PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 26, 2026Religions0 citationsOpen Access

Animals, Ledgers of Merit and Demerit, and Karma: Religious Ecological Mechanisms in Chinese Morality Books of the Ming and Qing Dynasties

View Full Paper
JCJunhui ChenXKXinfeng Kong

Key Points

  • This research explores the interface of religious ecological frameworks and moral practices in Ming-Qing morality books.
  • Analyzes Ming-Qing morality books to uncover themes of merit-demerit and karmic relations
  • Examines how animal ethics are integrated into moral causality
  • Compares historical models with contemporary ethical frameworks
  • Identified a triadic framework linking merit-demerit ledgers, karmic narrative, and animal ethics
  • Showed connections between actions towards animals and karmic outcomes
  • Proposed a revised framework for integrating moral practices with contemporary environmental ethics

Abstract

The article examines the religio-ecological framework articulated in Ming–Qing morality books 勸善書, focusing on how animals, Ledgers of merit 功過格, and karmic 業報 are integrated into a system of moral causality. Within this framework, actions such as killing or saving animals are directly linked to karmic reward and punishment, generating a dual mechanism that combines moral technology with an ultimate logic of justice to cultivate ecological consciousness and enforce social discipline. A central contribution of the study is the articulation of a triadic analytical framework—merit–demerit ledgers, karmic narrative, and animal ethics—showing how these elements form a coherent system of measurable and actionable ethical practice. In doing so, the framework challenges a strictly human-centered worldview by foregrounding an interconnected ecological order in which humans and animals are bound together through shared moral obligations and karmic entanglements. The article further situates this religio-ecological mechanism within contemporary debates in environmental ethics and animal rights. Through comparison with modern approaches—such as anti-speciesism, animal welfare and rights discourse, and proposals for cross-species political communities—it identifies both points of convergence and structural divergence. It concludes by exploring how this historical model might be critically translated and revised for present-day conditions, proposing a “revised morality book” framework that is more publicly defensible and more amenable to institutional implementation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/699f95951bc9fecf3dab390fhttps://doi.org/10.3390/rel17030276
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper