GENIUS FORUMS

Diebert, Maybe this will help you comprehend how animals suffer pain : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDu_yUM8sMo I couldn't watch more than a couple of minutes of that, even though I've seen much of the footage before. It's horrific. John, *this* is the type of animal suffering that concerns me, a...

Laird, your quotes do not help you much if you'd study them and compare them more. Why, because some of them add a few qualifications about the attributes of animals considered to be sentient? That's pretty minor, Deebs, really, and hardly the show-stopper you seem to want to make it out as. I'll r...

Russell wrote:The full time job makes samsara quite hard to avoid, and the girlfriend makes it impossible to avoid.

I would never have guessed that you had not only one of those attachments, but both! Not with your devotion to the cause.

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:That has nothing to do with the topic at all.

Huh? It directly addressed the challenge you put to me, which Kunga was kind enough to take up for me: "Show me some link about the insects first!"

But when we strip away all medieval elements, it becomes clear that sentient beings are humans, seemingly exclusively. You are quite simply dead wrong on this, Diebert, and it's really quite astounding for one supposedly well-read in Eastern philosophy. Aside from everything I have already put to y...

Ah, fruitarianism, right? How's that going for you? I've had to modify it. Originally, and for a while there, I was eating only raw fruit, seeds and nuts. When I went travelling, though, I found myself tempted back into cooked food - I just couldn't seem to sustain myself on a raw diet. So now, I h...

Russell, can you elaborate on why/how we project our likeness onto animals "to feel good about ourselves"? It's a combination of emotional self-affirmation and herd mentality. You can see it here in this thread. It's easy to believe oneself to be 'good' due to shared fondness between peop...

Russell, can you elaborate on why/how we project our likeness onto animals "to feel good about ourselves"? I'm not trying to be antagonistic, I'm genuinely uncertain as to what you mean. As for the practice of Buddhism having nothing to do with animals, I think you are referring to the que...

Well, the original point which is now becoming lost is not whether animals are capable of practising Buddhism, but whether (in general and according to Buddhism) they suffer, or, in other words, are subject to dukkha. Diebert introduced sentience and the skandhas for some reason that isn't precisely...

It would seem odd to me too if I hadn't seen similar statements elsewhere in my research on skandhas, hence my reprisal of my earlier comments to Diebert. I don't need to hear from a pet whether skandhas apply to it - they self-evidently do, as I described in my previous post to Diebert. Go ahead yo...

Something else for you and Diebert to consider, Russell, from the root Buddhism article on Wikipedia, under the heading, "The Three Marks of Existence" - the following quote: "By analyzing the constantly changing physical and mental constituents (skandhas) of a person or object, the p...

Oh, but I am neither Christian nor Buddhist, Russell, and (as follows from that) my opinion is not mainstream to either of those religions. I have my own understanding. It was Diebert who first raised in this thread the word "mainstream". I am only following up on that reference.

So then why doesn't it say exactly that, Russell? "Sentience is reserved for the human species". But it doesn't. I don't know, Laird, to keep people like you guessing? I ain't guessin', dude, I know that in mainstream Buddhism, animals are regarded to be sentient. You can deny this if you...

As for why there is "desire to equate humans with the rest of the animal kingdom", I can only speak personally: I see animals suffering in much the same way as humans suffer, and avoidably, due to human cruelty, and I desire to eliminate that avoidable suffering. Does that make sense to you?

I extend the same challenge to you, Russell, that I extended to Diebert: find me a reputable Buddhist source that asserts that *only* humans are sentient. I bet you can't. But I also bet that in the search, you will come across dozens of sources that include animals and insects as sentient, that you...

So then why doesn't it say exactly that, Russell? "Sentience is reserved for the human species". But it doesn't. Follow the links I offered in my previous post that demonstrate that the skanhdas are not purely human phenomenon. Wikipedia might mention only humans, but this is not to limit ...

One other question for your consideration, Diebert: if *only* humans are sentient, then why would Buddhism even have a term "sentient beings"? Wouldn't that term simply reduce to "humans"? What would be the point of the term, "sentient beings", if really, all it meant w...

Laird, way to completely avoid and ignore the main point of the post again... the whole main part about you imposing inherent-quality and all. Mind addressing that, there were even some questions there. John. I ignored that part of your post because, in my eyes, it's escapist fantasy. Suffering is ...

compassion is worthwhile/useful Worthwhile to a goal or end? Of course: worthwhile to the goal of minimising suffering, and if you can't see the point in that, then guess what? I heard that a gang of bikies is making its way over to your place to break your kneecaps, cut off your eyelids and hang y...

Heh. I told you, Diebert, that you would continue arguing even though your case had been blown out of the water. You scramble with your qualification that suddenly it's now only *one* type of dukkha to which you were referring (this is the first I've heard of that!), but even then you're on no bette...

I didn't mean to imply insincerity, just lack of engagement. As for challenging on all accounts, that's what *most* people in *most* conversations on this forum seem to feel about almost *everything* they post to one another, it's nothing very original or worthy of continuing a conversation over. Bu...

Oh, come on, Diebert. How many times have you criticised or analysed me out of the blue in the past? Aren't you doing it even in that very post? And I'm not "running away", I just see no value in continuing the conversation. Contrary to being "obsessed", I'm actually not all that...

Obsessed with you, Diebert? Would it be unkind to tell you to get over yourself? Perhaps it would, so I won't. ;-) I don't really feel like responding to the rest of what you've written - no offence, it just doesn't seem very productive for either of us. Be well. John, Of course ants count: they are...

John, you're quite simply callous: the issues are entirely yours. You fancy yourself enlightened yet you clearly care nothing for the suffering of any creature other than yourself. That's not enlightenment. Emotion is appropriate in the face of gratuitous cruelty. I'm sure you too would feel emotion...

Then I can only repeat what I wrote initially: "either your understanding of animals is warped, or the way suffering is understood here is warped, or, most likely, both". Feel free to supply any reason as why you feel it's warped. In the context of this thread and the Buddhist traditions ...