Buddist on Catholic answers?

[Veedar]

the only intrinsic value animals possess is the value that they have for human life.

Nothing has “intrinsic” value. Minds value things. Things have no value existing within them. Even if you think God values humans more than other animals, the value is still within the mind of God and not within humans or animals. I value animals, so do hundreds of millions of vegetarians and vegans in the world. And so do a lot of people who own pets, but inconsistently do not care for animals that are every bit as bright and sensitive as their pets, so called “food animals”.

animals exist for the benefit of human beings.

They do not. Humans are animals and descended from animals. Humans are not a “special creation”, biologically speaking.

animals have no immortal soul.

Neither do humans.

“and this will be made manifest at the proper time by the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.” (1Tim 6:15-16)

"I said in my heart with regard to the sons of men that God is testing them to show them that they are but beasts. **For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, **and man has no advantage over the beasts; for all is vanity. All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down to the earth? (Ecclesiastes 3:18-21)" Please note that the word spirit in v21 and the word breath in v19 is the same word. This is a willful distortion of the Hebrew text by the translators.

the only rights animals have are those given them by man

The only rights humans have are given to them by other humans in a society.

i believe it is wrong to make animals suffer solely or needlessly for some perverted, personal gratification.

I am glad to hear it. Using animals for food and clothing is completely unnecessary in our modern society.

i also believe animals suffer far less when humanely destroyed than when they are left to die from sickness and old age, or even at the hands of another animal.

Then you need to educate yourself about modern factory farming. The movie Earthlings is a good starting point. You can watch it in its entirety, for free.

however, i do not attribute to animals any of the rights or elements that make man different from animals.

There are no such elements. Unless you think someone in a coma, or a fetus, or someone who is mentally disabled, for instance, is less human than you are.

animals belong to a lesser and only temporal realm.

Humans belong to a lesser and only temporal realm. Subject to decay and death. Just like animals.

it is a false teaching to advocate that animals deserve to be treated like God demands humans treat each other.

No. And unless humans start treating animals that way, they will never treat each other in a skilful way either. Our brains are hardwired to dehumanize other humans by creating pseudoraces. The only way to neutralize that is to love all sentient beings.

animals have neither intellect nor free will.

They have the capacity to suffer, which is what matters. They enjoy life. They experience fear, sorrow, depression and they sometimes go insane. And you say a lot about what animals do not have. Of course, without a single scientific reference. The dog in this video has no intellect? Hah! Also, have you ever owned a pet? I have seen decisive evidence that my cat (may he rest in peace) could think.

youtube.com/watch?v=mTTuiE1_Oe8

i oppose anyone who tries to equate animals with humans.

I realize that. Nevertheless, humans are animals, and we all share a common ancestor.

 

[eddie_too]

veedar,

i prefer to put my trust in the One who raised Himself from the dead, not in someone whose words reveal no understanding of what the Church Christ founded over two thousand years ago teaches.

that you should consider yourself equal to Jesus Christ reveals what any faithful RC needs to know about your posts.

your posts demonstrate that you know next to nothing about the RCC and its teachings.

i pray that our Creator gifts you with theological faith in His Incarnate Son.

 

[Arlotus]

Nothing has “intrinsic” value. Minds value things. Things have no value existing within them. Even if you think God values humans more than other animals, the value is still within the mind of God and not within humans or animals. I value animals, so do hundreds of millions of vegetarians and vegans in the world. And so do a lot of people who own pets, but inconsistently do not care for animals that are every bit as bright and sensitive as their pets, so called “food animals”.

They do not. Humans are animals and descended from animals. Humans are not a “special creation”, biologically speaking.

Neither do humans.

“and this will be made manifest at the proper time by the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.” (1Tim 6:15-16)

"I said in my heart with regard to the sons of men that God is testing them to show them that they are but beasts. **For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, **and man has no advantage over the beasts; for all is vanity. All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down to the earth? (Ecclesiastes 3:18-21)" Please note that the word spirit in v21 and the word breath in v19 is the same word. This is a willful distortion of the Hebrew text by the translators.

The only rights humans have are given to them by other humans in a society.

I am glad to hear it. Using animals for food and clothing is completely unnecessary in our modern society.

Then you need to educate yourself about modern factory farming. The movie Earthlings is a good starting point. You can watch it in its entirety, for free.

There are no such elements. Unless you think someone in a coma, or a fetus, or someone who is mentally disabled, for instance, is less human than you are.

Humans belong to a lesser and only temporal realm. Subject to decay and death. Just like animals.

No. And unless humans start treating animals that way, they will never treat each other in a skilful way either. Our brains are hardwired to dehumanize other humans by creating pseudoraces. The only way to neutralize that is to love all sentient beings.

They have the capacity to suffer, which is what matters. They enjoy life. They experience fear, sorrow, depression and they sometimes go insane. And you say a lot about what animals do not have. Of course, without a single scientific reference. The dog in this video has no intellect? Hah! Also, have you ever owned a pet? I have seen decisive evidence that my cat (may he rest in peace) could think.

youtube.com/watch?v=mTTuiE1_Oe8

I realize that. Nevertheless, humans are animals, and we all share a common ancestor.

Veedar, I support what you are saying, and I admire what you are doing, but I cannot understand why you would want to even debate such ignorant ideas. It’s laughable.

 

[NextElement]

Even Buddhists believe that humans are superior to animals. Animals are living beings with a sense of self, but they do not have the mental capacity to reach enlightenment. In fact, some Buddhist sects believe that bad karma will have you reborn as an animal. We respect them as fellow living things, but we don’t see them as equals like Veedar seems to. A world where animals are treated exactly like humans would be a sad (or at least interesting) one indeed.

 

[Arlotus]

i do not need you to do anything for me. Jesus has already done for me all that needs doing.

i also reject your presumption of judgment against me. only God can and will judge me.

you have a great tendency toward sophistry, not to mention judgment.

you cannot say eating meat is a sin without saying Jesus sinned.

you cannot say killing an animal is a sin without saying God sinned when He ordered moses to kill a lamb and use its blood to identify the faithful israelites captive in egypt before their departure so that the angel of death would passover their homes.

you ignore these facts and prefer to employ a tactic of assigning guilt trying to make others feel bad that they do not accept your unreasonable and unsupportable arguments.

you never distinguish between the use of animals and the deliberate torture of animals.

“The great fault of all ethics hitherto has been that they believed themselves to have to deal only with the relations of man to man. In reality, however, the question is what is his attitude to the world and all life that comes within his reach. A man is ethical only when life, as such, is sacred to him, and that of plants and animals as that of his fellow men, and when he devotes himself helpfully to all life that is in need of help. Only the universal ethic of the feeling of responsibility in an ever-widening sphere for all that lives — only that ethic can be founded in thought. … The ethic of Reverence for Life, therefore, comprehends within itself everything that can be described as love, devotion, and sympathy whether in suffering, joy, or effort.”

“Compassion, in which all ethics must take root, can only attain its full breadth and depth if it embraces all living creatures and does not limit itself to mankind.”

(Albert Schweitzer)

 

[Arlotus]

Even Buddhists believe that humans are superior to animals. Animals are living beings with a sense of self, but they do not have the mental capacity to reach enlightenment. In fact, some Buddhist sects believe that bad karma will have you reborn as an animal. We respect them as fellow living things, but we don’t see them as equals like Veedar seems to. A world where animals are treated exactly like humans would be a sad (or at least interesting) one indeed.

I think the enlightenment you speak of when we treat animals as if they have little value is based on imagination. It is only when we are deeply aware of the interconnectedness of all of life that we begin to glimpse any kind of enlightenment.

I do not think it is a matter of assigning value - to me it is going through life with an attitude of not wanting to harm. It is against that backdrop that we develop a sattvic way of living. I do not let my dog and cat share my food. But I do try to understand that they respond to love and caring, like all of of life does. Our attitudes matter.Our thoughts create our realities. Better to think love - caring - kindness.

 

[Veedar]

veedar,

i prefer to put my trust in the One who raised Himself from the dead, not in someone whose words reveal no understanding of what the Church Christ founded over two thousand years ago teaches.

that you should consider yourself equal to Jesus Christ reveals what any faithful RC needs to know about your posts.

your posts demonstrate that you know next to nothing about the RCC and its teachings.

i pray that our Creator gifts you with theological faith in His Incarnate Son.

Of of course, “the one who raised himself from the dead” says none of what you did in your previous post. It is based on medieval philosophy, mingled with scripture. And as I have pointed out more than once, dogmas develop. The Church has done a 180 on many, many issues, such as slavery, death penalty, extermination of heretics, religious freedom, communion after divorce and remarriage, extra ecclesiam nulla salus etc… etc… etc…

 

[Veedar]

Even Buddhists believe that humans are superior to animals. Animals are living beings with a sense of self, but they do not have the mental capacity to reach enlightenment. In fact, some Buddhist sects believe that bad karma will have you reborn as an animal. We respect them as fellow living things, but we don’t see them as equals like Veedar seems to. A world where animals are treated exactly like humans would be a sad (or at least interesting) one indeed.

This is a distortion of the teaching of the Buddha. The following ideas are all wrong according to the Buddha: “I am of greater value than others”, “I am of equal value as others”, “I am of lesser value than others”. This error is called “the three conceits”, and it is based on human language and abstraction, not on the suchness of reality:

“Lord, I do not fully grasp the meaning of what Your Blessedness has expressed in brief. It would be well for me, Lord, if your Blessedness would explain in full what has been expressed in brief, that I may know its meaning.”

“[The Blessed One said:]
“Equal I am, or better, of less degree”:
All such idle fancies lead to strife,
Who’s unmoved by all these three conceits
Such vain distinctions leaves unmade.”

accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/walshe/wheel318.html

Nor have I claimed we should treat all things exactly the same way. All I have said is that it is skillful to cause as little suffering to living beings as possible, whether or not we label those beings human.

EDIT: I would also like to point out that we all descend from rat-like mammals living under ground in holes. The sole survivors after the cataclysmic event that wiped out the dinosaurs 70 million years ago. Had one in the chain of non-human animals you are descended from been murdered for food before it could raise offspring, you would not be here to walk the spiritual path towards enlightenment.

Veedar, I support what you are saying, and I admire what you are doing, but I cannot understand why you would want to even debate such ignorant ideas. It’s laughable.

I entered the discussion to answer the claim that Buddhism is “selfish”. The example I used started this discussion about animal suffering. You do have a point though.

 

[Grym]

Even Buddhists believe that humans are superior to animals. Animals are living beings with a sense of self, but they do not have the mental capacity to reach enlightenment. In fact, some Buddhist sects believe that bad karma will have you reborn as an animal. We respect them as fellow living things, but we don’t see them as equals like Veedar seems to. A world where animals are treated exactly like humans would be a sad (or at least interesting) one indeed.

I think you are mixing things up.

It is more difficult for an animal to become awakened compared to a human but so is it for gods. The human life is considered the ideal mix of the heavenly and the lowly to incite people to achive nibbana.

Also reincarnation allows all even animals and gods to become reborn as humans and get a chance at nibbana.

What you mean by “equal” is a bit obscure to me but remember that anatta teaches that objectively speaking all things have the same worth or if you will worthlessness!

It is only in the mind of beings things are given value.

/Victor

 

[eddie_too]

kind of amusing to read buddhists exhibiting overteeming arrogance by presuming to lecture christians about the teachings of Jesus.

 

[Arlotus]

kind of amusing to read buddhists exhibiting overteeming arrogance by presuming to lecture christians about the teachings of Jesus.

That is because for many the original Christianity has been lost. All the great ones, Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, et al, speak the same basic language, though their messages are geared to their times.

Look at what Pope Francis is up against now! He is up up against his own ‘christians’, in case the whole house of cards collapses.

 

[Grym]

kind of amusing to read buddhists exhibiting overteeming arrogance by presuming to lecture christians about the teachings of Jesus.

Jesus wasnt a christian either. But he lectured you pretty well. Didnt he? .

/Victor

 

[eddie_too]

overteeming arrogance can also be identified by seeing people compare their ignorance of Jesus’ teachings to Jesus’ actual teachings, and then conclude their teachings are are somehow equivalent to Jesus teachings when in reality what is similar in the two is far less than what is different.

the primary difference between buddhism and christianity is that buddhism grew out of the life of one man who did his natural best to understand reality based solely on his own efforts while christianity grow out of our Creator’s deliberate and supernatural intervention in to mankind’s history.

another, extraordinarily significant, difference is that while the founder of christianity left an empty grave thus confirming His victory over death, the body of the founder of buddhism ended up rotting in his grave.

and a third, very significant difference is that Jesus sacrificed Himself for the sins of all while the buddha sacrificed nothing for mankind.

if all you got is the buddha, you are better off than an atheist, but the buddha does not compare in any significant manner to the crucified and resurrected Incarnate Word.

 

[rossum]

the primary difference between buddhism and christianity is that buddhism grew out of the life of one man who did his natural best to understand reality based solely on his own efforts while christianity grow out of our Creator’s deliberate and supernatural intervention in to mankind’s history.

The point is the the Buddha did exactly what he set out to do. He succeeded. He was a man, and what he did, we can also do. It is within the power of man to follow in the Buddha’s path. Men are not gods, so it is fruitless for men to try to emulate gods. Better to stick to what we already know is possible, rather than to waste time attempting the impossible.

another, extraordinarily significant, difference is that while the founder of christianity left an empty grave thus confirming His victory over death, the body of the founder of buddhism ended up rotting in his grave.

You would do well to understand more of Buddhism. The point of Buddhism is to avoid rebirth. Being reborn – living again after death – is easy. The difficult thing is to avoid it. The Buddha succeeded, as do all those who attain nirvana before death. To a Buddhist, your loud proclamations that Jesus is alive merely show that Jesus did not attain nirvana. The Buddha is not alive precisely because he did attain nirvana. Do not assume that Buddhism is automatically the same as Christianity. Doing that will only lead you into error.

rossum

 

[eddie_too]

strangely, i love being alive and the idea of not being alive has no appeal to me.

why does it appeal to a buddhist?

 

[Grym]

the primary difference between buddhism and christianity is that buddhism grew out of the life of one man who did his natural best to understand reality based solely on his own efforts while christianity grow out of our Creator’s deliberate and supernatural intervention in to mankind’s history.

No the primary difference is Nibbana. Nothing else matters.

another, extraordinarily significant, difference is that while the founder of christianity left an empty grave thus confirming His victory over death, the body of the founder of buddhism ended up rotting in his grave.

Not really. Because they burnt the corpse. And nobody lives forever. No gods nor man. Whatever happened to Jesus sooner or later he too will die. Laws of thermodynamics see? Unless maybe if you freeze him to 0 kelvin and device a method to keep him there forever. But that wouldnt be much of a life?

and a third, very significant difference is that Jesus sacrificed Himself for the sins of all while the buddha sacrificed nothing for mankind.

First of all, since the dhamma is about seeing things as they really are, Jesus sacrifice seems to have had little effect? Dont you think? I mean looking at the world today?

What would you have had the Buddha sacrifice? And why?

if all you got is the buddha, you are better off than an atheist, but the buddha does not compare in any significant manner to the crucified and resurrected Incarnate Word.

Well so far we havent compared the two but rather the relative illogicality of christianity compared to the dhamma.
I see no real point in comparing them either. Why are you trying to?

/Victor

 

[Grym]

strangely, i love being alive and the idea of not being alive has no appeal to me.

why does it appeal to a buddhist?

Why would not being alive appeal to a buddhist? What a strange idea!

 

[eddie_too]

grym,

this is what rossum wrote: “The Buddha is not alive precisely because he did attain nirvana.”

like i said, i like being alive. according to buddhists the buddha is not alive.

 

[Grym]

grym,

this is what rossum wrote: “The Buddha is not alive precisely because he did attain nirvana.”

like i said, i like being alive. according to buddhists the buddha is not alive.

No he said “is not alive precisely” not that the Buddha is not alive.

The question of what happens to the Buddha after death is not answerable because if you ask the question then you have no idea of what being awakened means.

One way of explaining it would be that when Awakened death has no meaning anymore.

/Victor

 

[eddie_too]

based on the buddhists who have posted here, it seems fair to conclude that budhhism is understood in an entirely subjective manner. it has no agreed upon doctrines. it provides no authoratative teachings.

that is a huge difference from Roman Catholicism.