This topic of mine might seems ignorant or even inappropriate and if it is then i am quite sorry about that. Please kindly let me know of my mistakes and ignorance as you see fit.
Also, let temporarily put aside the fact that Kamma should not be pondered upon
For now, i would like to direct your attention to these case studies below and please give me your honest answer:
Case studies #2: The act of stealing something in regard to emotional value
(The act of theft is absolutely bad kamma and should not be dismissed in anyway, but what about the severity of the act itself depending on the emotional value of what you take?)
In an imaginary situation, you steal something from a warehouse full of stuffs that belong to somebody. However, the owner have too much stuffs in that warehouse and therefore do not actually noticed that he was robbed of something. He barely feels any negative emotions due to your theft.
In another (imaginary) case, you steal the exact same stuff as the example above. However, in this case the owner cherishes that object very much and immediately notices that the object is lost. Therefore, he grieves and feel saddened.
Similarities and Differences: In both cases, the owner lost something. And yet, their emotional responses are different.
The question: In these cases, can we say for certain that the kammic effect of example B is greater due to the emotional damage incurred to the owner?
Case studies #3: To determine if things were actually stolen according to the BMC by Thanissaro Bhikkhu
Example A: Bhikkhu #1 asks bhikkhu #2 to move some stuffs from room X to room Y. While carrying the stuffs to room Y as instructed, Bhikkhu #2 (maybe due to his monkey minds or boredom…etc), thinks jokingly or ironically to himself: “I have to “steal” these stuffs…”. However, all Bhikkhu #2 does in the end is simply move the stuffs as instructed to room Y.
Now according to the BMC, could Bhikkhu #2 be said to have fulfilled the factor for intention and efforts (since he was holding and moving the stuffs) and therefore commited a Parajika?
But if you ask Bhikkhu #1 what he thinks about the act, Would bhikkhu #1 say: " But he didn’t steal anything, he just moved items according to my instructions, i didn’t lose anything" ?
Example B: a person is hired to carry some stuffs from point #1 to point #2, then regardless of whether he thinks:" I am stealing this…etc" due to boredom, or maybe he want some excitement in his life. If all he does is simply move those things according to instruction to point #2 then can his employers or the law rightly accuse him of theft:
just as when, in the taking of what is not given, kings arresting the criminal would flog, imprison, or banish him, saying, “You are a robber, you are a fool, you are benighted, you are a thief”
The question: can we accuse either person in these 2 example above of theft when nothing was actually taken and therefore no negative emotional damage was done to the owner?
Thank you for having the patient to read so far. If i have offend or say anything inappropriately then i apologize. I would like to learn your answers to each of them.