Aramika
It's had to take, but my person can not abstain to make clear if someone gives into pets, such existence can be expected. Like monasteries here, one time a monk being served by devoted woman, one time a woman devoted to serve monks (out improper of attachments), onetime the "relaxed" dog, waiting for his share, or cat. That's the whell of certain upanissaya. Not that such pets have a real bad live, even living on alms, but it's hard for them to find possibilities to mak merits to gain better circumstances.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
"Here, Seniya, someone develops the ox duty fully and unstintingly, he develops the ox habit fully and unstintingly, he develops the ox mind fully and unstintingly, he develops the ox behavior fully and unstintingly. Having done that, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of oxen. But if his view is such as this: 'By this virtue or duty or asceticism or religious like I shall become a (great) god or some (lesser) god,' that is wrong view in his case. Now there are two destinations for one with wrong view, I say: hell or the animal womb. So, Seniya, if his ox duty is perfected, it will lead him to the company of oxen; if it is not, it will lead him to hell."
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
"Here, Punna, someone develops the dog duty fully and unstintingly, he develops the dog-habit fully and unstintingly, he develops the dog mind fully and unstintingly, he develops dog behavior fully and unstintingly. Having done that, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of dogs. But if his view is such as this: 'By this virtue or duty or asceticism or religious life I shall become a (great) god or some (lesser) god,' that is wrong view in his case. Now there are two destinations for one with wrong view, I say: hell or the animal womb. So, Punna, if his dog duty is perfected, it will lead him to the company of dogs; if it is not, it will lead him to hell."
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
He has wrong view, is warped in the way he sees things: 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.'
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
"Monks [lay people] who eat the food that other people donate [consume Dhamma], but then don't practice, can expect to be reborn as water buffaloes [monastery/Buddhism-slaves] next time around, to till the fields and work off their debts."
· Ten unwholesome actions (MN 41)
· Lack of virtue, holding to wrong views. If one is generous to monks and nuns, however, one may be reborn as an "ornamented" animal (i.e., a bird with bright plumage; a horse with attractive markings, etc.; AN 10.177).
· Behaving like an animal (MN 57)
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
Then Janussonin the brahman went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One, "Master Gotama, you know that we brahmans give gifts, make offerings, [saying,] 'May this gift accrue to our dead relatives. May our dead relatives partake of this gift.' Now, Master Gotama, does that gift accrue to our dead relatives? Do our dead relatives partake of that gift?"
"In possible places, brahman, it accrues to them, but not in impossible places."
"And which, Master Gotama, are the possible places? Which are the impossible places?"
"Then there is the case where a certain person takes life, takes what is not given, engages in sensual misconduct, engages in false speech, engages in divisive speech, engages in abusive speech, engages in idle chatter, is covetous, bears ill will, and has wrong views. With the break-up of the body, after death, he reappears in the animal womb. He lives there, he remains there, by means of whatever is the food of common animals. This, too, is an impossible place for that gift to accrue to one staying there.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
"Venerable sir, this naked dog-duty ascetic Seniya [soldier] does what is hard to do: he eats his food when it is thrown on the ground. That dog duty has long been taken up and practiced by him. What will be his destination? What will be his future course?"
Venerable sir, there is this Punna [merit], a son of the Koliyans and an ox duty ascetic: that ox duty has long been taken up and practiced by him. What will be his destination? What will be his future course?"
- Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa -
'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.'
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
"Cunda, the purification rites declared by the brahmans of the Western lands... are one thing; the purification in the discipline of the noble ones is something else entirely."
"But how is there purification in the discipline of the noble ones, lord? It would be good if the Blessed One would teach me how there is purification in the discipline of the noble ones."
"Then in that case, Cunda, listen & pay close attention. I will speak. (http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.176.than_en.html)"
A Heart of Gratitude (https://sites.google.com/site/wideanglewilderness/quotestories/heartofgratitude)
Luang Pu Suwan Suciṇṇo was a first-generation disciple of Luang Pu Mun Bhūridatto and Luang Pu Sao Kantasīlo. He was born in Khaw village, Phiboon Mungsahaan district, Ubon Ratchathani province, sometime before the turn of the 20th century. His mother died when he was only six months old. This caused a great problem as there were no other women in the village who were in a position to become his wet-nurse. As a last resort, he was suckled for quite some time at the teats of the village dogs. As he grew up, this earned him his nickname – 'Dog'.
Luang Pu Suwan Sucinno Having ordained in the Mahā-Nikāya, he had the incredible good fortune of encountering Luang Pu Sao and Luang Pu Mun. He first spent a rains' retreat with both of them in 1917 in the province of Sakorn Nakhorn, with another early disciple, Luang Pu Singh Khantayāgamo.
For the next several years, Luang Pu Suwan followed both Luang Pu Sao and Luang Pu Mun on tudong throughout the north of Isaan. One rains' retreat in Khaw village, Udon Thani province, another disciple with the monastic name 'Suciṇṇo' joined them for the first time – Luang Pu Waen Suciṇṇo. Throughout this time, Luang Pu Suwan was able to receive Dhamma teachings and advice from both great teachers, and made quick progress in his practise.
The general standard for forest monasteries in the line of Luang Pu Sao and Luang Pu Mun at that time consisted in fairly rough bamboo kuṭis that were really only temporary shelters, lasting for 2 or three seasons at the most. Luang Pu Suwan was unusual for a disciple at that time in that he liked to build monasteries – more permanent dwellings and buildings. The rest of the wilderness tradition soon followed along as massive deforestation began in Thailand and a forest monastery changed from being a small clearing in a vast forest to being a small forest in a vast clearing. In many areas today, the permanent forest monasteries are the only places where forest can be found – the only place where the forests have been conserved.
Luang Pu Suwan built many monasteries all over Udon Thani and Nong Khai provinces, setting them up as good practise monasteries, in the Mahā-Nikāya ordination lineage, that still exist to this day. His monasteries are easy to recognise. Whenever he built a Sālā or a 'Bote' (an Uposatha Hall), he would always have a large statue erected in front. The statue would not be of a Buddha, or a deva or nāga (traditional 'guardian' images), but of a dog. Dogs are held in the lowest esteem in Thailand, so to have a statue of a dog memorialised in front of a monastery would be quite shocking for some people. And although having the nickname 'Dog', and having suckled dogs as a baby would have been felt as shameful for many people, Luang Pu Suwan was adamant in proclaiming his gratitude to them. They had given him life, and not only would he not forget it, he wanted everyone to know the goodness he had received from them. The lowly dog was the symbol and talisman for all his monasteries. Rather than feeling lowered by the status of dogs, he raised them up, through the power of a true heart of gratitude.
Late in life, Luang Pu Suwan returned to his home village in Ubon Ratchathani, and passed away in 1958 or 1959.
So the association with pets, dependent of what is probably owed or what is necessary exchange for exchange, if one like to use them vor sensual enjoyment, dependent on whether they have fallen to one or came at first place on their own, or are simply accumulated, should be not different like in regard of human, but proper to their kind and with certain distance.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
“With regard to this, the Tathāgata discerns that ‘These standpoints, thus seized, thus grasped at, lead to such & such a destination, to such & such a state in the world beyond.’ That the Tathāgata discerns. And he discerns what is higher than that. And yet, discerning that, he does not grasp at it. And as he is not grasping at it, unbinding [nibbuti] is experienced right within. Knowing, as they have come to be, the origination, ending, allure, & drawbacks of feelings, along with the escape from feelings, the Tathāgata, monks—through lack of clinging/sustenance—is released.
“These, monks, are the dhammas—deep, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise—that the Tathāgata proclaims, having directly known & realized them for himself, and that those who, rightly speaking in praise of the Tathāgata in line with what is factual, would speak.
Suppose, Māgandiya, a householder or a householder’s son was rich, with great wealth and property, and being provided and endowed with the five cords of sensual pleasure, he might enjoy himself with forms cognizable by the eye…with sounds cognizable by the ear…with odours cognizable by the nose…with flavours cognizable by the tongue…with tangibles cognizable by the body that are wished for, desired, agreeable, and likeable, connected with sensual desire and provocative of lust. Having conducted himself well in body, speech, and mind, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he might reappear in a happy destination.
- Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa -
"Here, Seniya, someone develops the ox (pets) duty fully and unstintingly, he develops the ox habit fully and unstintingly, he develops the ox mind fully and unstintingly, he develops the ox behavior fully and unstintingly. (E.g. approves of the behaviour, by mind, signs and body)
Having done that, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in the company of oxen.
But if his view is such as this: 'By this virtue or duty or asceticism or religious like I shall become a (great) god or some (lesser) god,' that is wrong view in his case. (E.g. defends it as favoreable, sees high as low, does not recognize that intention and not merely outward appearing, leads to effects)
Now there are two destinations for one with wrong view, I say: hell or the animal womb. So, Seniya, if his ox duty is perfected, it will lead him to the company of oxen; if it is not, it will lead him to hell."
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
5. “There ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos devolves. When the cosmos is devolving, beings for the most part head toward the Radiant (brahmās). There they stay: mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time. Then there ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos evolves. When the cosmos is evolving, an empty Brahmā palace appears. Then a certain being—from the exhaustion of his life span or the exhaustion of his merit8—falls from the company of the Radiant and re-arises in the empty Brahmā palace. And there he still stays mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time.
“After dwelling there alone for a long time, he experiences displeasure & agitation: ‘O, if only other beings would come to this world!’
“Then other beings, through the ending of their life span or the ending of their merit, fall from the company of the Radiant and reappear in the Brahmā palace, in the company of that being. And there they still stay mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time.
“Then the thought occurs to the being who reappeared first: ‘I am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer & Ruler, Father of All That Have Been & Shall Be.9 These beings were created by me. Why is that? First the thought occurred to me, “O, if only other beings would come to this world!” And thus my direction of will brought these beings to this world.’ As for the beings who reappeared later, this thought occurs to them: ‘This is Brahmā… Father of All That Have Been & Shall Be. We were created by this Brahmā. Why is that? We saw that he appeared here before, while we appeared after.’ The being who reappeared first is of longer life span, more beautiful, & more influential, while the beings who reappeared later are of shorter life span, less beautiful, & less influential.
“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘We were created by Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be. He is constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But we who have been created by him—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’
“This is the first basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.
6. “As for the second: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?
“There are, monks, devas called Corrupted by Play.10 They spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because they spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, their mindfulness becomes muddled. Because of muddled mindfulness, they fall from that company of devas.
“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘Those honorable devas who are not corrupted by play don’t spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because they don’t spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, their mindfulness doesn’t become muddled. Because of unmuddled mindfulness, they don’t fall from that company. They are constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But those of us who were corrupted by play spent an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because we spent an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, our mindfulness became muddled. Because of muddled mindfulness, we fell from that company and—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’
“This is the second basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.
7. “As for the third: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?
“There are, monks, devas called Corrupted by Mind. They spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another.11 Because they spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another, their minds become corrupted toward one another. Because they are corrupted in mind toward one another, they grow exhausted in body & exhausted in mind. They fall from that company of devas.
“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘Those honorable devas who are not corrupted in mind don’t spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another. Because they don’t spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another, their minds don’t become corrupted toward one another. Because they are uncorrupted in mind toward one another, they don’t grow exhausted in body or exhausted in mind. They don’t fall from that company. They are constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But those of us who were corrupted in mind spent an excessive amount of time staring at one another. Because we spent an excessive amount of time staring at one another, our minds became corrupted toward one another. Because we were corrupted in mind toward one another, we grew exhausted in body & exhausted in mind. We fell from that company and—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’
“This is the third basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.
What Is Natural?
Claiming they want their practice to be "natural," some people complain that this way of life does not fit their nature.
Nature is the tree in the forest. But if you build a house, it is no longer natural, is it? Yet if you learn to use the tree, making wood and building a house, it has more value to you. Or perhaps the dog is natural, running here and there, following its nose. Throw food to dogs and they rush to it, fighting each other. Is that what you want to be like?
The true meaning of natural can be discovered with our discipline and practice. This natural is beyond our habits, our conditioning, our fears. If the human mind is left to so-called natural impulses, untrained, it is full of greed, hatred, and delusion and suffers accordingly. Yet through practice we can allow our wisdom and love to grow naturally until it blossoms in any surroundings.
Do we want to associate with foolish people or with wise people? Is it of no use to apply ourselves to mental development it we do not scrutinize ourselves first with regard to this question. We do not inclined to associate with people who have the same ideas and the same likes and dislikes as ourselves. Our inclinations are like elements; they arise by conditions. The same elements attract each other. We read in the 'Niddana-vagga' (Saṁyutta Nikāya, Kindred Saying on Elements, Chapter XIV, par 14):"Through an element it is, monks, that beings flow together, meet together. Beings of low tastes flow together, meet together with them of low tastes. They of virtuous tastes flow together, meet together with them of virtuous tastes. So have they done in the past. So will they do in the future. So do they now in the present."
When we are together with someone for a long time we cannot help being influenced by him. If we have foolish friends, who do not know the value of kusalā, who act and speak in an unwholesome way, it is to our detriment. We may not notice that we are under their influence, but gradually we may find ourselves following their ways. If we have friends who know the value of kusalā, who are generous, perform good deeds and speak in a wholesome way, it encourages us to more wholesomeness. The Buddha often pointed out the dangers of evil friendship and the benefit of righteous friendship.
Althought it seems that there is actually not much interest to listen and read but merely the wish to gain the favor of an audience, my person will answer nevertheless, Nyom Danilo.
I've brought here the suttas in which my view was based for the purpose of, if wishing so, Bhante could address to it in order to make his point more clear.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
"In the same way, Magandiya, if I were to teach you the Dhamma — 'This is that freedom from Disease; this is that Unbinding' — and you on your part were to know that freedom from Disease and see that Unbinding, then together with the arising of your eyesight you would abandon whatever passion & delight you felt with regard for the five clinging-aggregates. And it would occur to you, 'My gosh, how long have I been fooled, cheated, & deceived by this mind! For in clinging, it was just form that I was clinging to... it was just feeling... just perception... just fabrications... just consciousness that I was clinging to. With my clinging as a requisite condition, there arises becoming... birth... aging & death... sorrow, lamentation, pains, distresses, & despairs. And thus is the origin of this entire mass of stress.'"
"I'm convinced, master Gotama, that you can teach me the Dhamma in such a way that I might rise up from this seat cured of my blindness."
"In that case, Magandiya, associate with men of integrity. When you associate with men of integrity, you will hear the true Dhamma. When you hear the true Dhamma, you will practice the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma. When you practice the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma, you will know & see for yourself: 'These things are diseases, cancers, arrows. And here is where diseases, cancers, & arrows cease without trace. With the cessation of my clinging comes the cessation of becoming. With the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. With the cessation of birth then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering & stress."
Whould modern person generally call house pet a sad and poor existence?
If associating with being without virtue, lazy, without gratitude, without idea of ownership, with being just eating and sleeping, no idea of
making merits, selfish and only when a stranger enters, making "roof, roof, roof", sniffing the back... e.g. approving the pets duty, more
and more... it's clear that one will land there.
Knowing this, even seeing this, one should be clear, that pets, living in near association, in dependency of one, have strong Upanissaya to one,
are dear old relatives, and so should tread them dutyfull and nice like a family member, but in no way approve a pets behaviour or even, like
may, play with the thought "ohh, what a comfortable live". It's like if my person sees the "owner and pets"-family of Sutta central. Brahmas
and their Devas, trade, consume and wasting off possibilities, owner and slaves.
if behavior like a pet, an existence like a pet can be expected, if associate with pets in inproper way, it's a matter of nature to addopt
their ways. If wishing, thinking "pets-life is desireable", there are all ways to gain it.
Pets do not make merits, and it's because someone gives them food easy avaliable, they will stay there and waste their time off...
It's of course possible to gain even the highest path and fruits, if still living near and in certain association with pets (defilements), like if bound to parents,
childs, master... but at the highest fruit, life from association with such, is impossible.
Bhante, all,
Since I've been repeatedly asked to say something about this --
I'm speaking here as someone helping to take care of eight cats.
To begin with, this is how we came to have eight cats: At first we had only one. Before we adopted her, she was a stray cat that was wandering around the neighborhood, and we took her in out of mercy. The other seven are a mother and her six children (two litters, each of three). The mother of six was a stray cat who had kittens in our shed. At first, we wanted to give them to an animal shelter, but shelters here are full, they don't accept new animals. We also tried to find them a new home in some other way, but nobody wanted them. We also considered that even if an animal shelter were to accept them, they would most likely not be adopted by anyone, because they are too shy and not used to living indoors only. The animal shelter kills the cats that nobody adopts within one to three months. We didn't want this to happen. So we later adopted them. We sterilized all the females (five), and we plan to sterilize the males as well, so as to not produce more unwanted cats.
We live in the countryside, with a big garden, so it's not so crowded despite so many cats. Also, in my family, we've always had cats; it's always been normal to have cats.
Here in the countryside, there would normally be no stray cats, because all the cats would live on farms, and the farmers would kill the cats they don't want. The main reason why there are stray cats here is because people from the city abandon them. When they don't want to have a cat anymore, they take it to the countryside, throw it out of the car, and then we who live in the countryside have to take care of them. Also, one of the cats is black. Many people here have prejudice against black cats and don't want them and treat them very badly, and that was another reason we took her in.
A monk living in Thailand said that in Thailand, when people have cats they don't want, they bring them to the monastery, while in many other countries, people kill unwanted cats. So this is how there are sometimes many cats living in a monastery. A monk is appointed to look after them.
I think there are many reasons why people have cats, or pets in general. In the countryside, on farms, cats are usually kept to catch mice. Beyond that, I think that for many people, having a pet is the closest to experiencing unconditional love. For many people, having a pet is the main or the only source of gentleness and kindness in their lives. Some people feel that the animal is the only being for whom they can safely have affection.
Then there are dysfunctional families where the pet is a kind of psychological safe haven for the people, and a safe topic to talk about with other family members. In such families, even though the people don't care much about eachother, or are afraid of eachother, or distant to one another, they can still all care for the animal. Caring for the animal together like that can make life in such a family more bearable.
In my opinion, the people who have purebred cats and dogs as pets often see them as status symbols. They don't really care about the animal itself, they care just about the social status that having a particular breed of a purebred cat or dog implies. (The business with purebreds is brutal. Many kittens and puppies of purebred parents are killed; either because of some minor "flaw" or to artificially keep the price of the breed high.)
As for individual monks who keep animals as pets: I wonder about that too. Like I said above, some monks living in monasteries are assigned the duty to look after the monastery cats. Some monks seem to have deliberately adopted a pet. Of course, it's also possible that the animal sought out the monk, in the hope to be adopted by him. Perhaps the monk, out of mercy, gave the animal some food, and that was enough for the animal to want to stay with him.
Personally, one of the main reasons why I'm still interested in Buddhism despite all the difficulties, are the cats. I do care about them, and I feel responsible for them, not just in the ordinary worldly sense, but in religious terms as well. I have already outlived several cats, I have seen them die. I was there when they were tiny kittens, and then when they grew up, and eventually grew old and died from old age. This has been a sobering experience. I don't know if there is rebirth. But if there is, I feel it is my responsibility that I do everything in my power to make sure that those beings that are currently our cats, get a good rebirth. I don't know how all this works, or how to come to know the truth about it, but mainly because of the cats, I feel responsible to learn and realize these things.
[/quote]Whould modern person generally call house pet a sad and poor existence?
I've never found a person, in contemporary world, who seriously thinks that life as a animal would be really a good thing. Some may see as a good thing a life without responsabilities (a aspect of a pet's life), but overall, usually nobody would say that to be a animal is more advantageous than to be a human for obvious reasons. There is a gap between these two things.
Mind and body are two things. While it is difficult to change body kammas effects, on mind ones existence can be changed. If finding that barking is not proper, it would be possible to abound dog-like behaviour.If associating with being without virtue, lazy, without gratitude, without idea of ownership, with being just eating and sleeping, no idea of
making merits, selfish and only when a stranger enters, making "roof, roof, roof", sniffing the back... e.g. approving the pets duty, more
and more... it's clear that one will land there.Knowing this, even seeing this, one should be clear, that pets, living in near association, in dependency of one, have strong Upanissaya to one,
are dear old relatives, and so should tread them dutyfull and nice like a family member, but in no way approve a pets behaviour or even, like
may, play with the thought "ohh, what a comfortable live". It's like if my person sees the "owner and pets"-family of Sutta central. Brahmas
and their Devas, trade, consume and wasting off possibilities, owner and slaves.
Apply the same strict value judgment to animals as it is applied to humans doesn't seems reasonable to me. After all, animals are... ...animals!
People tend to be more complacent towards animal's behavior simply because we all know that they are not endowed with the same intellect and discerniment as humans are. So I don't see the point of apply the same criterias of judgment to them as if they are humans. What would be a approvement of pet's behavior? Is plain complacency (taking their unfortunate condition in consideration) a approvement?
There are less not really sane people behaviour like dogs or other animals, starting greed.if behavior like a pet, an existence like a pet can be expected, if associate with pets in inproper way, it's a matter of nature to addopt
their ways. If wishing, thinking "pets-life is desireable", there are all ways to gain it.
Why/how a sane person would behave like his pet?
Even if in a human state (body), many are (had deprived them) deprived of intellect and discernment, and as domestic beings relay on humans... or socialism... iat places where pets-like being is dominant.Pets do not make merits, and it's because someone gives them food easy avaliable, they will stay there and waste their time off...
Ok, but what else are they suppose to do other than this? and how? As mentioned before, they are deprived of intellect and discernment falcuties, how domestic animals would not rely on humans?
No "it is possible that one may obtain...". Yes Nibbana is the highest fruit.It's of course possible to gain even the highest path and fruits, if still living near and in certain association with pets (defilements), like if bound to parents,
childs, master... but at the highest fruit, life from association with such, is impossible.
There is a contradiction here. Is it possible or not?
highest fruit is nibbana?
Aramika
What a nonsens and leading people to gain pets rebirth...
http://forum.sangham.net/index.php/topic,8467.0.html
How poor must one be in heart to be of such corruption and low politic for poor becoming... of cause Brahm would neither check nor see his tail. That is why the Buddha didn't left it to your own judgment in regard of defilements but to seek for admirable friend, not pets or pets keeper. Seeking after right livelihood and holly live rather to make a living in pets entertaining and sharing crackers...
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "It is in accordance with their properties that beings come together & associate with one another. Beings of low dispositions come together & associate with beings of low dispositions. Beings of admirable dispositions come together & associate with beings of admirable dispositions. In the past, it was in accordance with their properties that beings came together & associated with one another... In the future, it will be in accordance with their properties that beings will come together & associate with one another... And now at present, it is in accordance with their properties that beings come together & associate with one another. Beings of low dispositions come together & associate with beings of low dispositions. Beings of admirable dispositions come together & associate with beings of admirable dispositions."
The underbrush born
of association
is cut away
by non-association.
Just as one riding
a small wooden plank
would sink
in the great sea,
so does even one of right living
sink,
associating with the lazy.
So avoid the lazy,
those with low persistence.
Live with the noble ones —
secluded, resolute, absorbed in jhana,
their persistence constantly aroused
: the wise.