Animals...

[Truth_Faith13]

A lot of these forums are about us human beings... what about animals? Whats the different religious perspective on them and what proof/reasoning do they have. Do they have souls, do they go to "dog heaven" etc or were they just put on this earth for us to eat. If you dont agree with either of those, what is the purpose of the animal?

Many thanks and look forward to hearing your points of view!

 

[Aqualung]

My belief is that all living things, like humans, were created spiritually before they were created physically. So I guess they have souls of sorts.

 

[!Fluffy!]

My belief is that all living things, like humans, were created spiritually before they were created physically. So I guess they have souls of sorts.

Cool idea. I like it.

 

[Popeyesays]

Abdu'l Baha tells us:
"Then, O ye friends of God! Ye must not only have kind and merciful feelings for mankind, but ye should also exercise the utmost kindness towards every living creature. The physical sensibilities and instincts are common to animal and man. Man is, however, negligent of this reality and imagines that sensibility is 374 peculiar to mankind, therefore he practices cruelty to the animal. In reality what difference is there in physical sensations! Sensibility is the same whether you harm man or animal: there is no difference. Nay, rather, cruelty to the animal is more painful because man has a tongue and he sighs, complains and groans when he receives an injury and complains to the government and the government protects him from cruelty; but the poor animal cannot speak, it can neither show its suffering nor is it able to appeal to the government. If it is harmed a thousand times by man it is not able to defend itself in words nor can it seek justice or retaliate. Therefore one must be very considerate towards animals and show greater kindness to them than to man. Educate the children in their infancy in such a way that they may become exceedingly kind and merciful to the animals. If an animal is sick they should endeavor to cure it; if it is hungry, they should feed it; if it is thirsty, they should satisfy its thirst; if it is tired, they should give it rest."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 373)

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Abdu'l Baha tells us:
"Then, O ye friends of God! Ye must not only have kind and merciful feelings for mankind, but ye should also exercise the utmost kindness towards every living creature. The physical sensibilities and instincts are common to animal and man. Man is, however, negligent of this reality and imagines that sensibility is 374 peculiar to mankind, therefore he practices cruelty to the animal. In reality what difference is there in physical sensations! Sensibility is the same whether you harm man or animal: there is no difference. Nay, rather, cruelty to the animal is more painful because man has a tongue and he sighs, complains and groans when he receives an injury and complains to the government and the government protects him from cruelty; but the poor animal cannot speak, it can neither show its suffering nor is it able to appeal to the government. If it is harmed a thousand times by man it is not able to defend itself in words nor can it seek justice or retaliate. Therefore one must be very considerate towards animals and show greater kindness to them than to man. Educate the children in their infancy in such a way that they may become exceedingly kind and merciful to the animals. If an animal is sick they should endeavor to cure it; if it is hungry, they should feed it; if it is thirsty, they should satisfy its thirst; if it is tired, they should give it rest."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 373)

I love the idea... so why do we eat them?

 

[Popeyesays]

A huge volume of religious law governs the harvesting of animals for food. It's not like it's a new question. Societal and religious law govern the meat packing process. I'm not a vegetarian, and have no real desire to be one. I don't have a moral question about it unless the animal is subjected to terror and pain in the process. Your mileage may vary.

Regards,
Scott

 

[BruceDLimber]

Hi!

The Baha'i scriptures say that animals are in a separate category from humans. They describe five of what we call "Kingdoms of Creation." These are, in ascending order:

• mineral
• vegetable
• animal
• human
• Divine Messenger

Each level has the attributes of the lower ones, and adds something additional.

For example, humans have an eternal soul; animals do not.

Best,

Bruce

 

[Gentoo]

I believe that we are no different than animals on all accounts. What happens to us, happens to them. Whether they are "separate but equal" or not remains to be seen at this point to me.

 

[Katzpur]

What about animals? Whats the different religious perspective on them and what proof/reasoning do they have. Do they have souls, do they go to "dog heaven" etc or were they just put on this earth for us to eat.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes that animals have souls and will be resurrected. As an animal lover (see my title), that doctrine is a great source of comfort to me.

 

[Katzpur]

Abdu'l Baha tells us:
"Then, O ye friends of God! Ye must not only have kind and merciful feelings for mankind, but ye should also exercise the utmost kindness towards every living creature. The physical sensibilities and instincts are common to animal and man. Man is, however, negligent of this reality and imagines that sensibility is 374 peculiar to mankind, therefore he practices cruelty to the animal. In reality what difference is there in physical sensations! Sensibility is the same whether you harm man or animal: there is no difference. Nay, rather, cruelty to the animal is more painful because man has a tongue and he sighs, complains and groans when he receives an injury and complains to the government and the government protects him from cruelty; but the poor animal cannot speak, it can neither show its suffering nor is it able to appeal to the government. If it is harmed a thousand times by man it is not able to defend itself in words nor can it seek justice or retaliate. Therefore one must be very considerate towards animals and show greater kindness to them than to man. Educate the children in their infancy in such a way that they may become exceedingly kind and merciful to the animals. If an animal is sick they should endeavor to cure it; if it is hungry, they should feed it; if it is thirsty, they should satisfy its thirst; if it is tired, they should give it rest."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 373)

Bravo for Abdu'l Baha! Once again, Mormonism and the Baha'i Faith share an important doctrine. In fact, the words sound very, very much like statements I have read from LDS leaders including Joseph Smith.

 

[Aqualung]

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes that animals have souls and will be resurrected. As an animal lover (see my title), that doctrine is a great source of comfort to me.

Where is that? I did a cursory search for it, didn't find it, was overpowered by boredom and couldn't keep my attention, so I went on to other things.

 

[lombas]

Since I do not believe in heaven, I don't think there is a separate one for your favorite pet to go to.

However, God being the creator of all things and animals being living creatures, it may be that there is a light within them. Since they have no reason, they will not understand, nor can they reason (about God). That way, I think they have no rights and are a mere "property" of human beings.

 

[Jaymes]

I don't think animals are here for me to eat, since I can live without eating them.

And I agree with what Gentoo said: Whatever happens to them, happens to us. The only difference between us and them is that our brain's wired a bit differently.

 

[Jaymes]

However, God being the creator of all things and animals being living creatures, it may be that there is a light within them. Since they have no reason, they will not understand, nor can they reason (about God). That way, I think they have no rights and are a mere "property" of human beings.

Actually, that's not true. In studies ravens have been shown to exhibit logic on par with or above that of primates.

 

[lombas]

Actually, that's not true. In studies ravens have been shown to exhibit logic on par with or above that of primates.

I have heard of such studies, and they may well be true. But can a raven enter a rational debate? Can it tell you its age when you ask for it (given you speak ravenish)?

Moreover, can it fulfill the premises of a rational debate (argumentation ethics, as they are called)?

 

[Jaymes]

I have heard of such studies, and they may well be true. But can a raven enter a rational debate? Can it tell you its age when you ask for it (given you speak ravenish)?

Moreover, can it fulfill the premises of a rational debate (argumentation ethics, as they are called)?

Four year olds can't enter debate, either, but you have no issues exempting them from this criteria. Why?

 

[lombas]

Four year olds can't enter debate, either, but you have no issues exempting them from this criteria. Why?

Ah, that is different. Four year olds haven't reached the level they are capable to enter a rational debate. But they will, if all goes well, in about # (e.g. sixteen) years.

It's about a person. A rational human being entering the discussion.

 

[Jaymes]

Ah, that is different. Four year olds haven't reached the level they are capable to enter a rational debate. But they will, if all goes well, in about # (e.g. sixteen) years.

It's about a person. A rational human being entering the discussion.

So why don't have you issues exempting the mentally ill or retarded, those that can't debate, from this idea that the ability to debate gives someone the right to not be property?

 

[Gentoo]

But can a raven enter a rational debate?

Perhaps ravens debate among themselves as to why those funny looking two-legged creatures insist on living in buildings. Who's to say?

 

[Katzpur]

Where is that? I did a cursory search for it, didn't find it, was overpowered by boredom and couldn't keep my attention, so I went on to other things.

This is from Joseph Fielding Smith's "Answers to Gospel Questions; Volume 5:

The Atonement of the Savior accomplished two wonderful things: First, it restored every living thing in mortal life to eternal life, that is, it gives to every mortal creature the resurrection and eternal power over death; second the remission of sins.

In a revelation given to the Prophet Joseph Smith, in September 1830, we find the following wonderful and clear explanation of the resurrection and the completeness or universal nature of this restoration:

"... And the end shall come, and the heaven and the earth shall be consumed and pass away, and there shall be a new heaven and a new earth.

For all old things shall pass away, and all things shall become new, even the heaven and the earth, and all the fulness thereof, both men and beasts, the fowls of the air, and the fishes of the sea;

And not one hair, neither mote, shall be lost, for it is the workmanship of my hand.

But, behold, verily I say unto you, before the earth shall pass away, Michael, mine archangel, shall sound his trump, and then shall all the dead awake, for their graves shall be opened, and they shall come forth -- yea, even all."

It is a very inconsistent notion which is held my some, that the resurrection will only come to human souls, that the animals and plants have no spirits and therefore are not redeemed by the sacrifice of the Son of God, and hence they are not entitled to the resurrection.