NO WISDOM in killing…
Prefatory Note: The following is a brief discussion between two dedicated animal liberationists, Kristal Parks and Ruth Eisenbud, on the intent of religious teachings in connection with animals. The exchange focuses on the doctrines of “dominionist religions” (i.e., the Judeo-Christian-Islamic faiths), which consign animals to the whims of man.—PG
“It is the essential characteristic of a wise person that he/she does not kill any living being.
One should know that non-killing and equality of all living beings are the main principles of religion”
—Jain sutra
“I have always felt responsible to act on what I know.” —Kristal Parks
Dear Kristal,
It was noted in the Greanville Post item on your protest of chinese consumption of ivory that:
‘She credits her spiritual training that draws on “the wisdom traditions, East and West. I’m most drawn to the contemplative Christian tradition and Zen Buddhism.”
She spent time meditating at St. Benedict’s monastery in Snowmass before and after every action. And she studied extensively with exiled Vietnamese Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh. “I used to say for however much time you spend in jail, you should spend an equal amount of time in a monastery, purifying your motives, taking down barriers that separate you from others.’
There is no doubt that you are a remarkable, courageous person, capable of understanding the implications of violence in its various forms to animals and humans. This is exactly why I was concerned to learn that you credit your spiritual training to “the wisdom traditions, East and West. I’m most drawn to the contemplative Christian tradition and Zen Buddhism.”
Given that you understand that the suffering of animals is no different than the suffering of humans, how is it possible for you to reconcile your values with the belief system of the semitic religions: judaism, christianity and islam? Dominion, the very foundation of this tradition is based on a hierarchy that subjugates animals to slaughter and exploitation in the name of human supremacy. This premise is endorsed by the St Benedictine Monastery, where you sought spiritual healing from exposure to the brutality of prison. The accepted diet for a St Benedictine Monastery includes:
FOOD AND DRINK AT A BENEDICTINE MONASTERY
Though the Rule of St. Benedict proscribes the eating of meat, fish is eaten at all Benedictine houses, and some inmates partake of lard and the flesh of birds as well. Child novices may be allowed the full range of meat dishes, and the head of a house may well have the flesh of pigs, deer, or other animals at his or her table. Obedientiaries frequently eat whatever they wish while travelling, and even when they are within the conventual walls, they may take their meals with the guests of the house and indulge in foods not found in the refectory [70].
Though their diets are more restricted, cloistered monks and nuns also enjoy a variety of dishes in many Benedictine communities. Quantities are often generous, and pittances are common additions to the daily meals. Feast days feature elaborate banquets, with ten or more courses served in the refectories of the wealthiest houses on important holidays. Ale is the usual beverage, or wine if the community can afford it. Meat may be served on special occasions [71]. The customary drink in the refectory in the afternoon during the summer and in the evening in winter sometimes includes light bread or cakes [72].http://www.aedificium.org/MonasticLife/BenedictineOrder.html
[pullquote] The lovely image of a shepherd guarding his sheep, fails to portray the reality. The shepherd is protecting his sheep from harm by other predators, so that the owner of the sheep may shear them and slit their throats for a feast. This is the intention and meaning of dominion. [/pullquote]In other words, the higher one is in the religious hierarchy, the more likely one is to consume the flesh of many animals. While A Benedictine Monastery is likely in a scenic location, since most of the best land was appropriated from the peasantry, it is hardly a suitable venue for contemplating compassion, peace and justice for all.
Are you familiar with the Jain tradition of India. It is a religious- based community that has embraced the tenets of non-violence, known as ahimsa, for thousands of years by prohibiting meat, leather, fur and silk. Though a small percent of the population, jains have had significant influence on implementing compassion for animals. Jains were historically the first to set up shelters, where injured animals were treated and released, as confining animals violates their right to freedom. To this very day, Jains exert their influence on Indian animal law, which is broad-based, comprehensive and compassionate. If you are familiar with the writings and work of Mahatma Gandhi, then you have an idea of the influence of ahimsa on politics. Prior to embarking on the campaign to liberate India from British occupation, Gandhiji conferred with Jain scholar, Shrimad Rajchandra, to better understand Jain doctrine as a basis for protest.
To better understand the doctrine as a basis for animal compassion consider the following sutras:
“All things breathing, all things existing, all living beings whatever, whould not be slain or treated with violence, or insulted, or tortured or drven away. This is the pure unchanging eternal law, which the wise ones who know the world have proclaimed…” —Jain Acharanga Sutra
“If thinking to gain praise, honor or respect,…a man who sins against earth or causes or permits others to do so…he will not gain joy or wisdom…tyrany to the earth is like striking , cutting or maiming a blind man…Knowing this a man should not sin agaonst earth or cause or permit others to do so. He who understands the nature of sin against earth is called a Sage.” —Jain Acharanga Sutra
“All beings with two, three, four or five senses in fact, all creation know individually pleasure and displeasure, pain, terror and sorrow. ALL are full of fears which come from all directions. And yet there exist people who would cause greater pain to them…Some kill animals for sacrifice, some for their skin, flesh, blood, feathers, teeth or tusks;…Some kill them intentionally and some unintentionally. Some kill because they have been previously injured by them…and some because they expect to be injured. He who harms animals has not understood or renounced deeds of sin…He who understands the nature of sin against animals is called a Sage.” —Jain Acharanga Sutra
If these sutras are consistent with your beliefs, then is it possible to state that the mandate of genesis is similar in intention? As you are well aware the ravages to animals seen daily in Judeo.Christian Muslim nations are a direct result of religious doctrine that excuses animal abuse as a right granted to man as follows:
“Genesis 9:1-3 is the most significant Biblical text supporting the Christian tradition of eating meat: “God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. The fear and dread of you shall rest on every animal of the earth, and on every bird of the air, on everything that creeps on the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; into your hand they are delivered. Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you; and just as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything.’ “
Having been born into one of the semtic religions, based on what I know of the cruelty of that tradition, I opted out of dominon. All faiths are not equal.Acting on what I know I left my birth religion of Judaism to free myself from the brutality of dominonist doctrine. If I were Christian I would do the same. Compassion for animals is not possible in a tradition that sanctifies their subjugation to man.
Living in a dominion-rooted culture takes its toll on one’s spirit. In an effort to undo this harm and heal from it, I have found spiritual peace as part of a Jain community, where I attend pujas and other observances, away from the violence of the semitic religious tradition. To the best of my knowledge Jainism is the only religion that has maintained a successful effort to live free from violence to both animals and humans.
While it is not necessary to be a Jain to live by ahimsa, it is impossible to remain in or praise a semitic religion and then expect compassion for animals.
Respectfully,
Ruth Eisenbud
REPLY
Dear Ruth,
“Our life begins to end the day we become silent about the things that matter.” – MLK
COUNTER REPLY
THE MYTH OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD
The Good Shepherd protects his sheep from harm, so that they
may be sheared and slaughtered by their master. The sheep are
being protected as property to be used or discarded at will.
The lovely image of a shepherd guarding his sheep, fails to portray the reality. The shepherd is protecting his sheep from harm by other predators, so that the owner of the sheep may shear them and slit their throats for a feast. This is the intention and meaning of dominion:
“The fear and dread of you shall rest on every animal of the earth, and on every bird of the air, on everything that creeps on the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; into your hand they are delivered. Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you; and just as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything.’” Genesis
Dear Kristal,
Thank you for responding to my concerns of characterizing dominion religions and even Buddhism as holders of the wisdom of compassion. The holiest of the holy, including the monks at the Benedictine Monastery where you sought refuge care little about your concern for animals, as they indulge in various meats with great piety. Even the dalai lama has been known to eat meat, although his indiscretion pales when compared to the meat orgies of semitic religious feasts.
It is irresponsible to promote the pillars of these religious institutions. They will take the opportunity to capitalize on your compassion and generosity of spirit as evidence that their blood drenched religions are enlightened. The semitic religions have no reason to change their view of animals while they receive support from individuals devoted to compassion (and respect and privileges from the state]. They will hold you up as proof that their cruel values are actually kind. They are anything but. Your praise of these religions insures that they will be able to preserve and perpetuate their cruel doctrine, along with a thin veneer of compassion. Gandhi understood the harm with such collaboration when he stated:
“As you do good, non-cooperation with evil is essential”
While you portray christianity as potentially helpful for animals, you are aiding and abetting their view of animals which allows them to be slaughtered with ease. You are inadvertently cooperating with the evil of dominion. Please do not allow yourself to be exploited by those who would harm animals.
The dominion religions are quite clear, “the exploitation and slaughter of animals has been granted to man by divine intervention.” Though sometimes cloaked in gentler language, the intention remains the same. Once this parameter is set into place, it is possible to quibble about the extent of exploitation or the type of slaughter, or which animal may be violated, which not, but it is never possible to end the violence. It is a sacred right.
the intention of dominion…
You state:’ It seems that followers of great spiritual leaders often desecrate the original teachings of those teachers.’
The doctrine which grants man dominion over animals is cruel by definition. There are some who use softer language and substitute the term stewardship for dominion. This is a clever manipulation of language designed to promote the same vision of animals. Stewardship implies management of one’s resources. This definition designates animals as human property. Once viewed as property it is possible to trivialize the value of their lives to allow for every manner of exploitation. In sum, it’s nothing but a euphemism. Politicians use it all the time; advertising is often built on euphemisms. The military uses it all the time, too, as when they speak blandly of, “collateral damage.”
The false imagery of dominion is as ruthless as its intention – the victimization of animals by their human masters. Dominion, aka stewardship, was never benevolent, nor is not now. as it sanctifies violence to animals for human advantage.
While it is comforting to hold on to the illusions of the semitic religions we learned as children: that they represent love and are filled with compassion, for the sake of the animals we must let go of this deception. By promoting a Benedictine Monastery as a refuge from violence, you are supporting the very system and institutions that have caused you so much distress…
Better to speak the truth.…
The dominion religions have resulted in ever escalating animal abuse, as they are based on a premise of tolerated violence to animals. Once such violence is sanctified, there is no going back. It is not possible to build compassion on a a foundation justifiable murder. It is not possible to reinterpret endorsed slaughter and exploitation as compassionate, for at the core this value is so intrinsically cruel it cannot be redeemed, even by dedicated and compassionate individuals such as you.
Your actions are not re-interpreting the teachings of the semitic religions. Dominion by its very nature must allow for slaughter and violence to animals. When you speak of reverence for life you are representing the viewpoint of a very different religious tradition.
When in need of refuge I do not seek out those who caused my distress with their cruel policies. Instead, I turn to those who have always understood that violence to animals is inexcusable. Are you familiar with the Jain tradition? These Jain sutras are a genuine expression of reverence for life.
"For there is nothing inaccessible for death.
All beings are fond of life, hate pain, like pleasure,
shun destruction, like life, long to live. To all life
is dear." Jain Acharanga Sutra.
"All things breathing, all things existing, all living beings whatever, would not be slain or treated with violence, or insulted, or tortured or driven away. This is the pure unchanging eternal law, which the wise ones who know the world have proclaimed..."
Jain Acharanga Sutra.
"Whatever living beings may have had pain or torment caused by me:
...Whoever I may have separated from life and made lifeless;
May all that be forgiven and may all the suffering I caused, knowingly or unknowingly, cease. May the ignorance in me that caused pain in other living beings come to an end, and may they all forgive me.
Jain Prayer of Atonement
These sutras are a far cry from Genesis. The monks at the Benedictine Monastery, or for that matter any other institutions of dominion religions, express entitlement not remorse for their meat laden diet.
Ahimsa
The Jains are a religious community who have lived a compassionate life style for many millennia, with the aid of a concept known as ahimsa… Ahimsa literally means no-harm or non-violence. Simply stated ahimsa means: “Don’t kill any living beings. Don’t try to rule them.” —Mahavira (Jain Acaranga, 4/23)
In theory and in practice ahimsa has resulted in a greater protection for animals. Though Jains are a small minority in India, the concept of ahimsa has permeated the mainstream consciousness, so that the following laws and protections for animals have been implemented. These same benefits are not possible for animals in dominion oriented cultures. In India:
- it is against the law to kill a healthy dog for any reason;
- dissection is banned for all high school students in every state;
- vivisection is banned on the college and university level;
- ALL use of animals is banned for testing of cosmetic products.
- the export of free roaming monkeys is banned, so they will not be harmed in foreign laboratories;
- It is always against the law to confine or harm a monkey
- all elephants have been liberated from zoos and circuses;
- all dancing bears have been liberated and sent to sanctuaries;
- The capture and confinement of sea mammals for exhibition or performance is banned
- in predominantly Hindu and Jain states the slaughter of cattle is illegal;
- all packaged vegetarian food is marked with a green dot for easy identification;
- there are no excuses to cull any species;
- and of course there are 400 million individuals who do not consume the flesh of any animal…
Ahimsa is quite explicit. It does not make deals for political power and wealth. It does not objectify victims as possessions to be submitted to the will of man. It is clear and direct and does not apologize for compassion. The intention is to elevate the human condition by encouraging non-violence for ALL who live.
—RE