Honoring Life

juantoo3

....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Messages
10,065
Reaction score
2,094
Points
108
Location
up to my arse in alligators
I began this thinking to add to the other thread about pets, but as that one seems more inclined towards consolation, which is right and well in its place, I thought it better to begin a new thread to get some thoughts from others on the subject.

I must say, I saw some pretty good lines of thought presented. Some I have considered before, some I have not. But I am still lost in quandary on the subject.

It really has hit close to home recently. I lost my dog, Cricket, in the middle of September. She was a good dog, as dogs go. But she was, after all, a dog. She loved to chase squirrels and birds, and yes, any neighborhood cat that dared into her yard. She barked at anything that went by. She ate and drank, pooped and peed, and scratched and wagged her tail. She was nothing extraordinary, just special to me.

Near as I can tell, she was about ten when she passed. Pretty old for some, left to their own devices on the side of the highway. Not nearly as old as others, kept as surrogate children and lavished with as much care as a human child might expect, down to and including medical intervention.

So, my quandary: where is the line to be drawn, between caring too much and caring too little.

Allow me to explain. We cherish our pets, albeit some more than others (pets and humans). Yet, does the love we lavish on our beloved pets really make any difference in what comprises their spirituality, presuming of course that animals do indeed have spirit? Does our love define which animals “make it” to heaven?

What differentiates between two different dogs, for example. I saw a reference to Native American belief that all life has spirit, even trees and rocks. (*I am inclined to agree with this belief.) Yet, it is also known that dog meat is a relished treat, at least among some tribes. Dog is a holiday meal, the equivalent to the American Thanksgiving turkey. The image of a young Indian child going into the woods with his bow and arrow to shoot a rabbit or pheasant for supper with his trusty canine companion at his side is a little, how can I say?, not accurate. The trusty companion was just as likely to become supper. How does the spirit of the dog that became the holiday supper greet the person who dispatched him/her when they meet in the Happy Hunting Grounds?

I had a puppy once, some years back, that became palsied very young. I took it in and “nursed” it myself. (If you can picture that, a grown guy nursing a puppy!) I used to dip my finger in the warm formula and let him suck it off of my fingertips. And I worked with that pup, hard, trying to build up his muscles so he could function anywhere close to normal. It didn’t happen. I made a choice, between allowing this creature I had grown to love very much to live a miserable life of an invalid, or putting it out of its misery and ending its suffering. I made the choice, and it was a hard one to make. I would not allow another to put him down. I did it myself, in the most caring way I could think to do. And I cried. And I still cry, and it’s been twenty years, but I do not regret the choice I made.

Before someone thinks I am just a little off kilter (OK, way off kilter), what of cows? How will that bovine that became our last Micky D’s hamburger greet the person who ate it in heaven? How attached do we dare become to what will one day be our supper? Is our attachment, our lavishing of love on a creature, what distinguishes and separates which animals will see heaven and which ones won’t? What of the cat or raccoon that keeps getting into the garbage can at night and spreading the trash all over the yard? What of the squirrel we “accidentally” ran over on the highway? What of the coyote that killed the neighbor’s sheep, and you (good neighbor that you are), shot at the first opportunity?

Of course, it is easy to take this to extreme, the old “meat is murder” campaign I hear too often. But is it, really? After all, if all life has spirit, then we are responsible to and for that spirit, are we not? “So become a vegan!” But wait a minute, even vegetables have feelings. I remember reading of some experiments in the ‘70’s that showed carrots, among others, have feelings. What of the tree we cut down for firewood last year?

What distinguishes between our cherished goldfish kept in a bowl on the desk from the trout or halibut that was last Friday’s supper?

Is sentience the proper delineation? Then how do we define sentience? How do we know that trees and other plants are not sentient, especially if we cannot speak their language? It is Native American belief that trees and plants have their own sentience. For that matter, even rocks have their own spirit and sentience.

I grieve for my dog. I miss her, terribly. I did the best I could under my meager circumstances for her. Yet I still wonder if it was enough, if the best I could do was good enough. She was not my surrogate child, she was not human. I did not treat her that way, and I still do not treat her pup that way, although I find myself paying more attention to Randy now that her mother is gone. My dogs have been great companions in an otherwise empty house. Yet, love them as I do, they are dogs. (even as I write this, my heart wells up in my throat)

Will Cricket (or Beau, the pup I put down) forgive my indiscretions? Can they forgive me? Should I forgive myself? What is the right thing in God’s eyes?

Or am I barking up the wrong tree?
 
Very moving Juantoo.

I wont go into all the points you raised but will say this. A pet that is loved and cherished is a happy animal, secure and confident. Just like a child. On the other hand a neglected, beaten and unloved animal is entirely different and becomes depressed or viscious. Just like a child. Are we not all children? And does it not show that the way we generaly regard animals smacks of a superiority complex?

Regards

TE
 
Thank you for your essay on this, Juantoo3. I identify a lot with the questions you ask here.

One thing I've come to believe is that whether we have an animal as a companion, service animal, food or just admire its qualities in the wild from afar, we always can honor the spirit of the animal and give thanks for it and the way it has effected our life. I also think that the love we have for anything or anyone has a "life" of its own, and so by loving we are creating and love always survives and goes on (again, not subject to those laws of physics, to touch on another thread).

TE is right on--it matters a lot how we care for our animals, most certainly including those that are raised for food.

It sounds to me like your pets and foundlings were very fortunate to find themselves in your care.

As I write this I have major guilt of my own since my own dog has been banished to the basement and outdoors as we go through the process of selling our house. His quality of life has gone down because of this, and I agonize that I don't find more time to walk and pet him lately. He's a very nice 12-year old labrador, retired guide dog that we raised as a puppy. He is something of a miracle dog because at age 3 he was retired early and not expected to live after surgical removal of a melanoma from his mouth. We thought we were taking him back to make his last month or two of life comfortable...now it is 9 years later... :p

peace,
lunamoth
 
I was greatly touched by your post, Juantoo3. I think any of us who has had the difficult decision about putting a loved pet down struggles with forgiving ourselves, and with whether the pet forgives them.

I believe that animals know when they are loved, and they forgive us for any actions that were not right to them just as we forgive those of our loved ones. I also believe that in keeping domesticated animals, we often become responsibile for ending their suffering of old age and infirmity through euthanasia because we have, in domesticating them and keeping them, altered the natural processes that would generally cut animals' lives short. We must remember that old animals in the wild would be picked off by predators, starve, or become ill. By extending their lives and halting the natural processes, we become responsible for ending and alleviating their suffering from old-age illnesses. I believe on some level they realize this and depend on us in this matter.

As for sentience and the treatment of life, I think lunamoth hit the nail on the head. I believe all life is sentient, and even some things we think of as non-life (rocks and such), but the key is honorable and humane treatment and giving thanks to them for their sacrifices. I think many indigenous hunting and gathering groups have the best models for this. They know they rely on killing sentient life to survive. It is a daily reality. They have no Vons to go to in order to buy their meat tidily packaged- they have to face it when it's cute and fuzzy. So they honor the lives that must be sacrificed so that their lives can continue- they have ritual, they give thanks to those that sustain them, and most importantly- they avoid getting greedy and inhumane. They believe (generally) that if you get greedy, if you are disrespectful, you bring misfortune on yourself by making the powerful spirits of these animals (and sometimes plants and geographical areas) angry. There are also often myths that there are cycles of reincarnation between humans and key resource species. Thus, it is really your dead relatives who, incarnated as whales or deer or bears, in your best interest, sacrifice themselves out of love for their family and the continuity of the tribe and the balance of life. Eventually, you'll die and sacrifice yourself for them. It's a beautiful thought really, and transforms animals into our kin, and expands our society (and thus those we need to care for and acknowledge as individuals and persons) to include the environment around us.
 
The Irony of the Bible is, animals do not need to be saved. Humans do...oy!:rolleyes: Seriously, animals commit no sin, ever. Humans...hmmm

I wanted to talk about deer, but maybe another time.

v/r

Q
 
Quahom1 said:
The Irony of the Bible is, animals do not need to be saved. Humans do...oy!:rolleyes: Seriously, animals commit no sin, ever. Humans...hmmm

I wanted to talk about deer, but maybe another time.

v/r

Q

yah. i see it the same too.
 
i enjoyed your post a lot Juan.:)
i see a lot of feelings & thoughts in it. i have never had to put an animal down but i did have to leave one behind during during relocating to another state & took him to the shelter. that was like 8 years & was hard to do & i still grieve about that, because i will never know.

i just lost my 14 year old iguana this summer. it was different because she lived a very full life with several handicaps. i knew she was going from a heart attack or seizure & it was 24 hours later she died in my lap.
 
Kindest Regards, all!

Thank you very much for all of your kind words, they help a lot.

I am very sorry to hear of your loss, Bandit.
 
juantoo3 said:
Kindest Regards, all!

Thank you very much for all of your kind words, they help a lot.

I am very sorry to hear of your loss, Bandit.

Juan, Life is supposed to be a quality unsurpassed. Doesn't mean we are in perfect health, but that our worth is perfect. I think that is all that matters. When the shell we have can not maintain our life, life will leave. If the suffering gets so great that our quality of life is decimated, then there are options. We seem to have a very strange sense of morales concerning the taking of life (for whatever reasons), that I still can't sort out.

Love and hate are the main factors, in determining whether life continues or not, and as such life is in the hands of the beheld and the emotion (or decision) they have.

For example, the individual trapped in wreckage who begs the one in authority (capacity), to not let them burn alive. What is morally correct? Take the life? Or let them succumb to a mentally/spiritually horrible demise? (we both know that after 30 seconds or so, nerves no longer feel the heat of fire, and lungs fail).

Take same individual trapped in wreckage who begs the one in authority (capacity), not to let them die. What is morally correct? Sever the limb? Or again, let them succumb to...

But with animals, things are different. Unlike the Sierra club's, and Green Peace, and other such "kill man before the earth" clubs' idealogy, animals are here to teach man (IMO).

To you, it was more humane to put the puppy down (and you chose to do it yourself - making it extremely personal and hard). To others, the choice is to fight to keep the puppy alive (they have the resourses/inclination/need).

All the animal (any animal) desires, is love and respect. How they live or die, is irrelevant to them. Whether they taught man to love and respect is all that I think matters to them.

Think about it Juan. An animal spirit goes before God, and God says "What did man learn from you?" The animal spirit replies, "Man learned to keep others from misery, and took on the misery for himself, out of love..."

or, "Man learned to fight the good fight, because there was hope. It put man out of his way to do so, but he insisted, despite the inconvenience, out of love..."

Either way, we win...do you see?

In any event, you won...and I suspect I won. :cool: ;)

v/r

Q
 
Back
Top