Monks Taking Care Of Discarded Pets

[girlx]

this might seem like a silly post, but i love animals and i try to help them out when i see they are in need. i know in thai society it is quite common to abandon unwanted pets at a temple, and it is assumed that the monks take care of them. i am here to say that this is not true in the least (at least not where i am). for example, i pass a wat on the way to town about every other day. recently i noticed a batch of seven tiny little pups was dumped at the wat, with no mother. i noticed an old monk who was there most of the time and figured he had it covered. but went by a few more times and noticed the pups were starving, had distended bellies with ribs sticking out... so i went and bought boxes of milk and puppy food for them, and a can of flea powder. took it to the temple, fed the pups who were almost killing each other in their mad scrape to get to the food. one of them was scrawny and sick, another had such a swollen belly that he looked like he was about to pop. i left the bag of dog food and the boxes of milk with the monk and asked him if he could just pour it into their bowl at least once a day. went off... today (3 days later) i drove by again to check on them, and saw that the monk had not even bothered to feed them from the bag i gave him, and two of the puppies (the ones i mentioned) had died. i fed them again and gave him more food to give to them, and some rice and soymilk packages for himself, but i can tell he won't do a thing.

so my question is, how can a monk let small animals starve to death in front of him when he has a big bag of (free) food handed to him to help them with? what kind of monk is this?

if someone has any explanation to help me feel less angry that would be nice. i know in the scheme of things it's not a really important issue, but to someone who tends to like dogs better than most people it hits hard.

[h90]

if you find an answer, please also tell me, I already gave up to ask questions like that....

this might seem like a silly post, but i love animals and i try to help them out when i see they are in need. i know in thai society it is quite common to abandon unwanted pets at a temple, and it is assumed that the monks take care of them. i am here to say that this is not true in the least (at least not where i am). for example, i pass a wat on the way to town about every other day. recently i noticed a batch of seven tiny little pups was dumped at the wat, with no mother. i noticed an old monk who was there most of the time and figured he had it covered. but went by a few more times and noticed the pups were starving, had distended bellies with ribs sticking out... so i went and bought boxes of milk and puppy food for them, and a can of flea powder. took it to the temple, fed the pups who were almost killing each other in their mad scrape to get to the food. one of them was scrawny and sick, another had such a swollen belly that he looked like he was about to pop. i left the bag of dog food and the boxes of milk with the monk and asked him if he could just pour it into their bowl at least once a day. went off... today (3 days later) i drove by again to check on them, and saw that the monk had not even bothered to feed them from the bag i gave him, and two of the puppies (the ones i mentioned) had died.  i fed them again and gave him more food to give to them, and some rice and soymilk packages for himself, but i can tell he won't do a thing.

so my question is, how can a monk let small animals starve to death in front of him when he has a big bag of (free) food handed to him to help them with? what kind of monk is this?

if someone has any explanation to help me feel less angry that would be nice. i know in the scheme of things it's not a really important issue, but to someone who tends to like dogs better than most people it hits hard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Beachcomber]

I don’t have any answers; can only add to the questions.

Some time ago while living in a shack on the beach a beach dog had a litter of puppies right under my shack.

What to do? Asking the locals they said leave them alone, not your problem. How could I?

Anyway to cut a long story short I took care of the pups and the mother, taking them several times to a mainland vet for all the jabs and getting mommy sterilized.

A big chunk out of my meager budget – hope to get my reward in the next life.

Beachcomber

[chownah]

Wats are not animal care facilities. Monks are not in the business of taking care of stray dogs necessarily. In Thailand there are more abandoned animals than there are people to take care of them....monks included. If monks accepted the duty of caring for abandoned dogs as a regular service then they would soon have no time or resources for anything else.

I believe that there are also Buddhist reasons why monks do not care for abandoned dogs but I am not familiar enough with the Buddhist Suttas to know about this and I hope someone who is more familiar with these will answer.

[sbk]

The monks at our local wat were overrun by dogs and puppies until Phangan Animal Care came in and sterilized all the animals. The monks do give them their leftovers but you must remember that they only eat twice a day and only eat the food given to them. If there isn't enough food for the dogs what are the monks supposed to do?

Rather than leave them for an elderly monk to take care of why don't you do the right thing and take them yourself?

[h90]

Wats are not animal care facilities.  Monks are not in the business of taking care of stray dogs necessarily.  In Thailand there are more abandoned animals than there are people to take care of them....monks included.  If monks accepted the duty of caring for abandoned dogs as a regular service then they would soon have no time or resources for anything else.

I believe that there are also Buddhist reasons why monks do not care for abandoned dogs but I am not familiar enough with the Buddhist Suttas to know about this and I hope someone who is more familiar with these will answer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"have no time or resources for anything else." What else exactly? As long as I know they are not doing anything....

Here they at least passive killing baby dogs. If the case is as describt, with girlx already bought the food, it is in european culture exactly the same as dirctly killing them, even worse as it is a slow dead.....

But I am not in positon to judge here, just I don't understand it.......

[Abandon]

But in Thailand cats and dogs are not viewed as cute doggie woggies and puddy tats like they are by you lot.

If I was in England and some Brazillian asked me to feed the rabbits in the field I would laugh at him/her. If a Thai asked me to feed the possums in New Zealand it would be equally laughable.

You are forcing your own culturally determined perceptions onto others (monks) and then blaming them for not measuring up. Disgraceful.

[Guest endure]

Wats are not animal care facilities.  Monks are not in the business of taking care of stray dogs necessarily.  In Thailand there are more abandoned animals than there are people to take care of them....monks included.  If monks accepted the duty of caring for abandoned dogs as a regular service then they would soon have no time or resources for anything else.

I believe that there are also Buddhist reasons why monks do not care for abandoned dogs but I am not familiar enough with the Buddhist Suttas to know about this and I hope someone who is more familiar with these will answer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"have no time or resources for anything else." What else exactly? As long as I know they are not doing anything....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They are striving towards their salvation. Why else would they become monks? The Vatican isn't one big dog's home. Why should Thai monasteries be?

[sabaijai]

if someone has any explanation to help me feel less angry that would be nice. i know in the scheme of things it's not a really important issue, but to someone who tends to like dogs better than most people it hits hard.

One explanation to help you feel less angry: Study your anger, find out what the real source is. Aversion, guilt, righteous indignation, buried memory, conditioning, there are myriad possible causes but if sati/awareness arises you may find it's basically a physical condition.

I don't agree that it's not an important issue. Anger is dukkha, the dog's suffering is dukkha, the monk's apparent indifference is dukkha, and any noting of dukkha is an opportunity to move towards skilful action.

[girlx]

Study your anger, find out what the real source is. Aversion, guilt, righteous indignation, buried memory, conditioning, there are myriad possible causes but if sati/awareness arises you may find it's basically a physical condition.

yeah, i know it is my problem, but my anger comes from seeing that someone in a position to help small suffering, living things, allows them to die. is that justifiable in buddhist philosophy?

true, dogs are not important in thai society (at least discarded dogs- several thais i know have treasured pet dogs), but is helping something or someone who is suffering important? as far as i can tell, no animal is very important in thailand beyond meat or labor. however isn't one of the buddhist precepts not to kill living things? is there any reason to sit and watch something die when it takes only 2 minutes to drop some food into a bowl and prevent it?

Rather than leave them for an elderly monk to take care of why don't you do the right thing and take them yourself?

i already have two dogs that i am taking care of because of this exact reason. not to mention the rest of the neighborhood dogs who drop by daily. and i have stopped by three times this week to feed these puppies now. i also donate regularly to phangan animal care and have asked them to make a special trip to thong nai pan in january to take care of the dogs here that need spaying etc. i will pay for it if i have to.

If monks accepted the duty of caring for abandoned dogs as a regular service then they would soon have no time or resources for anything else.

this particular monk does nothing all day but sleep and watch the puppies die, apparently.

you must remember that they (monks) only eat twice a day and only eat the food given to them

yes and i also bring the monk food for himself, as well as food for the pups. though i will think twice about that in future.

do thai people have the impression that their abandoned pets are taken care of at a wat? i think they do. it is seen as the responsibility of the monks to care for living things. from what i have seen, not only at this wat but at a few i have been to, they simply do not care.

Edited December 19, 2005 by girlx

[girlx]

I believe that there are also Buddhist reasons why monks do not care for abandoned dogs but I am not familiar enough with the Buddhist Suttas to know about this and I hope someone who is more familiar with these will answer.

hmmm i guess this is what i am getting at- i would like to understand from their point of view.

Anger is dukkha, the dog's suffering is dukkha, the monk's apparent indifference is dukkha, and any noting of dukkha is an opportunity to move towards skilful action.

is this the answer? pardon my ignorance, but can you define dukka?

[Abandon]

the dogs are vermin. You feed them you breed them. They crap everywhere - does the monk want to go cleaning that up too? Maybe there is a little shrine near you in disrepair - maybe the monk passes by and gives you a brush and a can of paint and tells you to look after it. Huh? Oh oh, and a little shrine would not multiply and crap everywhere. Nor would it have diseases and lice. It is a wonder he does not dunk them in a bucket of water as any English farmer would do with stray pups and kittens.

[Galong]

the dogs are vermin. You feed them you breed them. They crap everywhere - does the monk want to go cleaning that up too? Maybe there is a little shrine near you in disrepair - maybe the monk passes by and gives you a brush and a can of paint and tells you to look after it. Huh? Oh oh, and a little shrine would not multiply and crap everywhere. Nor would it have diseases and lice. It is a wonder he does not dunk them in a bucket of water as any English farmer would do with stray pups and kittens.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, it's nice to know that you don't have to be a monk to be an ######.

[girlx]

You know i agree that they are like vermin, but if Thailand made any real effort at controlling the population they would not have these problems. It is beside the point though... if a living thing is suffering and a monk is in a position to help, how can it be justified that he does not?

[chownah]

Dukkha is difficult to translate but it means something like suffering, unease, unsatisfactoriness, pain, discomfort, stress, etc.

A different way to look at the dog population:

In an environment if a species has enough food and space and all the other things it needs to reproduce and it has nothing checking its population growth then the population will grow until some limiting factor prevents further growth. For instance, in my garden there are lots of aphids at some times of the year because I have lush growth there and there are no predators. If nothing comes and kills them then they will reproduce without checks and they will kill my vegetation. When the vegetation is gone then 95% of them will die for lack of food. Another possible scenerio is that another species of insect, the lady bug, can arrive and start eating them (the aphids) before their population gets so big as to kill the plants. The lady bugs will then multiply with no check because they have a good food source and few predators so eventually there will be so many lady bugs that the aphids will all be gone and 95% of the lady bugs will die for lack of food. This is a natural thing.

The dogs in Thailand are allowed to reproduce without checks partly because people feed them. Since their reproduction is not limited there are too many for the resources available for them so many of them die...it is natural for this to happen as long as dogs can reproduce without limit but the food supply is limited.

Now a little puppy and even a grown dog is more human like than an aphid or a lady bug. You want to save all the puppies and dogs...do you want to save all the aphids and lady bugs too? Certainly you do not...and it may be because they are not cute or very human like. The things you want to save might be typified by saying that when you see them it creates a desire within you. The things don't want to save may be typified by saying that when you see them it creates aversion within you or at least no feeling of desire. A major parat of a Buddhist monks training is to understand what gives rise to feelings of desire and aversion and to learn how to keep these things from ruling their selves.

Watching an animal die is not a fun experience for most people, but trying to eliminate the deaths of animals out of ones own attachment and desire is not considered conducive to mindful living in Buddhist thought.....Buddhist thought is that it is important to understand how desires and aversions arise and how to keep them from ruling our lives.

[zzap]

Monks are obviously not all the same, some do care for animals, others don't. Some have a tight daily schedule, others seem to be idling.

It is not part of a monk's job-description to feed dogs. You are the one who noticed and cares. It is you who is trying to lay this on the monk.

The event, your non-understanding and your anger could be taken by you to gain further insight.

See Sabaijai's post.

[Abandon]

if Thailand made any real effort at controlling the population they would not have these problems.

Very Sensible.

What could 'Thailand' do? Stop, or encourage to stop, all the people from feeding these stray animals. Or shoot them. Very sensible.

[girlx]

it's not so difficult to spay and neuter the dogs, just like we do in the west. i think any other sort of pestilence in thailand would be addressed- i am surprised that the dog problem in thailand has been ignored to the extent it has been.

Buddhist thought is that it is important to understand how desires and aversions arise and how to keep them from ruling our lives.

hrmph. speaking out of a general ignorance of buddhist philosophy, i can say my initial thought is a life of such detachment is certainly an empty one. but thanks for explaining chownah so at least i can understand how they think, even if i disagree with it.

Watching an animal die is not a fun experience for most people, but trying to eliminate the deaths of animals out of ones own attachment and desire is not considered conducive to mindful living in Buddhist thought...

okay if nothing can be done i think maybe the only thing to do is accept the situation. but if something can be done, shouldn't it? if a monk saw a woman being raped, would he intervene or just accept it?

Edited December 19, 2005 by girlx

[britmaveric]

Perhaps a fatalistic approach is being used.... what happens happens? Not that its right, but that is a common though pattern among buddists.

[zzap]

It's encouraging you to further your understanding and be mindful, to not be ruled by your emotions and reactions. It doesn't say not to care, it emphasises to do so mindfully.

Empty or free of attachment, full of mind.

Skilful action may result from this, not for the monk mentioned, but for girlx.

Edited December 19, 2005 by zzap

[RonanTheBarbarian]

Watching an animal die is not a fun experience for most people, but trying to eliminate the deaths of animals out of ones own attachment and desire is not considered conducive to mindful living in Buddhist thought...

Sounds like a rather elegant explanation for ignoring suffering animals to me.

Girlx, the best thing you could do for these puppies (unless you think a home can be found for them) is to euthanase them.

Get something painless you can put in their next batch of food.

I know it seems a shame to do it to young healthy dogs but it will save them suffering in the long run.

[ArtfulD]

It seems from the deffensive explanations here people are saying that the Buddhist mindset is one of "Not my problem, lifes a bitch."....dress it up anyway you like, and say "you just dont understand", but thats it in a nutshell....im not saying Buddhism is like that or not, but the arguments put forward are really weak trying to defend the ignored suffering of a few animals. If I ever see a starving half dead Thai child on my doorstep I`ll remember what you told me...ignore it, theres loads of them out there, lifes harsh so let them deal with it.

[girlx]

It seems from the deffensive explanations here people are saying that the Buddhist mindset is one of "Not my problem, lifes a bitch."....dress it up anyway you like, and say "you just dont understand", but thats it in a nutshell....im not saying Buddhism is like that or not, but the arguments put forward are really weak trying to defend the ignored suffering of a few animals.  If I ever see a starving half dead Thai child on my doorstep I`ll remember what you told me...ignore it, theres loads of them out there, lifes harsh so let them deal with it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i agree. it sheds light on the whole concept of "mai pen rai" though. i do not however feel that is conducive to a harmonious society or "mindful living". if thailand in general is any example.

i know i should euthanize the pups but knowing nothing about it i would probably just make them sick, and i don't think i could ever bing myself to do it anyway.

[longway]

this might seem like a silly post, but i love animals and i try to help them out when i see they are in need. i know in thai society it is quite common to abandon unwanted pets at a temple, and it is assumed that the monks take care of them. i am here to say that this is not true in the least (at least not where i am). for example, i pass a wat on the way to town about every other day. recently i noticed a batch of seven tiny little pups was dumped at the wat, with no mother. i noticed an old monk who was there most of the time and figured he had it covered. but went by a few more times and noticed the pups were starving, had distended bellies with ribs sticking out... so i went and bought boxes of milk and puppy food for them, and a can of flea powder. took it to the temple, fed the pups who were almost killing each other in their mad scrape to get to the food. one of them was scrawny and sick, another had such a swollen belly that he looked like he was about to pop. i left the bag of dog food and the boxes of milk with the monk and asked him if he could just pour it into their bowl at least once a day. went off... today (3 days later) i drove by again to check on them, and saw that the monk had not even bothered to feed them from the bag i gave him, and two of the puppies (the ones i mentioned) had died.  i fed them again and gave him more food to give to them, and some rice and soymilk packages for himself, but i can tell he won't do a thing.

so my question is, how can a monk let small animals starve to death in front of him when he has a big bag of (free) food handed to him to help them with? what kind of monk is this?

if someone has any explanation to help me feel less angry that would be nice. i know in the scheme of things it's not a really important issue, but to someone who tends to like dogs better than most people it hits hard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

what if it wasnt litter of cute puppies, what it was a litter of giant rats, would u be so keen to look after them even tho they are suffering. supposed some mad thai girl came along and fed them a few times and told u to look after them, what would u do?

dogs aren't vermin in the sense of rats, but u see the point, the monk just may not get it. he may have decided long ago that its not his responsibility to take care of every litter that gets dropped at his doorstep. if u want it done u will hv to do it yourself.

i know what your saying and i actually agree with you. theres alot i dont understand about this country.

[longway]

It seems from the deffensive explanations here people are saying that the Buddhist mindset is one of "Not my problem, lifes a bitch."....dress it up anyway you like, and say "you just dont understand", but thats it in a nutshell....im not saying Buddhism is like that or not, but the arguments put forward are really weak trying to defend the ignored suffering of a few animals.  If I ever see a starving half dead Thai child on my doorstep I`ll remember what you told me...ignore it, theres loads of them out there, lifes harsh so let them deal with it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

feel free to contact girlx and look after the pups yourself if u feel so strongly about it. start an awareness campaign about stary dogs in thailand, is it your christian mind set that allows such hypocrisy?

do you know how many small animals are slaughtered during harvesting of so called vegetarian food. we are much more sentimental about SOME kinds of animals, but it doesnt mean we are right.

[zzap]

It seems from the deffensive explanations here people are saying that the Buddhist mindset is one of "Not my problem, lifes a bitch."....

  If I ever see a starving half dead Thai child on my doorstep I`ll remember what you told me...ignore it, theres loads of them out there, lifes harsh so let them deal with it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i agree. it sheds light on the whole concept of "mai pen rai" though. i do not however feel that is conducive to a harmonious society or "mindful living".  if thailand in general is any example.

i know i should euthanize the pups but knowing nothing about it i would probably just make them sick, and i don't think i could ever bing myself to do it anyway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Noone suggested ignorance or a mai pen rai attitude...

Mindfulness has been mentioned, example: what is the nature of your attachment to the suffering of dogs? How does the suffering of other beings, say rats, effect you? Are you as attached to this? Is leaving food for the dogs with the monk a skilful action to reduce suffering, or has it furthered the dogs suffering, and your own?

You already said euthanising the puppies would be a good thing to do, but you don't know how to and are attached to an aversion against doing this yourself. So perhaps this incident will lead you to acquire knowledge and skill of euthanising the dogs?

Perhaps the old monk you focus on is a catalyst, a waypointer for you?

[chownah]

I guess that one of the main questions here is why didn't the monk feed the puppies when requested to do so and given the food to do it with. If you truly want to find the answer then go back and ask the monk why.....this is the only way that you will truly be able to answer this question.

[longway]

I guess that one of the main questions here is why didn't the monk feed the puppies when requested to do so and given the food to do it with.  If you truly want to find the answer then go back and ask the monk why.....this is the only way that you will truly be able to answer this question.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

absolutely.

also if i may reply one more time i reccomend reading phra farang and/or little angels by peter pannapadipo, who is a brit who used to be a monk. you will learn alot about buddhism and the sangha, and get some insight into rural life in thailand too, from a western viewpoint.

[Abandon]

You are mixing up your 'compassion' for the puppies, and your hating the monk. As I already explained, dogs here are vermin, not cute doggie woggies. I wonder how many animals get dumped at his temple. It is grossly unfair to blame him and also to try and stir up others to blame him too.

I did not see any compassion in Western society for the rabbits when I was in Aussie - I refused to kill them, but the locals came round and did it anyway - on our land.

Address your own feelings!

[camerata]

It seems to me that in the kind of popular Buddhism that's evolved in Thailand there is a strong belief that a bad situation in the current life is a result of sins in past lives, and that we (people and animals) have to "work out our karma" by enduring the suffering here and now so that we can have a more advantageous next life. Hence the reluctance to "interfere" with another being's karma and possibly cause them not to have a favourable rebirth.

I think this accounts for a lot of the indifference and cruelty to animals we see in Thailand. Presumably, this faulty logic could be extended to, "If I beat a puppy, it's just part of the consequences of its past sins."

Most Westerners would look at it the other way round - if we are kind to a puppy then that is also a result of its past actions, so might as well be kind and compassionate.

What the puppies in this story really needed was someone to take complete responsibility, take them in, fix them up and find a good home for all of them. But no one was prepared to go that far. We can't really blame the monk for that.

After seeing a zillion puppies dumped at the monastery, the monk may well have had 'compassion fatigue' and thought it better to let them move quickly to a better next life. Or he may just not have been a very compassionate person. According to Phra Farang, the yelping and howling of abandoned dogs at monasteries make it impossible to meditate, which is after all the main purpose of monastic life for serious monks.

It's worth mentioning here that when devout fundamentalist Buddhist Chamlong Srimuang was Bangkok Governor he tried very hard to find a humane solution for stray dogs, but he didn't get a lot of support. The second time he ran for governor, he lost, partly (according to The Nation) because Bangkokians didn't want him forcing his brand of religion down their throats (he had been active in bringing down a pro-abortion bill in the 70s and is now active in blocking the listing of an alcoholic beverage company on the Thai stock market).