"Good deeds are karmic cause only for good results, but they can be condition for any kind of other karma to manifest."
So, I can tell a cat a mantra, with good intentions, and because of his karmic conditioning (which is lower than a human for him to be in the state of cat) – he bites me, because of his own karmic conditioning or misconditioning?
If there is any single exception from some rule, then the rule is wrong. I.e. work isn't the cause of money, because peoples sometimes get payed, and sometimes don't. So work can only be a condition (and not the cause) for someone to get money.
On the other side if you have a cause for money, any kind of action (robbing, killing, stealing, borrowing, working, etc...), can serve as condition. It has nothing to do with intentions.
So in your case, causes are ripen to see some ungrateful cat. And, since you are the one who is perceiving unpleasant result, it is product of both YOUR and cats bad karma. The real causes (fruits) of mantra are not yet manifested in yours neither in cats mind.
Of course, it could also be argued, the mantra, under the guidance of the deity, is sitting dormant in the cat’s consciousness, until such times as causes ripen for it to take proper effect? That is, the cat dies and takes a rebirth as a human.
Actually yes, this is what i claim. Effects of mantra are stored in alaya, or store-house consciousness, and will manifest once the conditions are ripen. In your or mine or cats case, it could be in numerous aeons. Only when conditions are ripen, we will see the result. So, you should simultaneously work on purifying your mind, and not solely on planting karmic seeds, by mere chanting of the words.
Of course i could be wrong in this
Another reason I like to include the subject-object dichotomy in a discussion involving two entities – A synonym for perception is Skandha – who is also deified as a protector warrior deity. Hence, if one attempts too much to alter the Skandha or perception of another, they are in effect invoking an inner warrior deity in the other, who’s purpose is to protect that one’s view of truth – and a highly charged reaction can occur.
Personally, I believe this is the reason for the old adage – “a curse can only be softened, not broken.”
Based on this, perhaps I should atone as well for false notions of Skhanda I’ve created as well? People will fight, it seems, to protect both their relative and their absolute truths, even when they are clearly shown to be an error.
I'm sorry, this is out of my league. I really don't know why peoples are sometimes afraid to accept change in circumstances or in the way they are thinking. However, i would not claim that if you are attempting too much to alter the Skandha or perception of another, that you are in effect invoking an inner warrior deity in the other, who’s purpose is to protect that one’s view of truth, because it would be arguable that peoples then cant collect bad karma, because it is the inner warrior deity who is in fact responsible and should go in hells instead of them or at least with them.