[sleeplessworld]

Thanks for the clarification. Perhaps what this really shows is that a reincarnation system, where you can be reincarnated as an animal or thing that has no mental concept of good or evil, does not make sense. Because such a system cannot bring enlightenment, as your karma situation is basically unknowable - unless you would have an overview of the system and the chain of reincarnations, which does not seem to happen. And therefore whether your situation was a result of good or evil becomes irrelevant. But in a reincarnation system, where we only have reincarnation as humans, with a purpose of progress, the concept of good and evil can make sense (?). Even whether we completely understand the system or not.

"... if the concept of evil and good is literally irrelevant to the workings of the belief system, then that belief system simply doesn't have the concept of evil (or good)." In a real sense yes, but the actors in the system may still be under the belief that good and evil exists. That actually may touch a sore point in some religions, that claims to have explanatory powers and maybe also salvation powers. But at the same time, it seems not to allow learning about and approaching a subject or concept such as good and evil, from a point of incomplete understanding.

I think the whole thing ie. this entire interesting debate, shows that our understanding is incomplete. The concepts or beliefs we have in this area does not hold under analysis and scrutiny. And yet there seems to be something there that ignites curiosity.