What was the deciding factor of the differences between humans and animals? Do humans think they are superior over animals because we walk on two legs rather than four or because we speak with articulate words while they speak with signals or sounds? According to Jainism and Ecology, “religion distinguishes the human species from all others, just as human presence on earth distinguishes the ecology of our planet fro other places in the unknown universe. Religious life and the earth’s ecology are inextricably linked, organically related” (810).
Many humans, specifically westerners, believe that we, as a species, have reign over the animal species because we were given this right by God himself. “Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things” (Genesis 9:3, 809). God may have blessed humans with animals as their companions, but He also told his sons “…the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth…”(Genesis 9:2, 809). I believe that we were given animals as a gift, yet as a species we have completely taken this gift for granted and taken advantages of the seeming superiority that we have with our brain capacities and exponential technological advances. The “task…of revaluing nature so as to prevent its destruction marks a significant new phase in religious thought”. Religion is not a single decision made on a whim by a single person. All religions are traditional waves that have been shaped and twisted from some original idea to what is practices in today’s society. Expanding the religious realm of human-animal relations will take more than simply a few advocates speaking out on the animals’ behalves. Religion is one of the most immovable, stubborn theologies on the planet. In order for a movement to happen involving religion would take a radical movement with explicatory action. Jainsim is “an ancient religion of India, also now found in other countries around the world, that prescribes a path of peace and non-violence towards all living beings” (Wikipedia Jainism). A part of Jainsim called Ahimsa is a “non injury, of course, [and] implies non-killing. But, non-injury is not merely non-killing. In its comprehensive meaning, Ahimsa or non-injury means entire abstinence from causing any pain or harm whatsoever to any living creature either by thought, word or deed. Non-injury requires a harmless mind, mouth, and hand” (815).
The crisis and cause of many major wars has its source at the bounds of religion. The difference between the non-kill ideas of Jainism and the non-killing ideas of Christianity are vast. While non-kill means not killing any living thing to Jainists, non-kill to Christians means not killing another human being. Killing animals is okay for Christians because God has given them animals as a means to nurture themselves and survive while Jainists find other means of nutrition as this is what is required to avoid killing or hurting any living thing, emotionally or physically. How can two religions that are so different come together on such a contradictory idea? According to the Neo-Confucian Manifesto, “such crises have their origin in man’s inability to control his cultural products and inventions…it is clear that the formation of a world civilization is contingent upon co-operation on a high plane among the various cultures of the world” 832). I agree with this notion that in order to make a difference in the world and in order to collide two very different religions, people must cooperate or else no progress would be made. Christian and Jainist ideas on eating animals is contingent on their respective religious leaders and this is likely not to change unless eyes are opened to the reality of the others’ thought origins. For these two separate worlds to converge and even align, there must be major cooperation and sympathetic imagination must be utilized in order to fully understand one another.
No comments:
Post a Comment