirth as an animal was seen as an “unfortunate destiny” (Skt. durgati ) brought about by negative karma and afflicted by extreme suffering. Constantly engaged in preying upon one another and pursuing mindless sex and violence, animals are distinguished from human beings by their lack of the higher mental faculties (Skt. prajñā ), their lack of moral agency, and their inability to engage in spiritual cultivation. The distinction between human beings and animals is categorical in nature and might be described as a form of speciesism.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190637545.003.0001

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is a clear distinction between human beings and animals in Buddhist ethics, because killing the latter is a lesser offense than killing the former.

    “Ohnuma (2017, pp.15-16), in her work on the perception of animals in Buddhism, suggests that there is a clear distinction between human beings and animals in Buddhist ethics, because killing the latter is a lesser offense than killing the former.”

    From How to Deal with Dangerous and Annoying Animals: A Vinaya Perspective (2019) · cites this paper as Ohnuma (2017, pp.15-16)

  • Buddhaghosa uses dogs as a negative example of how a monk should not eat food; a monk should not eat like a dog, for dogs know no limit to their eating and eat way beyond what is necessary.

    “Elsewhere, he uses them as a negative example of how a monk should not eat food; he should not eat like a dog, for dogs know no limit to their eating and eat way beyond what is necessary.10”

    From For the Love of Dogs: Finding Compassion in a Time of Famine in Pali Buddhist Stories (2019) · cites this paper as [10]

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Ohnuma, R.
Corresponding author
Ohnuma, Reiko
Venue
Oxford Scholarship Online
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Published
2017-06-22
DOI
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190637545.003.0001
OpenAlex
W4256694154
Cited by
24
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 10
FWCI
7.79
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Indian and Buddhist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Religion, Ecology, and Ethics
Keywords
early Buddhism, Buddhist cosmology, animal suffering, human-animal distinction, prajñā, moral agency, speciesism, Buddhist doctrine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review