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.
Again, Nyom
Danilo , the Dog-duty Sutta shows clear, that there is a different between "common" animal and here "dog" and "ox". And if observing, there is a clear different between animals, wild and pet.
Whould modern person generally call house pet a sad and poor existence?
And again, where ever the mind tends to, where ever it gives into, with what ever it seeks identification, what ever behaviour it approves, there it lands.
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.
Pets do not make merits, and it's because someone gives them food easy avaliable, they will stay there and waste their time off...
Common to modern people, or? Can such be seen, if honest, in one self?
![](https://forum.sangham.net/proxy.php?request=https%3A%2F%2Fs.yimg.com%2Flo%2Fapi%2Fres%2F1.2%2FKqngW7yZEhDzZufYjYwrDw--%7EB%2FYXBwaWQ9eWlzZWFyY2g7Zmk9Zml0O2dlPTAwNjYwMDtncz0wMEEzMDA7aD00MDA7dz00MjA-%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fstatic.boredpanda.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F03%2FLike-Owner-Like-Pet8__605.jpg.cf.jpg&hash=5a0d35bb34244b0a98075532340142ae4588b8c5)
And people are not aware, that for the most, after the break off of the body, after a human life, most will fall into lower realm.
Knowing this, even seeing this, one should be clear, that pets, living in near association, in deoendency 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.
The Buddha him self, in his previous lifes, has been many, many times at pet, off course never a common animal.
Observe open and honest, it does not make sense, it leads to suffering, if intensify your self with this and that, seeing good, bad, friends and enemies.
"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."
Look at SC for example, and you will find a lot of "Oxen" (slaves) working on other fields for their benefit, and a lot of "dogs" (consumer) feeding on that, which the "Brahmas" (traders) left over, abound, sacrified for binding the pets.
So again, are humans like pets traceable? Mindstates and character, tendencies and "roof, roof" behavior?
For deeper into this underlying view, see
DN 1, section Partial Eternalism ![](https://forum.sangham.net/Themes/sangham/images/arrow.gif)
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.
For the dog, the owner is Brahma, and that is why he would "roof, roof, roof"
Again, if virtue is not based on right view, it might lead here and there, the action performed, but does not count on the eightfold path, will not lead to right path and liberation, but simply either maintain or increase old bound.
Therefore it's important not to seek to press ones habits into the frame of Dhamma, to stay with it and feel well, but change ones ways, so long long time gone after, again and again.
Don't seek for natural practice... dog duty
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.
And if one gives nicer food, food, the pets run over.
Only a person, starting with this, who has firm faith in the Juwels, and that eye and it's associated objects, ear... ideas, and it's associated object, are not real, inconstant, stressfull no refuge,... such a person, can not fall off till reaching the stream.
What binds the dog to his owner? The owner to his pet?
And it happens even to unvirtuose beings, to appear in good destinies, or are bad people enjoying a heaven-like life not seen?
There is nothing bad, even wrong, to help relatives, be even generous toward those more worse, but to like association, just because of this, does not lead to a better, and the is a german language (austrian) proverb "Wie der Herr so's G'scher", "like the owner, so the slaves", and vici versa, which fits well of what the Buddha taught:
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.
A personal gift from Upasika Nina Van Gorkom, toward here ancestors.