Can brahmins have pets?

[C RAVI]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

I am initiating this topic because of my craze for Dogs. From my childhood I liked to play with Dog. I love to interact with a Dog as a friend and could sense what my friend wants to reciprocate.

I pet a Dog when I was 12 years old when we were in Assam Air Force Station. A brown colored healthy and charming street dog that got attached to our home and sheltered himself somewhere at the corner of the door step. I named him "JIMMY" and had wonderful days with him for 4 years. He used to come along with me till my class room and I had to force him to go back at teacher's instructions. I used to go to him at the class room entrance, sit near his face and tells him in Hind to go back home and wait for me till afternoon when I leave my school, patting him. He leaves the school. When I return from the school at around 3pm, I find him running towards me somewhere near the school on my way back home.

After 4 years my Dad got Promotional Transfer to Nasik and we had to move. That day I can not forget till my life time. I cried like anything as well my brother. When we were preparing to leave I could notice the restlessness of my JIMMY. When the Vehicle started moving, JIMMY looked very upset and started running behind the vehicle looking at us till the Vehicle exited the security Gate.

My above narration is to tell how deep was my intimacy with JIMMY and how we felled the relationship as if we were fellow beings. And to emphasis that a two different species can live as fellow beings (as long as it is practical) and share the feelings.

My question is –

1) Whether as per shastras we Brahmins are allowed to have pets (Dogs or Cats) and keep them in our house as one of our family members?

2) Will this leads to Karmic Bondage? Should we need to perform any rites for this departed soul (at least at once at the time of death or yearly) as we feed our pet, love our pet and live with our pet for long. And in return the pet shows its love to us, be with us and helps us to the best of its understanding and capacity.

Or karmic bondage exists only among human beings who all are closely related?

3) Does Brahmin shastras objects such a close relationship with other species to avoid any sort of mystic and complicated karmic bondage?

I request the learned members to help me with my queries, as I have strongly decided to pet one dog the moment I could feel the possibility, considering the acceptance of other family members.


Cheers...

RAVI

 

[[email protected]]

To Sri C.Ravi, I was also a Dog lover and in my young age I learned to train Dogs, at present my spiritual path advocates that we should not have pets in home,since we develop attachment towards them and it will put you in a fix,so better to avoid them. There is also KarmicBondage danger, but there is no objects in shastras. Some cases the Vasanas will also play a role in our life and we may forced to keep pets in our home. s.r.k.

 

[C RAVI]

Sri esarkey ji,

Thank you very much for your suggestion.

By the by if not mistaken can you please explain elaborately as what you have intended to convey by stating - "Some cases the Vasanas will also play a role in our life and we may forced to keep pets in our home"

Cheers...

RAVI

 

[Raghy]

Sri Ravi,

Interesting questions indeed.

1. Yes. Brahmins are allowed to have pets. ( sincerely I can't understand the use of the word 'allowed'. In my opinion, our life is not controlled by anybody).

2. Naturally pets will lead to karmic bondage. It is a relationship. Any relationship ought to lead karmic bondage. In my opinion, we will need to perform last rites to the pet in the event of departure so as to complete our bereavement and grieving process. Yearly rememberence can be a personal choice. It just depends upon the time we take to move on from the loss.

3. I have not heard of any shastras objecting to this. Then again, I do not know all the sahstras anyway.

The above answers are my personal opinions.

 

[C RAVI]

Sri Raghy ji,

You are absolutely true that it is a relationship with bondage. I feel the same way.

------------------------------------

My thinking process on this topic generates many more interlinking questions...

1) SHOULD WE TREAT THE IMPORTANCE OF SOUL WHICH HAD A LIFE OF A DOG/CAT IN PAR WITH HUMAN SOUL?

2) SHOULD CRIMINATION RITUALS TO BE FOLLOWED FOR THE PETS THAT DOSEN'T HAVE ALL THE 6 SENSES THAT WE HUMAN BEINGS ARE CONSIDERED TO HAVE. [I am comparing with the 6th sense of humans that let us know what is wrong and what is not. As well what is good and what is bad. Other species are considered to have only 5 other senses.]

3) DO WE NEED TO CONSIDER ALL THE RELATED SOULS IN EQUAL STANDARD AND PERFORM REQUIRED RITES ON ITS DEPARTURE FROM THIS LAND OF SURVIVAL?

[HERE I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT - I ASSUME, A SOUL IS JUST ONE LIKE EVERY OTHER SOUL [IN TERMS OF PARAMATMA] AND LOSES ITS CAPACITY TO HAVE THE 6TH SENSE ONLY BECAUSE OF HAVING TAKEN SOME OTHER BODY SHAPE OTHER THAN HUMAN BEINGS. SO SHOULD ALL THE SOULS TO BE CONSIDERED AS ONE AND GIVEN DUE IMPORTANCE?]

4) DID ANY OF THE MEMBERS HAVE COME TO KNOW ABOUT ANY ONE PERFORMING ANY SORT OF RITUAL AT THE TIME OF CRIMINATION? DOES SUCH A RITUAL POSSIBLE? IF YES DOES PROHITHARS/VAATHIYARS ACCEPT THE OWNER'S REQUEST AND GUIDE THEM DOING THE KARYAMS?

5) WILL SUCH KARYAMS FOR THE DEPARTED SOUL OF ONE’S PETS WOULD CAUSE ANY SORT OF DOSHAM TO A PERSON PERFORMING IT?


Hope to receive vivid ideas from our esteemed members…….

Cheers.

RAVI

 

[gsarathy]

this all is prarabda karma.
you are ordained to do these things
you had both good and bad benefits.
once karma is over your pet will find its place elsewhere.
its also darma sastra
why worry.
GPS

 

[sridharvasudevan]

I kind of liked this unconventional topic and thought of sharing some of my thoughts here. I know my words here will/may not have an effect on the larger scale, but may linger in the minds of people who read this. Basically, make us think from the other perspective.

Let me start by confessing, I love dogs and love all living and non-living beings. My craze for dogs was at its peak when I was 10-15 years old. I never got to have one at home. In one incident, I picked up a bat which was being attacked by crows; fed and cared for it until it departed its body eventually. In one incident, I picked up a snake which was being attacked by humans and threw is far away so it may live.

Every living being has its right to be free and live its natural life as designed by nature. Even trees and plants do have that right. In one recent court ruling in India, one state government has been directed not to use any concrete around a certain distance from road side trees.

Though love for living beings is good, I would not encourage anyone who cages or ties or encloses a living being from living its life in freedom.

I write here only because most pets in this world are either caged, tied or enclosed by walls and denied their natural right to be free.

The only thing that can tie us to another living being can be love. Then we should be equally a pet to the dog or pig or rabbit or what ever.

Even the word "allowed" inflamed shri raghy into saying (our life is not controlled by anybody), because it questioned ones' freedom. Then how can one deny the freedom of another living being in the name of pet?

with love.

 

[sapthajihva]

I completely agree with shri sridharvasudevan...

I love all animals, in their naturalness... and in their freedom...

We never used to have pets in the strict belongingness the term denotes, but have fed dogs and cats.. I used to feed sugar, dosas etc to the ants in our garden... watching an ant colony is fascinating (to me, atleast). I have done a few childish crimes as well, but deeply regret them now.

On an other angle - jivathma is referred to mean only the human souls which have the discriminating ego... animals though are flesh and blood beings, are lower down the order and hence the rituals which are applicable to humans would not apply... I am not aware of any rituals for the bodies of pet animals... or for any animals, for that matter.

Brahmins, in those days, used to have cows in their houses for milk, butter etc., but do not seem to have done any rituals, when they died. They would have them taken away and disposed off, in an appropriate manner (so that they would not be scavenged, I suppose). They could also have been skinned for their apparent use in drums etc... and the remains disposed off...

All in all, one can have pets if they could afford the love and care it requres, but there are no prescribed rituals when they depart. I think it need not be done.

1) SHOULD WE TREAT THE IMPORTANCE OF SOUL WHICH HAD A LIFE OF A DOG/CAT IN PAR WITH HUMAN SOUL?

All souls are to be treated alike, but they manifest in this world in their gross form which takes on different attributes accorded to them. Do we then, treat frogs, cockroaches, mosquitoes, bedbugs and rodents the same way? I try to avoid killing cockroaches/mosquitoes to the maximum; it is better to ignore them, better would be to keep our places clean so that we could avoid them

[HERE I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT - I ASSUME, A SOUL IS JUST ONE LIKE EVERY OTHER SOUL [IN TERMS OF PARAMATMA] AND LOSES ITS CAPACITY TO HAVE THE 6TH SENSE ONLY BECAUSE OF HAVING TAKEN SOME OTHER BODY SHAPE OTHER THAN HUMAN BEINGS. SO SHOULD ALL THE SOULS TO BE CONSIDERED AS ONE AND GIVEN DUE IMPORTANCE?]

We are not body-less souls so that we see the other souls the same way. Of couse, when one is truly realized, they accord the same respect to all beings. I remember a story narrated to me (I do not remember the names) - A rishi/guru/acharya was taking bath in the river, when he saw a scorpion drowning. Out of natural pity, he took the scorpion in his hand to place it in the bank. Immediately, it stung him. As a result of the reflex action, it fell into the river. The rishi took it out again, it stung him again and fell into the river again. This sequence happened a few times. His disciples watching this spoke to him- "Even though you are trying to save the scorpion, it stings you every time. Why do you still persist it saving it?". The rishi replied "It is its svabhava that it stings, so why do you blame it? And it is my svabhava that I try to save it". The disciples were left speechless.

Regards,

 

[kunjuppu]

We are not body-less souls so that we see the other souls the same way. Of couse, when one is truly realized, they accord the same respect to all beings. I remember a story narrated to me (I do not remember the names) - A rishi/guru/acharya was taking bath in the river, when he saw a scorpion drowning. Out of natural pity, he took the scorpion in his hand to place it in the bank. Immediately, it stung him. As a result of the reflex action, it fell into the river. The rishi took it out again, it stung him again and fell into the river again. This sequence happened a few times. His disciples watching this spoke to him- "Even though you are trying to save the scorpion, it stings you every time. Why do you still persist it saving it?". The rishi replied "It is its svabhava that it stings, so why do you blame it? And it is my svabhava that I try to save it". The disciples were left speechless.

Regards,

sapthajhiva,

how did this story end?

i can only think of one ending ie the rishi dying of scorpion poison.

unless ofcourse, due to magical powers, he is not affected.

what is the moral for a mortal like me? personally, i am not too keen on being repeatedly stung by a poison.

i understand the subhavam of each animals to behave the way they do. that part i understand. what i don't understand is the rishi's behaviour.

unless there is a deeper meaning attached to the story ie that animals too can be wicked and bite the hand that feeds them.

personally, all animals are innocent, in that they live the life that is etched in their dna or fate. they do not cross the rules.

only humans do.

thank you.

 

[Brahmanyan]

Why not? It is up to the individual to decide, depending on the resources available to him.I do not understand, what "Sastras" have to do with this. Even otherwise we have left Sastras to the reference libraries long back.
Regards,
Brahmanyan.

 

[sapthajihva]

sapthajhiva,

how did this story end?

i can only think of one ending ie the rishi dying of scorpion poison.

unless ofcourse, due to magical powers, he is not affected.

what is the moral for a mortal like me? personally, i am not too keen on being repeatedly stung by a poison.

i understand the subhavam of each animals to behave the way they do. that part i understand. what i don't understand is the rishi's behaviour.

unless there is a deeper meaning attached to the story ie that animals too can be wicked and bite the hand that feeds them.

personally, all animals are innocent, in that they live the life that is etched in their dna or fate. they do not cross the rules.

only humans do.

thank you.

... Frankly I dont know the end of the story... but that is not important, we live and die, but our nature/pursuit in the intervening period is what counts...

I think the basic import is that animals are 99.99% controlled by their svabhava, but humans can 99.99% control their svabhava...

On an other note, I was just reflecting on the emphasis which different individuals place on a simple incident. Perhaps that was the reason, the more mystic imparts were given to students who had crossed over/understood the mundane...

Regards,

 

[kunjuppu]

... Frankly I dont know the end of the story... but that is not important, we live and die, but our nature/pursuit in the intervening period is what counts...

I think the basic import is that animals are 99.99% controlled by their svabhava, but humans can 99.99% control their svabhava...

On an other note, I was just reflecting on the emphasis which different individuals place on a simple incident. Perhaps that was the reason, the more mystic imparts were given to students who had crossed over/understood the mundane...

Regards,

saptha,

for some reason, your icons don't come out correctly; only as words.. perhaps it is only for me? can you see your posted icons ok?

now back to your reply. i am a மண்டு as far as anything that even strays into philosophy, religion etc.

i say it with a sense of fact and not with any particular other attributes like humility or arrogance or such like.

from this viewpoint, i simply do not understand your last para. can you explain further re 'different individuals (who are they?), simple incident (which one? ie scorpion stinging, rishi repeatedly picking it up? which ones), mystic imparts - what is this?

perhaps, what i am asking, is a commentary on that para.. if you don't mind.. just imagine, just answering it in a manner, that all my queries are covered, and no more can be elicited.

i agree it might mean a little work on your part

thanks.

 

[pannvalan]

The scorpion story involves a Buddhist monk, not any rishi or Hindu Acharya.

But, the monk didn't die at the end. The scorpion also could survive, because after a few times, it fell on the shores, not into the water.

 

[C RAVI]

Sri Sapthajihva ji,

Thank you very much for your elaborate explanations with some clarity....My thoughts as well are in line with yours.

But as far as my question and your reply as below extract is concerned...
----------------------

[HERE I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT - I ASSUME, A SOUL IS JUST ONE LIKE EVERY OTHER SOUL [IN TERMS OF PARAMATMA] AND LOSES ITS CAPACITY TO HAVE THE 6TH SENSE ONLY BECAUSE OF HAVING TAKEN SOME OTHER BODY SHAPE OTHER THAN HUMAN BEINGS. SO SHOULD ALL THE SOULS TO BE CONSIDERED AS ONE AND GIVEN DUE IMPORTANCE?]

YOUR REPLY - We are not body-less souls so that we see the other souls the same way. Of couse, when one is truly realized, they accord the same respect to all beings
---------------------
I would like to emphasis here in order to make it clear that my question of giving due importance to all the souls is in terms of DEPARTED SOULS of our PETS (as per the bottom line of this topic) and not just all souls in general. My first question that you have extracted and expressed your opinion as well is referred to the DEPARTED SOUL of our PET

Sir, can you please express your opinion on the above...As I am seeking opinions on CONSIDERING A SOUL'S IMPORTANCE FOR PERFORMING LAST RITES AND THE NECESSITY OF THE SAME YEARLY IN REPEATATION [AS FOR THE SOULS OF WE HUMAN BEINGS] FOR THE PET'S SOUL.

------------------

Sri Brahmanyan avargal,

I am concerned about SHASTRAS related to this topic for the reason - As we all know that the last crimination rites is a detailed and systematic process for departed Human souls with which we have karmic bondage, likewise should such a process be adopted for the soul of our departed pet?

I would like to have your comments...

-----------------------

Sri Sridharvasudevan ji,

My questions are purely related to Karmic duties that we human beings are bound to perform to the Departed Soul a human being with which we had a karmic bondage. A concrete judgment and clear conclusions about the necessity and implications of the same with respect to the departed soul of our pets would help some of we Brahmins who all are animal lovers to go for petting a Dog or Cat [Off course providing due love, care, comfort and importance as one of our family members]

Cheers...

RAVI

 

[pannvalan]

Generally, we are tempted to think that human beings are superior to other living beings like animals and birds and our soul is also naturally superior to their soul.

It boils down to the inference from this equation.

If Man+Soul = Any Animal+Soul
By cancelling soul on both sides, we get
Man = Animal.

Since it is not (supposed to be or cannot be) true, soul of a man is superior to that of an animal.

This general understanding is contrary to 'advaidic philosophy' which treats every one or everything as the same or equal. It does no differentiation between any.

But, performing funeral or last rites for a pet animal on its death appears to be far fetched.

(Sri Rama performed last rites for 'Jadaayu').

 

[C RAVI]

Sri Pannvalan ji,

I am happy to note yours as a paradigm to my own child hood story to some extent and as an answer to one of my many inter-related questions...

Rama performed last rites of Jadaayu himself. Lord Rama could perform on his own being a scholarly/supreme personality.

But we as a common man are depended on qualified vaadhiyas/purohithars for almost all of our cultural event. Obviously for karmic performances as well.

Could you ever come across a present life incident where a Brahmin family has performed such rites upon departure of their pet's soul?

I never heard about such a case. I am eager to know this.

My childhood story - During my childhood when I found a dead "KURUVI", I immediately dig the ground and buried its body. Being too young, I did this as the subject was within the capacity of my hearts feelings and beyond my mental understanding of the importance, meaningfulness and implications.

But as a grown up man I don't want to do anything without proper understanding and its importance.


Cheers...

RAVI

 

[SuryaKasyapa]

I have seen Sri Shankaracharya of Sringeri having a deer with the entourage .Acharya bestows his affection(can we call so I don,t know)-or blessings I may say -on the pet. Similarly in pictures and cinemas, rishis are shown to have their own pets ,including cows.Rishi putris are shown to be in company of such pets.

it means Satviks can have pets.So naturally brahmins also can have pets.

But in keeping pets, many times , the animals or birds are denied their natural food and habitat, which is a denial sin. moreover, if abandoned or separated from the owner, they will not be taken into the flock by their own breed.

This leads to cruelty.

I have read about elephants given post death obsequies by the owners or animal lovers.

Loving and treating all living things ( Sakala charaacharams) with self-like thinking is paying obeisance to the almighty.

 

[sridharvasudevan]

Sri Sridharvasudevan ji,

My questions are purely related to Karmic duties that we human beings are bound to perform to the Departed Soul a human being with which we had a karmic bondage. A concrete judgment and clear conclusions about the necessity and implications of the same with respect to the departed soul of our pets would help some of we Brahmins who all are animal lovers to go for petting a Dog or Cat [Off course providing due love, care, comfort and importance as one of our family members]

Cheers...

RAVI
[/FONT][/COLOR]

Dear Ravi,

Since you speak of Karma and would like to discuss from that perspective, let me talk about it in that direction.

Simple man takes thoughts and actions as Karma and the consequences as Karmic effects. So why do something that is bound to cause to trouble in future - not just to oneself, but also to another. I discourage having pets that need to be tied, caged or enslaved. I encourage the first example where you had just showered love on a street dog during your childhood without enslaving it as your own.

I have no comments or knowledge about karmic bondage and what to do after committing to one knowingly.

 

[kunjuppu]

i am definitely impressed with the deep discussion on the karmic effects of having a pet.

certainly, i did not think it was so complicated for a brahmin to own a pet.

i live in canada, where pets are treated better than humans, generally. because the pet is wanted and is an outlet for companionship or exercise or educational tool.

sadly, dogs cats live only a finite number of years. their passing away is like a loss of a family member.

i am coming to realize that being a brahmin, is one tough assignment.

i am also in alignment with krs' terminology about how much 'percentage' brahmins we are. by having a pet, are we -5% in our scores?

perhaps we can come up with a chart of what consists 100% brahmin ie all the ideals. then we can put up a score to the value of each brahmin entity.

for example: sandhyavandhanam 5%, avani avittam 5%, wearing poonal 10% etc etc. so that we ourselves can grade what type or how much of a brahmin we are.

based on this, sometimes, when we term someone as 'non brahminish' we have some moral or mathematical score to backup our argument

thank you.

 

[sapthajihva]

om namo narayanaya namaha

shri kunjuppu, fyi, there is no 10% brahmin, 33% brahmin or 71% brahmin... one is either a brahmin or not at all...

there is no grading system to evaluate the percentage of 'brahmin-ness', based on rituals, habits and behaviour... this is a mistaken notion.

i think you have misunderstood the whole concept - one should do all the prescribed, to be a brahmin. you might immediately quip - 'then are there any true brahmins?' the answer is 'yes, there are, but few in number'. and i would like to add that this does not, in any way, infer that we have to discard whatever little we are doing. we should continue to do our maximum hoping to emulate the life of a true brahmin, thereby doing our dharma.

regards,

 

[sapthajihva]

Generally, we are tempted to think that human beings are superior to other living beings like animals and birds and our soul is also naturally superior to their soul.

It boils down to the inference from this equation.

If Man+Soul = Any Animal+Soul
By cancelling soul on both sides, we get
Man = Animal.

Since it is not (supposed to be or cannot be) true, soul of a man is superior to that of an animal.

This general understanding is contrary to 'advaidic philosophy' which treats every one or everything as the same or equal. It does no differentiation between any.

I would like to amend the equation, as it does not fit the logic correctly. From the equation you have put forward, it appears that as if the body is the differentiating factor.

Man + soul is not equal to any animal + soul.

That the word soul is on both sides cannot be inferred to mean that they are separate and hence could be cancelled as in a mathematical equation. The nature of soul is the same, but each soul is different.

Humans, by virtue of their karmas might be born again as animals, but that does not necessarily mean that all animals were humans in their previous birth...!!!

Advaitha philosophy talks about the entire world as equivalent to a dream state of the brahman, and we are nothing but the same brahman, reduced to thinking that we are separate due to the veil of maya. Once that veil is removed, as a person waking suddenly from his sleep to realize that it was a dream, we too would realize our true self ie., brahman.

 

[kunjuppu]

thank you saptha.

i am not so sure that i misunderstood the whole concept of living as a brahmin. it is just that i am somewhat overwhelmed by the standards.

no wonder, maybe in ancient times, when we were even fewer in number, and there were even fewer outlets for livelihood, and absolutely little by way of distraction, these ideals were considered as a matter of taking for granted.

so, in that context, i did not misunderstand the requirements.

also, i did not intend any quip for now

might come later though

i also agree with you, re any way, infer that we have to discard whatever little we are doing. we should continue to do our maximum hoping to emulate the life of a true brahmin, thereby doing our dharma'

but even you have implied, that we are doing 'little', compared to the true brahmin. so we are trying to emulate, which is good, and i do have no arguement about that.

back to my query re quantification about % true brahmin scale.

in the context of your own words, we can probably list all the qualities of a true brahmin. against which, we can tick off how many we (don't) follow.. and based on that consider ourselves %age brahmins.

i think, this opens a new level of moral authority. for instance, as a 80% brahmin, you definitely will have a more respected role when voicing some opinion on a karmic query, compared to me with close to zero. no?



i am also very curious how the public views this grading system and how we can come up with one, which should be even more interesting.

 

[sapthajihva]

from this viewpoint, i simply do not understand your last para. can you explain further re 'different individuals (who are they?), simple incident (which one? ie scorpion stinging, rishi repeatedly picking it up? which ones), mystic imparts - what is this?

perhaps, what i am asking, is a commentary on that para.. if you don't mind.. just imagine, just answering it in a manner, that all my queries are covered, and no more can be elicited.

i agree it might mean a little work on your part

thanks.

i think i went a little overboard... i did not want to particularly elaborate on it, but then, here i am replying to your query...

the viewpoint which we put forth as a reaction sometimes indicate the state of our mind. for example, in the rishi incident, a reaction

- that the rishi is kindness and mercy incarnate would indicate that our mind is of the nishkamya karma type and crossed over our gunas

- that the rishi should have killed the scorpion is an indication that we are bound by our gunas

- that the rishi would die of scorpion bite indicates a mind which could be cynical or agnostical, but very practical to the mundane

there could be more... now, between these three a guru would ideally choose disciples from the first category... not that the others cannot fit it, but would depend on other criteria, as the case may be.

now, such a scenario where disciples have different perceptions, certainly not all the shasthras/upanishads would be taught coz they would understand it in a totally different way. the agnostic might start his own view on sutras; the guna-bound disciple might not understand it at all...

so they had to undergo a process (way of life) through which they gradually acquire the qualities required for the highest of enlightenment.

hope this clarifies.

 

[sapthajihva]

i think, this opens a new level of moral authority. for instance, as a 80% brahmin, you definitely will have a more respected role when voicing some opinion on a karmic query, compared to me with close to zero. no?

not for me... i do not believe that this should be a pick and choose matter to grade oneself...

it is a akin to the relationship of husband and wife - one is either a husband or not at all. there can be no 50% husband...

or take the example of a parent-child.. either one is a son (daughter) or not.... you cannot say that somebody is 25% son and the other is 50% son and so on...

it simply would not apply here... any such initiation is only for self-amusement, and not any other...

regards,

 

[kunjuppu]

hope this clarifies.

clarifies wonderfully

thank you