There're a group of farmers who were on their way to the slaughterhouse. Accompanying them were their old cows and buffaloes. On the way they met a hippy who dressed like a heavy metal fan. For astonishing to see such a big group of farmers he asked them what's the purpose of their journey. One of the farmers said "We are going to sell these animals to the slaughterhouse for some money, they are too old to work for us so they are now useless for us to keep them in the farm.

Then the hippy said "These animals had worked for you for nearly 20 years without asking any return. Without you they can live happily in the forest. But without them you won't be able to complete all the hard works in the farm. If you sell them to the slaughterhouse it means that you deliberately kill them. That's a great sin to kill someone who had helped you for all of their lives."

After getting this advice from the hippy, some of the farmers felt guilty, and quickly turned back to the way home. But there're still some greedy farmers who wanted to kill their grateful animals for money. So they continued the trip to the slaughterhouse.

After a while they met a bald man, looked like a celeb who always has his own style of living and dressing. As the hippy, the bald man asked the farmers about their journey.

One of the ungrateful farmers told the bald man exactly the same as told to the hippy. Then the bald man said "Luckily we meet each other today. In my life I am not good at anything but raising a fund. Your situation make me create a new idea. I will start a new donation project which will lure some animal-lovers to donate money for saving the life of these old animals. After 20% deduction, the money will be yours as you will let these old animals die in your farm land."

Those ungrateful farmers were so happy about this project because they didn't have to kill those animals for the money. After exchanging the MP numbers, they happily turned back to their farms.

Well, it's quite legal for the farmers to sell their unwanted buffaloes for slaughter, so comparing them to murderers or thieves is not valid.

The hippy makes an argument that Buddhists must be attracted to, even if they don't follow through in practice. Mind you, the hippy has no stake in the scenario or its outcome other than a sense of moral superiority.

The ungrateful farmers don't have to follow the hippy's exhortations. They can make up their own minds according to what they believe is acceptable morally and legally. As I said, there's nothing illegal in selling their buffaloes to the abbatoir, regardless of what good service the animals have provided. In Thailand, where even monks eat meat, there's not much of a moral example for vegetarianism and a peaceful retirement for working animals.

The bald celeb, through his fundraising skills, is enabling a win-win outcome for the animals, the cash-strapped farmers and the sensitive animal-lovers who wish to donate (and perhaps make merit as a result).

Isn't entrepreneurialism terrific?

Thanks for posting this, greatflood.

The concepts of "sinner" and "saint" don't really belong in Buddhism. In the context of the teaching of not-self I don't think we should be in the business of placing value judgements on individuals. We should however consider the value of actions, and then the term would be skilful or unskilful, quite a different perspective from the sinner or saint view of things.

This is somewhat but it does have relevance so I'll risk it.

There is a group that is known as the Hieffer Project. Here in Thailand one of their activities is to provide breeding animals to poor Thai farmers (mostly in hilltribe areas of Northern Thailand) that they are active in. I believe, but can not be certain right now, that they are based in Chiang Mai.

What they do is buy cattle, water buffalo, and other farm animals (chickens, ducks, milk cows.etc.) both locally here in Thailand and in Laos or Cambodia. These are then LOANED to village and farmer's organizations. That organization will then breed the animal with a local animal. When the offspring is born, the local organization gets to keep the offspring...but they must return either the original animal or sometimes one or more of the new offspring back to the Heiffer Project...which will then be loaned to another farmer's group for eventual breeding. In this way, the project sustains it's supply of breeding stock...and also helps poor farmers acquire and afford the stock they need for their farms and their livelyhood.

I first heard about this organization when my Thai wife donated a small amount of money to buy water buffalo that were about to be slaughtered. She made this donation through a Wat here in Bangkok. I have never bing able to find out however, if the Heiffer Project was part of that our not, but while searching on tne internet I found a little information on the Heiffer Project there.

I'm sure they would like a small donation if you are so inclined...to help them purchase those breeding animals they loan out.

Look them up on the net if you're interested.

As I said they have an office here in Thailand...either in Chang Mai or Chang Rai...I can't remeber right now.

They have various projects all over the world...and their international headquarters is in the U.S. However, for my taste at least, I find there international headquarters far to "corporate"...offering hefty tax breaks for large congributers and having a definate "Christian" bias I do not care for.

But here in Thailand they seem to work directly with the poor farmers and hill tribe associations...which is much more interesting to me personally.

Anyhow, if interested, search for them on the internet.

Morality is what seperates the humans from the animals species. The appreciation and gratitude of assistance one receives in their time of need and paying back by ensuring they live out their old age in comfort would not be considered a debt but an appreciation. Just because the reference is to an animal, does it mean that a person can treat it lesser? In the cycle of reincarnation, some people do come back as animals. For buddhists to claim that when an animal has done it's worth, they are deemed expendable is beyond comprehension. How we treat animals, that same attitude will eventually lead to how we treat our fellow humans. I admit that am hypocritical saying this when am not a vegetarian but that's my opinion cos i strongly believe that if an animal will toil for me so that me or my family can put food on the table, it is only right that when it's old or sick, i should render whatever help i can to it. Sometimes, humans are just plain selfish, seeing themselves as the center of everything and not realising that everything is related.

Raising money and giving money to save the animals can't be compared to giving money to thieves and murderers. The animals cannot save themselves yet it is completely within the power of thieves and murderers to change their actions.

But, I never give money to those people selling birds and fish at wats because that is a completely selfish, cruel, hypocritical enterprise. If it were not for the sellers and vendors capturing the fish and birds, the animals would be free and not in need of freedom.

all famers all over the world are rich in there own country.i will never give them money

all famers all over the world are rich in there own country.i will never give them money

UR Genius !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First of all a big thank for all comments;

Well, it's quite legal for the farmers to sell their unwanted buffaloes for slaughter, so comparing them to murderers or thieves is not valid.

#### Yes it's legal to sell or to kill those animals, because the law is establised by human not by animal. But morally it's absolutely wrong. Can you find any animal who pleased to be killed by human or vice versa?

So you can see only some differences between those people. But do the farmers have to kill animal to survive? They have a lot of money and live happily than any worker or beggar.

But a lot of thieves illegally do something because they have nothing or not enough to eat. If the monks have nothing to eat they will also become a thieve, believe or not.

The hippy makes an argument that Buddhists must be attracted to, even if they don't follow through in practice. Mind you, the hippy has no stake in the scenario or its outcome other than a sense of moral superiority.

#### If it's wrong that the hippy make any argument that Buddhists must be attracted to, so why can monk do that?

Mind you, the monk also has no stake in the scenario or its outcome other than a sense of moral superiority. Or it's because they want some commission. I heard that some wat charges up to 30% commission.

The ungrateful farmers don't have to follow the hippy's exhortations. They can make up their own minds according to what they believe is acceptable morally and legally. As I said, there's nothing illegal in selling their buffaloes to the abbatoir, regardless of what good service the animals have provided.

#### As the animals will never establish any law or morality. Those farmers are always right. I don't imply that the farmers must follow the hippy. But apparently the greedy farmers showed their real instinct.

Are those farmers buddist who believes that killing animal is sin? If they are, and they still want to kill those animals for the sake of increasing more number in their bank account, not for their survival. Should they be considered as a sinner?

If they are sinner, raising fund for them should be disgusting or not?

If raising fund for them is not disgusting why not there's any fund raising for the thieve who has to steal something for their survival?

In Thailand, where even monks eat meat, there's not much of a moral example for vegetarianism and a peaceful retirement for working animals.

#### It's a disgusting behavior that someone teaches others not to do something, but they deliberately do it!

They don't directly kill animal but they and doner give money to someone who kill animal for becoming their food. Should they also be considered as an indirect murder?

The bald celeb, through his fundraising skills, is enabling a win-win outcome for the animals, the cash-strapped farmers and the sensitive animal-lovers who wish to donate (and perhaps make merit as a result).

#### The bald celeb did it not for any kind of morality, but for some commission. And I don't consider this is a merit.

If all of the farmers follow the hippy's advice, the fund raising for those animals will be unneccessarily. But as you see this fund raising is now becoming fashion of earning money of some people in the wat. It does imply that;

1. Monk does not spread dhamma as they claimed.

2. Monk can not distinguish the greedy people from suffering people.

3. Buddha's teaching and method is not effective enough to eliminate passion from greedy people.

Isn't entrepreneurialism terrific?

#### If they create fair job and future for workers that must be fine. But can you find that kind of entrepreneur?

　

Raising money and giving money to save the animals can't be compared to giving money to thieves and murderers. The animals cannot save themselves yet it is completely within the power of thieves and murderers to change their actions.

#### I want to compare the farmers who don't need more money to the people who struggle to survive. Hope you can see this point. );

And it also be completely within the power of greedy farmers to change their actions.

Raising money and giving money to save the animals can't be compared to giving money to thieves and murderers. The animals cannot save themselves yet it is completely within the power of thieves and murderers to change their actions.

But, I never give money to those people selling birds and fish at wats because that is a completely selfish, cruel, hypocritical enterprise. If it were not for the sellers and vendors capturing the fish and birds, the animals would be free and not in need of freedom.

If those people will send the fish and birds to the slaughter house, will it not be a completely selfish, cruel, hypocritical enterprise? And then you will raise a fund for them.