Home › forums › Buddhist Practice › Advanced Buddhist Practice

Helping Sentient Beings?

Mon, 2010-02-15 17:47 — aumbrock

A question arose in my mind after caring for several crickets my roommate is keeping in his room to (eventually) feed to his pet lizard. I had noticed they were not eating the specified "cricket food" my roommate put in their aquarium, and with no alternative sources for food or water, several had subsequently died. I brought the remaining little guys leaves and water soaked in a paper towel and all of them almost immediately began eating and drinking! I imagined they were pretty happy. So my question is this: Does taking a sentient being, insect or otherwise, away from otherwise hostile conditions (in nature, or in this case already in captivity) and giving them optimal conditions ultimately help them towards obtaining rebirth as a higher form? My guess is that in this case, it would- but if I were to take a sentient being from a harmful situation in nature away from that harm and give it optimal causes and conditions for happiness, is that really a good thing or should nature "run its course?" Can we, as conscious beings, really intervene and assist other less-conscious beings on their path? Or do beings need to suffer at the hand of nature to evolve in consciousness? Thanks for your input!

Pure Consciousness ›
Tue, 2010-02-16 07:31 — ABN

Case by case

Generally, it is to the advantage of the less wise to be in the company of the more wise. Generally, it is better to live under less hostile conditions. Generally, it is a good thing to improve the conditions within which another sentient being is living.

The problems, of course, arise when we consider particular cases, which always have many other factors.

A second important general aspect to this question is we have a much better understanding today than we used to of ecology, habitats, and the needs and abilities of non-human sentient beings. This means that many traditional Buddhist ideas no longer apply in the same way they may have seemed to in the past. A case in point is the Buddhist practice of freeing caged animals. Chinese Buddhists are especially fond of this practice, though they usually cause more harm than good by doing it. There is an article just today about Buddhists in Taiwan doing this practice without giving it proper thought (comes up every New Year).

That said, I do think there are times when "we, as conscious beings, really [can] intervene and assist other less-conscious beings on their path."

Caring for strays and unwanted pets is one example. Feeding birds or providing water in arid areas is another. Generally, as human take up more and more land, we can do a great kindness to other sentient beings by being more tolerant of them when they move (back) into our neighborhoods.

I do not think it is so that "beings need to suffer at the hand of nature to evolve in consciousness," though that will happen.

In our treatment of other beings, Buddhist practice always emphasizes wisdom and compassion, or wise compassion. So, for any particular case, it is always a good idea to reflect on the conditions the animal may be in and what our motivations and capacities for helping really are. Also, it is always good to consult with others and see what they have to say.

Mon, 2010-02-22 20:11 — aumbrock

RE: Case by Case

Thank you for the clear, insightful reply. I agree, there probably would be no finite rule- the most skillful course of action always seems to depend on the many conditions that apply... understanding our intentions while educating ourselves on the effects of our actions can help lead us to a more wise, compassionate decision... certainly there have been instances where our own ignorance or lack of knowledge can get in the way despite our best intentions. Luckily we have so much information readily available these days, and many people to get opinions from!

What I was meaning when I said "beings need to suffer at the hand of nature to evolve in consciousness," was referring to two things. Primarily, that in certain cases, say, a species may be facing extinction because those are the natural conditions at the present time. Maybe there is little we could do but care for those beings in a direct, humane way. Nature seems to have it's way of bringing species in and out of existence, more or less, that just happens. Striving to change all the conditions of nature to keep that species may be unwise and reckless... maybe not, depending on many things. (Again, case by case.) Secondly, from my own experience, how I relate to suffering that has arisen has been a major catalyst in spiritual practice... but I think that is specifically a human perspective and could not apply to beings who cannot understand the causes and conditions of their own suffering and liberate themselves. So... it seems compassion, equanimity, and mindful/wise action are fundamental in dealing with sentient beings in every case.

Sat, 2010-03-20 08:15 — rajajuju

action without skillful means is not skillful

There is a reason why it is proffered to continually work on the closest sentient being, which is yourself. If you could reach deeply enough within, you would not have to ask the question of someone else. It is ultimately the most important that you are able to realize the profound and unified wisdom that comes from within.. because without it, so-called compassionate action is based on falsehood and confusion.