Guest guest Posted July 13, 2003 Report Share Posted July 13, 2003 In Traditional Chinese Veterinary Medicine (TCVM) there seem to be no description of channels or meridians - only acupuncture points. Some speculate that this is because animal medicine was less developed due to the low status of animals in China historically. Another idea is that it is because animals do not have a soul. A colleague wrote: As I understand it 'souls' referring to possession of shen,hun,po,yi and zhi collectively making up the Shen which makes us uniquely human. When speaking of a human being in the context of the union of the parents each providing their 'essences' which creates a new being and this is what draws the spirits, shen. The two essences combine, the physical form and the spirits are completed thus uniting the Qi of heaven and earth and giving mankind. (Su wen 15). I cannot give you a quote on where it says animals do not have these same souls or spirits but I understood that the implication is that it is their possession and their flow in the meridians that defines us as humans. Can anyone on this list shed more light on these issues? Thanks Jimmy --------- Jimmy Symmonds BSc, BVSc, MRCVS Holistic Animal Care Centre 125 Magdalen Road Oxford OX4 1RQ UK Tel: +44 (0)1865 453570 Fax: +44 (0)1865 423183 Email: jimmy Web: www.HolisticAnimalCare.co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2003 Report Share Posted July 14, 2003 >>>Which brings us to the question - does an animal have Buddha nature?<<< My cat Ninja certainly seems to. Seriously, though, I wouldn't go so far as to say that animals have the consciousness to attain enlightenment, though that doesn't make us humans essentially better than them. But I believe that anything that has life "has a soul." I put that in quotes because the idea is inverted. None of us has a soul. We are souls. We have bodies, hearts and minds. We are spirits in the material world, as the song says. Because the Chinese, and the rest of the world, for that matter, tend to treat animals as commodities, does not mean animals are not worthy of respect as divine beings in their own right. Look in an animal's eyes and then tell me it doesn't have consciousness. Only souls have consciousness, in my book. Do not dogs dream? Does that not mean they have a hun? Ain't nothing but a hun dog, right? Joseph Garner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2003 Report Share Posted July 14, 2003 On Sunday, July 13, 2003, at 12:50 AM, Jimmy Symmonds wrote: > In Traditional Chinese Veterinary Medicine (TCVM) there seem to be no > description of channels or meridians - only acupuncture points. Some > speculate that this is because animal medicine was less developed due > to the > low status of animals in China historically. Of course, the social standing of an organism doesn't change its physiology. : ) I'm sure that there are meridians connecting the acupoints on animals just like with the two-legged mammals called people. The lack of meridians is more likely because farmers were interested in which points did what and less interested in theory. > Another idea is that it is > because animals do not have a soul. I guess that you'd have to define " soul " to qualify this statement. I am of the belief that everything has a soul and that the only thing unique about the human's soul is its insistence that it is somehow more advanced than the others. I don't buy into that myself, but really this is all going to be dramatically colored by one's religious / philosophical culture and how it defines the " soul " . From what I saw at the " pet market " in China, animals are more inanimate objects, a commodity that can be carried home by the ear as long as it doesn't become detached while riding one's bike home. There are certain parallel themes in Western (Judeo/Islamic/Christian) thought as well. Something about God giving us dominion over nature or something like that. So it is likely that if you look hard enough, you'll find some classical text that supports the idea that animals have no soul. I just don't personally agree. > As I understand it 'souls' referring to possession of > shen,hun,po,yi and zhi collectively making up the Shen which makes us > uniquely human. Sure, but that's because we have human shen, hun, po, yi, and zhi. A dog will have its own shen, hun, po, yi, and zhi with its own nature that is unique to the species as well as the individual pooch. -- Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional. -Adlai Stevenson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2003 Report Share Posted July 14, 2003 Which brings us to the question - does an animal have Buddha nature? Robert Chu, L.Ac., QME chusauli See my webpages at: http://www.chusaulei.com >al stone <alstone > > >Re: Do animals have souls? >Mon, 14 Jul 2003 13:25:46 -0700 > _______________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail On Sunday, July 13, 2003, at 12:50 AM, Jimmy Symmonds wrote: > In Traditional Chinese Veterinary Medicine (TCVM) there seem to be no > description of channels or meridians - only acupuncture points. Some > speculate that this is because animal medicine was less developed due > to the > low status of animals in China historically. Of course, the social standing of an organism doesn't change its physiology. : ) I'm sure that there are meridians connecting the acupoints on animals just like with the two-legged mammals called people. The lack of meridians is more likely because farmers were interested in which points did what and less interested in theory. > Another idea is that it is > because animals do not have a soul. I guess that you'd have to define " soul " to qualify this statement. I am of the belief that everything has a soul and that the only thing unique about the human's soul is its insistence that it is somehow more advanced than the others. I don't buy into that myself, but really this is all going to be dramatically colored by one's religious / philosophical culture and how it defines the " soul " . From what I saw at the " pet market " in China, animals are more inanimate objects, a commodity that can be carried home by the ear as long as it doesn't become detached while riding one's bike home. There are certain parallel themes in Western (Judeo/Islamic/Christian) thought as well. Something about God giving us dominion over nature or something like that. So it is likely that if you look hard enough, you'll find some classical text that supports the idea that animals have no soul. I just don't personally agree. > As I understand it 'souls' referring to possession of > shen,hun,po,yi and zhi collectively making up the Shen which makes us > uniquely human. Sure, but that's because we have human shen, hun, po, yi, and zhi. A dog will have its own shen, hun, po, yi, and zhi with its own nature that is unique to the species as well as the individual pooch. -- Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional. -Adlai Stevenson Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2003 Report Share Posted July 14, 2003 Al, Chinese medicine is based largely on Confucianist thought, which has a hierarchical approach to creation, rather than a pantheistic, 'everything and everybody is the same' approach. The body is hierarchical, with sovereigns (heart), and generals (liver), prescriptions are hierarchical with sovereigns, deputies, assistants and envoys. As far as Western religions go, I can only speak for Jewish thought on the subject, but in the Torah and Kabbalistic literature, all sentient beings have a soul, and cruelty to animals is strictly prohibited. This is one important reason for the kosher laws of animal slaughter. Yet, the nature of different souls is described, and an animal soul is essentially different from a human one. Animals, for one, do not have free will, clearly a human trait (if we choose to use it). An ant may have a type of soul, but clearly it is not 'the same' as a human soul. I am not familiar with animal medicine in China or the West, so I cannot say if there are discussions on the souls of animals in the Chinese medical literature. Ken Rose can probably help us out on this. I do know that in Chinese thought the physical manifestation of a sentient being says something about its nature, which tells us something about its soul. Just because you observed someone in China mistreating animals doesn't mean that Chinese culture condones cruelty to animals. This would seem to be more a trait of world-wide secular consumerism, that reduces everything, including human beings, to commodities. A rather soulless approach to life, I would think. Dominion over nature, mentioned in the Jewish scriptures (and Christian and Islamic as well) is clearly a human trait. Our free will and ability to create technology allows us to reshape and govern the world for better or for worse. It doesn't mean we should destroy nature or that we shouldn't live in harmony with it. It does mean that people have dogs as pets, not the other way around (although sometimes it does seem to be the other way around . Planet of the apes, anyone? On Monday, July 14, 2003, at 01:25 PM, al stone wrote: > I guess that you'd have to define " soul " to qualify this statement. I > am of the belief that everything has a soul and that the only thing > unique about the human's soul is its insistence that it is somehow more > advanced than the others. I don't buy into that myself, but really > this is all going to be dramatically colored by one's religious / > philosophical culture and how it defines the " soul " . > > From what I saw at the " pet market " in China, animals are more > inanimate objects, a commodity that can be carried home by the ear as > long as it doesn't become detached while riding one's bike home. There > are certain parallel themes in Western (Judeo/Islamic/Christian) > thought as well. Something about God giving us dominion over nature or > something like that. > > So it is likely that if you look hard enough, you'll find some > classical text that supports the idea that animals have no soul. I > just don't personally agree. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 14, 2003 Report Share Posted July 14, 2003 Z'ev, > > I am not familiar with animal medicine in China or the West, so I > cannot say if there are discussions on the souls of animals in the > Chinese medical literature. Ken Rose can probably help us out on this. > I do know that in Chinese thought the physical manifestation of a > sentient being says something about its nature, which tells us > something about its soul. Ken Rose cannot help us out on this. He knows little about Chinese medical literature, less about animals and even less about souls. Take it from me. Ken Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 i have always found discussions of animal's souls intriguing. i will start by defining 'soul' as i grew with it. i grew up in a christian tradition that defined 'soul' as a unification of earth, i.e. clay, and divine Breath. most christian groups to the theory that body and soul are separate and the soul survives independently of the body at *death*. Emmanual, your teacher's definition of the soul fits perfectly with that definition from my childhood. thanks for giving that quote here. " Soul is the intersection of earthly heredity with divine heredity. It is where the two meet. " in genesis 2:7 (nrsv, oxford new annotated bible, 3rd edition 2001) " then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being. " oxford's note: " human nature is not a duality of body and soul; rather God's *breath* animates the *dust* and it becomes a single *living being*. " as i learned growing up, at *death* the breath returns to God the way that electricity returns to the larger grid when you unplug a christmas tree's lights. future life will occur when the breath is restored to newly formed bodies lacking imperfections. " Soul is the intersection of earthly heredity (dirt) with divine heredity (Breath). " as i studied chinese medicine and learned about the hun (ethereal soul) and po (corporeal soul), and the hun's exit to the heavens and the po's return to the earth with body (dirt), i was amazed to find a depiction of the soul so like the picture with which i grew up. next, i grew up with the notion that animals do not have souls, and so no animals from our earthly lives would be present in the life to come. truthfully, i always thought this a cruel trick of god's to give us these companions who love without the conditions that humans almost always attach to intimacy, and to promise that after this life, we will never see them again. " i don't want to start any blasphemous rumors, but i think that god has a sick sense of humor " comes to mind. last year, i heard a lecture on the subject of Breath, and the Breath of humans and of other animals were discussed. the greek words referencing the divine breath in humans and the breath in animals clearly intersect, so that in some passages, the words for both are the same. i am still thrilled by this information as i turn from my desk and see my maureen sleeping peacefully. she is my 18 year old cat with chronic renal failure. she has been on daily fluids for seven months now, and i know that at some point her heart will no longer tolerate this influx of fluids. i do not believe that animals may achieve the enlightenment gifted to those of us humans who are willing recipients. but, how dare someone say that her *animus* is inferior to mine, that she is less worthy of any future life than am i. " To locate yourself in that intersection consciously is to find your place in the world wherein you can accomplish your full potential. " i am accustomed to thinking of myself as a soul, but in a detached, intellectual sort of way. Emmanual's teacher brings home a more graphic effect. i am going to remind myself that soul is not a detached concept, but i am soul and that to know and fulfill my destiny, i must be aware that i am not simply in that intersection, i am that intersection. i am, and every person i know, each patient i treat, is part of that intersection of earth and heaven. wow. i already feel that in my dantien. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 thanks, jimmy symmonds for positing this question. i took this Q to another online forum, and it has provoked some very interesting discussion. in my reply on this list i made reference to emmanual segmen's quote from his sufi teacher. emmanual, is this a statement that i may repeat specifically? if so, how would you like it credited? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 Hi Lynne, I enjoyed your elaboration on my post. Lots of interesting insights. I trust you will make references with integrity. I probably overstepped some boundaries of propriety by quoting my teacher while she was privately guiding my spiritual exercises. Thus, if I can be insensitive enough to quote her on this forum, I'll certainly trust your use of that quote on your other forums. I see this forum as a professional newspaper. I was inspired in the moment to make the case for the integration of axes of experience (professional and spiritual) as a form of guidance for career and life development. All the Best, Emmanuel Segmen Lynne Detamore wrote: thanks, jimmy symmonds for positing this question. i took this Q to another online forum, and it has provoked some very interesting discussion. in my reply on this list i made reference to emmanual segmen's quote from his sufi teacher. emmanual, is this a statement that i may repeat specifically? if so, how would you like it credited? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.