pets
Majnun with Layla's Dog
The following poem of Mowlana Rumi illustrates how dogs can be better creatures than us!
Majnun with Layla's Dog
Majnun saw Layla's dog and began kissing it,
running around like a hajji circling the Kaaba,
bowing to its paws, holding its head, scratching
its stomach, giving it sweets and rosewater.
"You idiot," said someone passing by.
"Dogs lick their privates and sniff
excrement on the road. This is insane,
the intimate way you treat that dog."
"Look through my eyes," said the lover.
"See the loyalty, how he guards the house
of my Friend, how he's so glad to see us.
Whatever we feel, grief, the simple delight
of being out in the sun, he feels
that with us completely.
Don't look too much at surface actions.
Discover the lion, the rose of his real nature.
Friend, this dog is a garden gate into the invisible."
Anyone preoccupied with pointing out what's wrong
misses the unseen. Look at his face!
Source: Say I Am You RUMI Poetry Interspersed with Stories of Rumi and Shamsh translated by JohnMoyne and Coleman Barks
***
Be good to animals: neither ill-treat them, nor place on them loads beyond their strenght to bear. [Maxim]
-- Hazrat Ali
Majnun with Layla's Dog
Majnun saw Layla's dog and began kissing it,
running around like a hajji circling the Kaaba,
bowing to its paws, holding its head, scratching
its stomach, giving it sweets and rosewater.
"You idiot," said someone passing by.
"Dogs lick their privates and sniff
excrement on the road. This is insane,
the intimate way you treat that dog."
"Look through my eyes," said the lover.
"See the loyalty, how he guards the house
of my Friend, how he's so glad to see us.
Whatever we feel, grief, the simple delight
of being out in the sun, he feels
that with us completely.
Don't look too much at surface actions.
Discover the lion, the rose of his real nature.
Friend, this dog is a garden gate into the invisible."
Anyone preoccupied with pointing out what's wrong
misses the unseen. Look at his face!
Source: Say I Am You RUMI Poetry Interspersed with Stories of Rumi and Shamsh translated by JohnMoyne and Coleman Barks
***
Be good to animals: neither ill-treat them, nor place on them loads beyond their strenght to bear. [Maxim]
-- Hazrat Ali
Last edited by kmaherali on Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
A Dog as a Lover of God!
In the following anecdote, Mowlana Rumi refers to a dog as a lover of God!
Rumi was walking by the moat around the edge of Konya when a group of students from a neighbouring college posed a question they thought would confuse him, "What color was the dog who slept in the cave with the seven sleepers?" Rumi's spontaneous answer was, "Light yellow. A lover is always pale with longing, as I am, and that dog was a lover." They followed along then asking questions that were less impudent.
***
Near the market, Rumi began talking to people in the late afternoon one day. A large crowd gathered, but as the sun went down and Jelaluddin kept discoursing, they wandered away. He went on into the night, until finally he was alone with a number of the town's stray dogs, who sat in a circle around him whining and wagging their tails. "You understand what I say,"he announced to his canine audience. "Men have condescended and called you 'dogs,' but from now on, let your species be known as the seven sleepers, because of that blessed group in the Qur'an, which included one of you."
Source: Say I Am You RUMI Poetry Interspersed with Stories of Rumi and Shamsh translated by JohnMoyne and Coleman Barks
Rumi was walking by the moat around the edge of Konya when a group of students from a neighbouring college posed a question they thought would confuse him, "What color was the dog who slept in the cave with the seven sleepers?" Rumi's spontaneous answer was, "Light yellow. A lover is always pale with longing, as I am, and that dog was a lover." They followed along then asking questions that were less impudent.
***
Near the market, Rumi began talking to people in the late afternoon one day. A large crowd gathered, but as the sun went down and Jelaluddin kept discoursing, they wandered away. He went on into the night, until finally he was alone with a number of the town's stray dogs, who sat in a circle around him whining and wagging their tails. "You understand what I say,"he announced to his canine audience. "Men have condescended and called you 'dogs,' but from now on, let your species be known as the seven sleepers, because of that blessed group in the Qur'an, which included one of you."
Source: Say I Am You RUMI Poetry Interspersed with Stories of Rumi and Shamsh translated by JohnMoyne and Coleman Barks
A Pet's devotion - Tsunami
A Pet's Devotion
January 3, 2005 | 11:55 a.m.
A 7-year-old boy was saved from the tsunami's force by the family dog, who pulled the boy up a hill and out of the small hut where he had taken shelter. The boy's mother had fled with her two younger children, hoping against hope that her older boy would be strong enough to outrun the wave on his own. When the boy ran into the hut, the dog, which is named Selvakumar after the boy's uncle, nudged him back outside and up a nearby hill.
More..
http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/a ... to_safety/
January 3, 2005 | 11:55 a.m.
A 7-year-old boy was saved from the tsunami's force by the family dog, who pulled the boy up a hill and out of the small hut where he had taken shelter. The boy's mother had fled with her two younger children, hoping against hope that her older boy would be strong enough to outrun the wave on his own. When the boy ran into the hut, the dog, which is named Selvakumar after the boy's uncle, nudged him back outside and up a nearby hill.
More..
http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/a ... to_safety/
Thank God for Our "Small-Brained" Friends
Thank God for Our "Small-Brained" Friends
Dogs do great things for humans every day, even if it's just being there for us when we get home.
By Eileen Mitchell
The email was in response to a dog column I write for the San Francisco Chronicle. The subject line read “Stupid dog freak”.
"Here's some news for you," the email read. "Dogs are JUST ANIMALS. They are domesticated wolves with small brains. They don't even know they are alive, nor can they appreciate a single thing you're doing for them. You should be helping your fellow man, instead of wasting your efforts on flash-in-the-pan lower species."
Let me get this straight: Because dogs are "just animals" they don’t deserve to be loved or cared for? Loving animals has never prevented me from "helping my fellow man." I work at a nonprofit organization, religiously recycle, donate to shelters, and baby sit, pet sit and house sit for friends. I haven’t yet found a cure for cancer, but hey, there are only so many hours in a day. Still, I'm afraid my humble efforts pale in comparison to our canine companions. Because the fact is, many of these "domesticated wolves with small brains" do more to help human kind on a daily basis than do most people in a lifetime.
Throughout the country, children are learning to enjoy books by reading to a nonjudgmental canine listener in programs such as Paws to Read (Pleasanton, CA), Dog Day Afternoons (Salt Lake City, UT) and Sit, Stay, Read (Birmingham, AL). There are service dogs for the visual and hearing impaired, police dogs, search and rescue dogs, and therapeutic companion dogs for seniors, shut-ins, and the clinically depressed. There are dogs that work as "medic alerts," predicting seizures, dangerously low-blood sugar levels, and now we’re discovering, even cancer.
A canine’s sense of smell is generally 10,000 to 100,000 times superior to that of humans. A recent U.K. study found that dogs sniffing urine detected "a specific profile of aromas linked to the abnormal metabolic products of cancer cells." As a result, a dog’s sharp sense of smell may one day prove to be a non-invasive way to detect bladder cancer. Sure beats the current detection methods, which require inserting a fiber-optic instrument into the bladder via the urethra.
Another article referenced studies that find a canine’s sense of smell may also be used to detect prostate cancer in human urine. Not to mention several reports where guardians discovered they had a cancerous lesion (melanoma) thanks to their dog’s persistent sniffing of the spot.
I contacted Dr. Marty Becker, the veterinarian correspondent for ABC-TV’s, Good Morning America. He knows firsthand about the therapeutic value of pets, having spent 18 months researching the subject for his book, The Healing Power of Pets (Hyperion Press 2002). In our email correspondence he wrote:
"The late Dr. Robert Poresky was a human development and family studies professor at Kansas State University. His studies showed a small but significant increase in the IQ scores of children who cared for animals in their home." Dr. Becker also mentioned Dr. Mark Smith, a psychopharmacologist and National Institute of Health researcher who specializes in mood disorders.
"He talks about the ability of dogs to help people with manic-depression or Bipolar disease. Dogs can detect people in the earliest stages of mania, a time when people do things like spend their savings in a single weekend on frivolous purchases or have a weekend of sexual promiscuity."
Finally, Dr. Becker referenced a British study that followed a woman accompanied by a yellow Labrador retriever while she went about her daily routine for five days, and then for five more days without the dog. With the dog, the woman spoke with 156 people or more than thirty people a day. Without the dog, only fifty people or ten a day.
"The study found dogs serve as a social lubricant and conversation catalyst,” Dr. Becker said. "The positive interactions stimulated by the dog are key to a greater sense of psychological well-being for the humans."
He concluded: "You never come home and find your dog's suitcases packed or a note saying they don't love you anymore or they've found someone else. Dogs don't take the day off from greeting you at the door because they're mad at you or refuse to go for a walk because they have something better to do. Dogs don't posture for personal gain and have no hidden agendas. They just display unconditional love and limitless affection and loyalty."
And dogs aren’t just good for the heart and soul: they may very well save your life. When I Googled the words "Dog saves" thousands of postings appeared. These included a Toy poodle whose barking alerted a sleeping Tennessee family to a house fire, a dog in the Philippines whose barking warned of an approaching landslide, a Golden retriever in New York who alerted a mother to her choking child, a Pit Bull in Alaska who saved a child from a burning home, and an Australian blue heeler in Florida who protected his injured guardian from an approaching alligator.
Dogs do great things for humans every day, even if it’s just being there for us when we get home. This is precisely why many people would choose a dog with a small brain over a human with no heart any day of the week.
That, my friend, is a no-brainer.
Dogs do great things for humans every day, even if it's just being there for us when we get home.
By Eileen Mitchell
The email was in response to a dog column I write for the San Francisco Chronicle. The subject line read “Stupid dog freak”.
"Here's some news for you," the email read. "Dogs are JUST ANIMALS. They are domesticated wolves with small brains. They don't even know they are alive, nor can they appreciate a single thing you're doing for them. You should be helping your fellow man, instead of wasting your efforts on flash-in-the-pan lower species."
Let me get this straight: Because dogs are "just animals" they don’t deserve to be loved or cared for? Loving animals has never prevented me from "helping my fellow man." I work at a nonprofit organization, religiously recycle, donate to shelters, and baby sit, pet sit and house sit for friends. I haven’t yet found a cure for cancer, but hey, there are only so many hours in a day. Still, I'm afraid my humble efforts pale in comparison to our canine companions. Because the fact is, many of these "domesticated wolves with small brains" do more to help human kind on a daily basis than do most people in a lifetime.
Throughout the country, children are learning to enjoy books by reading to a nonjudgmental canine listener in programs such as Paws to Read (Pleasanton, CA), Dog Day Afternoons (Salt Lake City, UT) and Sit, Stay, Read (Birmingham, AL). There are service dogs for the visual and hearing impaired, police dogs, search and rescue dogs, and therapeutic companion dogs for seniors, shut-ins, and the clinically depressed. There are dogs that work as "medic alerts," predicting seizures, dangerously low-blood sugar levels, and now we’re discovering, even cancer.
A canine’s sense of smell is generally 10,000 to 100,000 times superior to that of humans. A recent U.K. study found that dogs sniffing urine detected "a specific profile of aromas linked to the abnormal metabolic products of cancer cells." As a result, a dog’s sharp sense of smell may one day prove to be a non-invasive way to detect bladder cancer. Sure beats the current detection methods, which require inserting a fiber-optic instrument into the bladder via the urethra.
Another article referenced studies that find a canine’s sense of smell may also be used to detect prostate cancer in human urine. Not to mention several reports where guardians discovered they had a cancerous lesion (melanoma) thanks to their dog’s persistent sniffing of the spot.
I contacted Dr. Marty Becker, the veterinarian correspondent for ABC-TV’s, Good Morning America. He knows firsthand about the therapeutic value of pets, having spent 18 months researching the subject for his book, The Healing Power of Pets (Hyperion Press 2002). In our email correspondence he wrote:
"The late Dr. Robert Poresky was a human development and family studies professor at Kansas State University. His studies showed a small but significant increase in the IQ scores of children who cared for animals in their home." Dr. Becker also mentioned Dr. Mark Smith, a psychopharmacologist and National Institute of Health researcher who specializes in mood disorders.
"He talks about the ability of dogs to help people with manic-depression or Bipolar disease. Dogs can detect people in the earliest stages of mania, a time when people do things like spend their savings in a single weekend on frivolous purchases or have a weekend of sexual promiscuity."
Finally, Dr. Becker referenced a British study that followed a woman accompanied by a yellow Labrador retriever while she went about her daily routine for five days, and then for five more days without the dog. With the dog, the woman spoke with 156 people or more than thirty people a day. Without the dog, only fifty people or ten a day.
"The study found dogs serve as a social lubricant and conversation catalyst,” Dr. Becker said. "The positive interactions stimulated by the dog are key to a greater sense of psychological well-being for the humans."
He concluded: "You never come home and find your dog's suitcases packed or a note saying they don't love you anymore or they've found someone else. Dogs don't take the day off from greeting you at the door because they're mad at you or refuse to go for a walk because they have something better to do. Dogs don't posture for personal gain and have no hidden agendas. They just display unconditional love and limitless affection and loyalty."
And dogs aren’t just good for the heart and soul: they may very well save your life. When I Googled the words "Dog saves" thousands of postings appeared. These included a Toy poodle whose barking alerted a sleeping Tennessee family to a house fire, a dog in the Philippines whose barking warned of an approaching landslide, a Golden retriever in New York who alerted a mother to her choking child, a Pit Bull in Alaska who saved a child from a burning home, and an Australian blue heeler in Florida who protected his injured guardian from an approaching alligator.
Dogs do great things for humans every day, even if it’s just being there for us when we get home. This is precisely why many people would choose a dog with a small brain over a human with no heart any day of the week.
That, my friend, is a no-brainer.
Dog Funny
Dog Funny
A butcher in his shop, and he's real busy, and he notices a dog in the
shop. He shoos him away. But later, he notices the dog is back again.
So he goes over to the dog, and notices he has a note in his mouth. He
takes the note, and it reads "Can I have 12 sausages and a leg of
lamb, please.
The dog has money in his mouth, as well." The butcher
looks inside and, lo and behold, there is a ten pound note there. So
he takes the money, and puts the sausages and lamb in a bag, placing
it in the dog's mouth.
The butcher is well impressed, and since it's
close to closing time, he decides to shut up shop and follow the dog.
So off he goes.
The dog is walking down the street, when he comes to a level crossing.
The dog puts down the bag, jumps up and presses the button.
Then he waits patiently, bag in mouth, for the lights to turn. They do, and he
walks across the road, with the butcher following him all the way. The
dog then comes to a bus stop, and starts looking at the timetable.
The butcher is in awe at this stage. The dog checks out the times, and
then sits on one of the seats provided. Along comes a bus. The dog
walks around the front, looks at the number, and goes back to his
seat. Another bus comes.
Again the dog goes and looks at the number,notices it's the right bus, and climbs on. The butcher, by now open-mouthed, follows him onto the bus.
The bus travels through the town and out into the suburbs, the dog
looking at the scenery. Eventually he gets up, and moves to the front
of the bus. He stands on 2 back paws and pushes the button to stop the
bus. Then he gets off, his groceries still in his mouth.
Well, dog and butcher are walking along the road, and then the dog
turns into a house. He walks up the path, and drops the groceries on
the step.
Then he walks back down the path, takes a big run, and
throws himself -Whap!- against the door. He goes back down the path,
runs up to the door and -Whap!- throws himself against it again.
There's no answer at the house, so the dog goes back down the path,
jumps up on a narrow wall, and walks along the perimeter of the
garden. He gets to the window, and beats his head against it several
times, walks back, jumps off, and waits at the door.
The butcher watches as a big guy opens the door, and starts laying
into the dog. Yelling and swearing at him. The butcher runs up, and
stops the guy.
"What the heck are you doing? That dog is a genius. He
could be on TV, for heaven's sake!", to which the guy responds,
"Clever, my foot! This is the second time this week that he's
forgotten his key."
A butcher in his shop, and he's real busy, and he notices a dog in the
shop. He shoos him away. But later, he notices the dog is back again.
So he goes over to the dog, and notices he has a note in his mouth. He
takes the note, and it reads "Can I have 12 sausages and a leg of
lamb, please.
The dog has money in his mouth, as well." The butcher
looks inside and, lo and behold, there is a ten pound note there. So
he takes the money, and puts the sausages and lamb in a bag, placing
it in the dog's mouth.
The butcher is well impressed, and since it's
close to closing time, he decides to shut up shop and follow the dog.
So off he goes.
The dog is walking down the street, when he comes to a level crossing.
The dog puts down the bag, jumps up and presses the button.
Then he waits patiently, bag in mouth, for the lights to turn. They do, and he
walks across the road, with the butcher following him all the way. The
dog then comes to a bus stop, and starts looking at the timetable.
The butcher is in awe at this stage. The dog checks out the times, and
then sits on one of the seats provided. Along comes a bus. The dog
walks around the front, looks at the number, and goes back to his
seat. Another bus comes.
Again the dog goes and looks at the number,notices it's the right bus, and climbs on. The butcher, by now open-mouthed, follows him onto the bus.
The bus travels through the town and out into the suburbs, the dog
looking at the scenery. Eventually he gets up, and moves to the front
of the bus. He stands on 2 back paws and pushes the button to stop the
bus. Then he gets off, his groceries still in his mouth.
Well, dog and butcher are walking along the road, and then the dog
turns into a house. He walks up the path, and drops the groceries on
the step.
Then he walks back down the path, takes a big run, and
throws himself -Whap!- against the door. He goes back down the path,
runs up to the door and -Whap!- throws himself against it again.
There's no answer at the house, so the dog goes back down the path,
jumps up on a narrow wall, and walks along the perimeter of the
garden. He gets to the window, and beats his head against it several
times, walks back, jumps off, and waits at the door.
The butcher watches as a big guy opens the door, and starts laying
into the dog. Yelling and swearing at him. The butcher runs up, and
stops the guy.
"What the heck are you doing? That dog is a genius. He
could be on TV, for heaven's sake!", to which the guy responds,
"Clever, my foot! This is the second time this week that he's
forgotten his key."
The following anecdote conceived as a joke gives a different spin on why dogs and cats were created!
And God Created Dog and Cat
A newly discovered chapter in the Book of Genesis has provided the answer to 'Where do pets come from?'
Adam said, 'Lord, when I was in the garden, you walked with me every day. Now I do not see you any more. I am lonesome here and it is difficult for me to remember how much you love me.'And God said 'No problem. I will create a companion for you that will be with you forever and who will be a reflection of my love for you so that you will love me even when you cannot see me. Regardless of how selfish or childish or unlovable you may be, this new companion will accept you as you are and will love you as I do, in spite of yourself.'
And God created a new animal to be a companion for Adam. And it was a good animal. And God was pleased. And the new animal was pleased to be with Adam and it wagged its tail.
And Adam said, 'Lord, I have already named all the animals in the Kingdom and I cannot think of a name for this new animal.'
And God said, 'No problem. Because I have created this new animal to be a reflection of my love for you his name will be a reflection of my own name, and you will call him Dog.'
And Dog lived with Adam and was a companion to him and loved him. And Adam was comforted. And God was pleased. And Dog was content and wagged his tail.
After a while, it came to pass that Adam's guardian angel came to the Lord and said, 'Lord, Adam has become filled with pride. He struts and preens like a peacock and he believes he is worthy of adoration. Dog has indeed taught him that he is loved, but perhaps too well.'
And the Lord said, 'No problem. I will create for him a companion who will be with him forever and who will see him as he is. The companion will remind him of his limitations, so he will know that he is not always worthy of adoration.'
And God created Cat to be a companion to Adam. And Cat would not obey Adam. And when Adam gazed into Cat's eyes, he was reminded that he was not the Supreme Being. And Adam learned humility.
And God was pleased. And Adam was greatly improved. And Dog was happy.
And Cat didn't care one way or the other.
And God Created Dog and Cat
A newly discovered chapter in the Book of Genesis has provided the answer to 'Where do pets come from?'
Adam said, 'Lord, when I was in the garden, you walked with me every day. Now I do not see you any more. I am lonesome here and it is difficult for me to remember how much you love me.'And God said 'No problem. I will create a companion for you that will be with you forever and who will be a reflection of my love for you so that you will love me even when you cannot see me. Regardless of how selfish or childish or unlovable you may be, this new companion will accept you as you are and will love you as I do, in spite of yourself.'
And God created a new animal to be a companion for Adam. And it was a good animal. And God was pleased. And the new animal was pleased to be with Adam and it wagged its tail.
And Adam said, 'Lord, I have already named all the animals in the Kingdom and I cannot think of a name for this new animal.'
And God said, 'No problem. Because I have created this new animal to be a reflection of my love for you his name will be a reflection of my own name, and you will call him Dog.'
And Dog lived with Adam and was a companion to him and loved him. And Adam was comforted. And God was pleased. And Dog was content and wagged his tail.
After a while, it came to pass that Adam's guardian angel came to the Lord and said, 'Lord, Adam has become filled with pride. He struts and preens like a peacock and he believes he is worthy of adoration. Dog has indeed taught him that he is loved, but perhaps too well.'
And the Lord said, 'No problem. I will create for him a companion who will be with him forever and who will see him as he is. The companion will remind him of his limitations, so he will know that he is not always worthy of adoration.'
And God created Cat to be a companion to Adam. And Cat would not obey Adam. And when Adam gazed into Cat's eyes, he was reminded that he was not the Supreme Being. And Adam learned humility.
And God was pleased. And Adam was greatly improved. And Dog was happy.
And Cat didn't care one way or the other.
- Narrated by Abu Huraira: The Prophet (PBUH) said, "A man saw a dog eating mud from (the severity of) thirst. So, that man took a shoe (and filled it) with water and kept on pouring the water for the dog till it quenched its thirst. So Allah approved of his deed and made him to enter Paradise."
- "Abu Huraira" is a name was given by the Prophet (PBUH) to Abu Huraira because he was carrying a kitten.
Abu Huraira means (the kitten's father) because of his love for a kitten he looked after and fed, and which used to stick to him wherever he went. (the kitten was his pet)
- "Abu Huraira" is a name was given by the Prophet (PBUH) to Abu Huraira because he was carrying a kitten.
Abu Huraira means (the kitten's father) because of his love for a kitten he looked after and fed, and which used to stick to him wherever he went. (the kitten was his pet)
Why Pets Can Be Good for Your Health
It's funny how dogs and cats know the inside of folks better than other folks do, isn't it?
-Eleanor H. Porter, Pollyanna
From "Unconditional Love: Healing from Pets" by Jill Neimark, Spirituality & Health Magazine (July/August 2005):
A survey by the American Animal Hospital Association found that three-quarters of pet owners say affection is their pet’s most endearing quality. Now a review of the research from Stanford University shows that the love goes both ways and suggests that our own altruistic behavior makes caring for pets so beneficial.
"The attachment we feel to our pets is similar to the unconditional love a parent feels for a child," says Marivic Dizon, a postdoctoral candidate at Stanford University. "Acts of kindness and compassion directed at animals are authentically altruistic. There are few social benefits to such actions beyond the possible reciprocation of love from the animal." Dr. Dizon explains that altruism is linked to improved mental and physical well-being, and the care and nurturing we give animals offers similar benefits. Whether you’re rescuing an injured bird or stroking your dog’s belly, you will likely be boosting your own health and well-being.
Dizon reports that adults and children who feel empathy towards their pets manifest stronger feelings of empathy toward other people. In Project Pooch, incarcerated youth who learned to care for dogs that had been abandoned also learned greater honesty, empathy, nurturing, social growth, respect for authority, and leadership. A study of women in prisons who trained dogs to help the handicapped found that the women’s self-esteem increased significantly.
One long-term study on pet ownership found that adopting a pet is associated with almost instantly improved physical and emotional well-being. This may be in part because caring for a pet connects us more strongly to society.
It's funny how dogs and cats know the inside of folks better than other folks do, isn't it?
-Eleanor H. Porter, Pollyanna
From "Unconditional Love: Healing from Pets" by Jill Neimark, Spirituality & Health Magazine (July/August 2005):
A survey by the American Animal Hospital Association found that three-quarters of pet owners say affection is their pet’s most endearing quality. Now a review of the research from Stanford University shows that the love goes both ways and suggests that our own altruistic behavior makes caring for pets so beneficial.
"The attachment we feel to our pets is similar to the unconditional love a parent feels for a child," says Marivic Dizon, a postdoctoral candidate at Stanford University. "Acts of kindness and compassion directed at animals are authentically altruistic. There are few social benefits to such actions beyond the possible reciprocation of love from the animal." Dr. Dizon explains that altruism is linked to improved mental and physical well-being, and the care and nurturing we give animals offers similar benefits. Whether you’re rescuing an injured bird or stroking your dog’s belly, you will likely be boosting your own health and well-being.
Dizon reports that adults and children who feel empathy towards their pets manifest stronger feelings of empathy toward other people. In Project Pooch, incarcerated youth who learned to care for dogs that had been abandoned also learned greater honesty, empathy, nurturing, social growth, respect for authority, and leadership. A study of women in prisons who trained dogs to help the handicapped found that the women’s self-esteem increased significantly.
One long-term study on pet ownership found that adopting a pet is associated with almost instantly improved physical and emotional well-being. This may be in part because caring for a pet connects us more strongly to society.
'My Pet Is a Blessing'
Some angels have fur, not wings, according to Beliefnet members.
Does your pet impact your spiritual life? When Beliefnet asked readers that question last year, we were inundated by inspiring and unusual stories. This year, we'll once again be highlighting your pet stories throughout October, the month when many religious traditions honor animals. If you sent us a photo in September, check back each Tuesday this month to see if your pet is featured.
The Gift Mary Gave Me"
Trigo is a Spanish Shepherd dog. During my four-month pilgrimage from Holland to Santiago de Compostela in Spain, I was struck by a statue of Mary. When I was praying for the welfare of pilgrims and all those who gave prayers to me to carry forth to the tomb of St. James, it seemed that Mary answered and said, "Do not worry... I shall take care of you and your worries."
The next day a stray dog came on my path and continued to be with me. A priest along the Camino de Santiago asked me whose dog it was. I said it was mine more or less as I found it. He answered, "You didn’t find that dog. The dog found you!"
Only later I understood that this was the gift Mary gave me...If Trigo wasn’t in my life, I would have given up hope long, long ago.
--Pieter P., the Netherlands
More and pictures at:
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/176/stor ... mc_id=NL24
Some angels have fur, not wings, according to Beliefnet members.
Does your pet impact your spiritual life? When Beliefnet asked readers that question last year, we were inundated by inspiring and unusual stories. This year, we'll once again be highlighting your pet stories throughout October, the month when many religious traditions honor animals. If you sent us a photo in September, check back each Tuesday this month to see if your pet is featured.
The Gift Mary Gave Me"
Trigo is a Spanish Shepherd dog. During my four-month pilgrimage from Holland to Santiago de Compostela in Spain, I was struck by a statue of Mary. When I was praying for the welfare of pilgrims and all those who gave prayers to me to carry forth to the tomb of St. James, it seemed that Mary answered and said, "Do not worry... I shall take care of you and your worries."
The next day a stray dog came on my path and continued to be with me. A priest along the Camino de Santiago asked me whose dog it was. I said it was mine more or less as I found it. He answered, "You didn’t find that dog. The dog found you!"
Only later I understood that this was the gift Mary gave me...If Trigo wasn’t in my life, I would have given up hope long, long ago.
--Pieter P., the Netherlands
More and pictures at:
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/176/stor ... mc_id=NL24
Dog dies saving owner from bear
The Associated Press
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Jason Schindler says he wouldn't be alive if it were not for his dog, Dude. The 27-year-old rural Cataract man said the eight-year-old mixed-breed hound jumped between him and an attacking black bear last Thursday night, saving his life but giving up his own. The animal sustained at least 28 puncture wounds, he said.
"I'd hate for someone else's dog to go through what mine did," he said.
Schindler said he heard the dog barking loudly Thursday after dark and went out to investigate. Suddenly, "all I saw was this dark thing lunging at me," he said.
But his dog jumped between the two and was quickly snatched up in the bear's jaw, he said.
"If not for the dog, I wouldn't be standing here," he said.
He returned to his house, grabbed a rifle, returned to the scene and fired, possibly hitting his target before the bear fled into the woods.
He said Dude was the last of a litter of puppies available at the local animal shelter when Schindler adopted him.
Another week in the shelter and he would have been euthanized, Schindler said.
"I saw him lying there alone in his cage and I felt so bad for him," he said. "In a way he was a miracle dog."
© The Calgary Herald 2007
The Associated Press
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Jason Schindler says he wouldn't be alive if it were not for his dog, Dude. The 27-year-old rural Cataract man said the eight-year-old mixed-breed hound jumped between him and an attacking black bear last Thursday night, saving his life but giving up his own. The animal sustained at least 28 puncture wounds, he said.
"I'd hate for someone else's dog to go through what mine did," he said.
Schindler said he heard the dog barking loudly Thursday after dark and went out to investigate. Suddenly, "all I saw was this dark thing lunging at me," he said.
But his dog jumped between the two and was quickly snatched up in the bear's jaw, he said.
"If not for the dog, I wouldn't be standing here," he said.
He returned to his house, grabbed a rifle, returned to the scene and fired, possibly hitting his target before the bear fled into the woods.
He said Dude was the last of a litter of puppies available at the local animal shelter when Schindler adopted him.
Another week in the shelter and he would have been euthanized, Schindler said.
"I saw him lying there alone in his cage and I felt so bad for him," he said. "In a way he was a miracle dog."
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Love for pets knows no bounds
Owners spend thousands on funerals, medical care
Deborah Tetley
Calgary Herald
Sunday, March 04, 2007
CREDIT: Leah Hennel, Calgary Herald
"When you have an animal, you have to care for it," says Tammy Laframboise, above, who has spent $7,000 on chemotherapy treatments for the family's golden retriever, Remington, seen here with her children Sarah, 8, and Ben, 5.
Chelsea Dawn was laid to rest on Super Bowl Sunday in a pink, satin-lined oak casket.
At the funeral, friends stood at the front of the chapel, sharing favourite memories of the 14-year-old's life.
Someone read a touching poem about an animals-only heaven. Guests, as they passed the open casket, placed roses next to her body.
Chelsea, who was euthanized last month, was a mixed-breed spaniel -- and this was her pet funeral.
"I really hate to say this, but my dog's funeral was almost as nice as my dad's," says owner Heather McNamara, a 36-year-old Calgarian who works for a phone company.
"People probably think I'm weird and that's OK. She was my child. I couldn't do anything less than the best for her, after all she'd meant to me."
Including a plot in a Calgary pet cemetery, McNamara spent $2,000 on her dog's funeral -- a fraction of the nearly $24,000 she'd doled out on medical bills during Chelsea's life.
Full-fledged funerals similar to the lavish one McNamara held are becoming increasingly popular.
As dogs and cats secure their status as family members, expenditures on everything from doggie funerals to cosmetic surgery are blurring the line between pets and people.
"For some people, there's a stigma attached," said Arnold Paterson, a former funeral director who operates Pet Heaven Crematorium and Funeral Chapel in the city's southeast, "but others go all out because (the pet) meant so much in life, they want the same in death."
Some animal experts embrace the trend, while others warn that owners are compromising their pets' health and even interfering with their human relationships.
Owners say there's nothing unhealthy about caring for a pet.
Tammy Laframboise, 34, is proving her devotion to her dog by spending nearly $7,000 on chemotherapy treatments for her golden retriever, Remington, who has cancer.
"It's about caring, but it's also about responsibility," she said. "When you have an animal, you have to care for it."
The Alberta Veterinary Medical Association says dogs and cats enrich our lives.
"Man's best friend is giving us unconditional love that many of us do not have," said Ken Hubbard, president of the province's veterinary medical association.
"The pet is no longer a commodity -- living in a house out back -- but a significant part of our circle, sleeping on the king-sized bed."
Such close bonds can be seen in the explosion of pet funerals at places like Pet Heaven Crematorium, which opened for business a little more than a year ago and has handled 10 full-fledged funerals.
Animal or human, Paterson treats the services about the same.
"Funerals are less about who has passed away and more about the people left to mourn. It makes no difference if the body in the casket is an animal."
In Calgary, the bodies or remains of nearly 3,000 animals are buried at a memorial park at the Country Club Pet Resort south of the city.
Owner Don Brooks said the remains of four people are also interred alongside their pets in the cemetery, a final sign of the undying bond between pet and person.
"That's not for everyone, but there are folks who want to be with their pets after they go," he said. "So, we open the grave and honour their wishes."
Today, Canadians are forking out nearly $4 billion annually, between pet day cares, pet clothes and food, medical expenditures and, finally, funerals.
But a former veterinarian says pet owners have gone too far.
"It's absurd, self-centred and egotistical the way we use pets to fill voids," said Charles Danten, who lives in Montreal.
In 1998, Danten left the profession after 20 years -- 11 in private practice -- as pet owners increasingly asked for cosmetic surgeries.
"People started developing weird relationships with pets and my whole world disintegrated," he said.
"If we didn't have this emptiness in our social lives and had better relationships, we wouldn't need to hold funerals for our dogs."
Pet owners, however, say the truth about cats and dogs is less complex --they simply love their animals and their animals love them.
"My house feels empty without her," McNamara says of losing her dog Chelsea after 14 years. "I hadn't expected to be this heartbroken."
[email protected]
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Owners spend thousands on funerals, medical care
Deborah Tetley
Calgary Herald
Sunday, March 04, 2007
CREDIT: Leah Hennel, Calgary Herald
"When you have an animal, you have to care for it," says Tammy Laframboise, above, who has spent $7,000 on chemotherapy treatments for the family's golden retriever, Remington, seen here with her children Sarah, 8, and Ben, 5.
Chelsea Dawn was laid to rest on Super Bowl Sunday in a pink, satin-lined oak casket.
At the funeral, friends stood at the front of the chapel, sharing favourite memories of the 14-year-old's life.
Someone read a touching poem about an animals-only heaven. Guests, as they passed the open casket, placed roses next to her body.
Chelsea, who was euthanized last month, was a mixed-breed spaniel -- and this was her pet funeral.
"I really hate to say this, but my dog's funeral was almost as nice as my dad's," says owner Heather McNamara, a 36-year-old Calgarian who works for a phone company.
"People probably think I'm weird and that's OK. She was my child. I couldn't do anything less than the best for her, after all she'd meant to me."
Including a plot in a Calgary pet cemetery, McNamara spent $2,000 on her dog's funeral -- a fraction of the nearly $24,000 she'd doled out on medical bills during Chelsea's life.
Full-fledged funerals similar to the lavish one McNamara held are becoming increasingly popular.
As dogs and cats secure their status as family members, expenditures on everything from doggie funerals to cosmetic surgery are blurring the line between pets and people.
"For some people, there's a stigma attached," said Arnold Paterson, a former funeral director who operates Pet Heaven Crematorium and Funeral Chapel in the city's southeast, "but others go all out because (the pet) meant so much in life, they want the same in death."
Some animal experts embrace the trend, while others warn that owners are compromising their pets' health and even interfering with their human relationships.
Owners say there's nothing unhealthy about caring for a pet.
Tammy Laframboise, 34, is proving her devotion to her dog by spending nearly $7,000 on chemotherapy treatments for her golden retriever, Remington, who has cancer.
"It's about caring, but it's also about responsibility," she said. "When you have an animal, you have to care for it."
The Alberta Veterinary Medical Association says dogs and cats enrich our lives.
"Man's best friend is giving us unconditional love that many of us do not have," said Ken Hubbard, president of the province's veterinary medical association.
"The pet is no longer a commodity -- living in a house out back -- but a significant part of our circle, sleeping on the king-sized bed."
Such close bonds can be seen in the explosion of pet funerals at places like Pet Heaven Crematorium, which opened for business a little more than a year ago and has handled 10 full-fledged funerals.
Animal or human, Paterson treats the services about the same.
"Funerals are less about who has passed away and more about the people left to mourn. It makes no difference if the body in the casket is an animal."
In Calgary, the bodies or remains of nearly 3,000 animals are buried at a memorial park at the Country Club Pet Resort south of the city.
Owner Don Brooks said the remains of four people are also interred alongside their pets in the cemetery, a final sign of the undying bond between pet and person.
"That's not for everyone, but there are folks who want to be with their pets after they go," he said. "So, we open the grave and honour their wishes."
Today, Canadians are forking out nearly $4 billion annually, between pet day cares, pet clothes and food, medical expenditures and, finally, funerals.
But a former veterinarian says pet owners have gone too far.
"It's absurd, self-centred and egotistical the way we use pets to fill voids," said Charles Danten, who lives in Montreal.
In 1998, Danten left the profession after 20 years -- 11 in private practice -- as pet owners increasingly asked for cosmetic surgeries.
"People started developing weird relationships with pets and my whole world disintegrated," he said.
"If we didn't have this emptiness in our social lives and had better relationships, we wouldn't need to hold funerals for our dogs."
Pet owners, however, say the truth about cats and dogs is less complex --they simply love their animals and their animals love them.
"My house feels empty without her," McNamara says of losing her dog Chelsea after 14 years. "I hadn't expected to be this heartbroken."
[email protected]
© The Calgary Herald 2007
Everything I Need to Know I Learned From My Greyhound, Elvis
A new study says that people choose dogs that resemble themselves. Some might find this odd. I say, it's a good thing.
By Eileen Mitchell
The newspaper clipping on my desk was titled, “Study: People pick purebred dogs that resemble them." I was at work, sitting at my desk with my co-worker, Paul. We were discussing a presentation when I saw his eyes glance at the article. Then he looked behind my shoulder over at my computer, which had kicked into screensaver mode and features a photo of my greyhound, Elvis. Then he looked at me. Then back at Elvis. Then at me again.
"Yeah," he nodded nonchalantly, "You do look like your dog...."
Not a jury in the world would convict me. I was about to ask, through clenched teeth, if it was the long nose or floppy ears he thought bore the most resemblance when he added, "...you're both tall and skinny."
Had he said "skinny"? Well, alrighty then.
But actually, resembling my dog wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. With his long, delicate limbs, soft, golden hair and chocolate syrup eyes, Elvis exudes a gentle Audrey Hepburn sweetness not always applicable to my own sometimes questionable demeanor.
The article Paul had spied on my desk noted, "When people pick a dog, they look for one that, at some level, bears some resemblance to them." While the study referenced physical traits, wouldn't it be an improvement if we resembled the personality traits of our dogs?
I wish I could love like a dog, unconditionally and with total purity. Elvis won't notice if I'm wearing brand new Manolo Blahniks or 10-year-old Birkenstocks. He doesn't give a hoot about how much money I make, whether I'm Christian or Jewish, black or white, pro-life or pro-choice, Democrat or Republican. Do I drive a Beamer or a Bug, live in a condo or McMansion? Am I partial to Richebourg Red Burgundy from France or Two-Buck Chuck from Trader Joe's? Maybe I battle chunky monkey thighs or am blessed with a bod like Beyonce. Doesn't matter. Not important. Elvis is wholly and utterly devoted to me for one reason and one reason only: because I'm me. OK, that and I can work a can opener.
I'd love to wake up each morning absolutely thrilled for no reason other than it's yet another day. Sure, I'm in good health, have wonderful family and friends, a roof over my head and food in my cupboards. Yet still, I complain. Where's my whirlwind romance, best-selling novel or Caribbean cruise? Why can't I make more money, lose more weight, have more fun? And is it Friday yet?
Ah, but to a dog each and every boring, monotonous, repetitive day is an absolute adventure. Just the mere appearance of their guardian is enough to elicit an unbridled joy that's the human equivalent of winning the lottery. And what about a ride in the car? A walk in the park? A scratch behind the ears? Suggest any of these simple, mundane activities and I usually have to steer clear of Elvis' tail, wagging so ferociously it practically slaps each side of his ribcage. Happy tail, one friend calls it. Indeed, a previous issue of Berkeley's Bark magazine features two pages of smiling dogs. Silly, happy, goofy grins that capture that blissful, joyful essence of all that is dog. If only we could all be content with so little.
I'd love to work and play like a dog, with total dedication, purpose and concentration. Like the service dog that carefully guides his guardian across a busy street or through a bustling crowd. Observe how seriously a border collie will try to herd playing dogs in a dog park. Watch how focused a golden retriever remains on that airborne Frisbee. See how vigorously a labrador swims through water. Nothing lackadaisical or halfhearted here. Dogs aren't mulling over their walk tomorrow, their meal tonight or their nap in 10 minutes. Dogs live in the moment. Enthusiastically, they embrace each second of the here and now, be it a day in the field guiding cattle, a Sunday in the yard chasing squirrels or simply a restful afternoon snoozing in a pool of sunshine. Suddenly, dog-tired sounds more like an aspiration than a complaint.
When mistreated, dogs forgive. When ignored, they still love. When abandoned, they remain loyal. When neglected, they don't judge. They want for one thing only. To hear their human's voice, feel their human's touch, revel in the nearness of the person they love so unconditionally. Without prejudice, bias or discrimination, our canine companions epitomize the best of human nature. Or what human nature should be.
All of which leads me to believe there's a reason why it's often pointed out that dog is "God" spelled backwards. Because both deity and dog have traits we human beings should all aspire to resemble.
And we don't need a study to tell us that.
A new study says that people choose dogs that resemble themselves. Some might find this odd. I say, it's a good thing.
By Eileen Mitchell
The newspaper clipping on my desk was titled, “Study: People pick purebred dogs that resemble them." I was at work, sitting at my desk with my co-worker, Paul. We were discussing a presentation when I saw his eyes glance at the article. Then he looked behind my shoulder over at my computer, which had kicked into screensaver mode and features a photo of my greyhound, Elvis. Then he looked at me. Then back at Elvis. Then at me again.
"Yeah," he nodded nonchalantly, "You do look like your dog...."
Not a jury in the world would convict me. I was about to ask, through clenched teeth, if it was the long nose or floppy ears he thought bore the most resemblance when he added, "...you're both tall and skinny."
Had he said "skinny"? Well, alrighty then.
But actually, resembling my dog wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. With his long, delicate limbs, soft, golden hair and chocolate syrup eyes, Elvis exudes a gentle Audrey Hepburn sweetness not always applicable to my own sometimes questionable demeanor.
The article Paul had spied on my desk noted, "When people pick a dog, they look for one that, at some level, bears some resemblance to them." While the study referenced physical traits, wouldn't it be an improvement if we resembled the personality traits of our dogs?
I wish I could love like a dog, unconditionally and with total purity. Elvis won't notice if I'm wearing brand new Manolo Blahniks or 10-year-old Birkenstocks. He doesn't give a hoot about how much money I make, whether I'm Christian or Jewish, black or white, pro-life or pro-choice, Democrat or Republican. Do I drive a Beamer or a Bug, live in a condo or McMansion? Am I partial to Richebourg Red Burgundy from France or Two-Buck Chuck from Trader Joe's? Maybe I battle chunky monkey thighs or am blessed with a bod like Beyonce. Doesn't matter. Not important. Elvis is wholly and utterly devoted to me for one reason and one reason only: because I'm me. OK, that and I can work a can opener.
I'd love to wake up each morning absolutely thrilled for no reason other than it's yet another day. Sure, I'm in good health, have wonderful family and friends, a roof over my head and food in my cupboards. Yet still, I complain. Where's my whirlwind romance, best-selling novel or Caribbean cruise? Why can't I make more money, lose more weight, have more fun? And is it Friday yet?
Ah, but to a dog each and every boring, monotonous, repetitive day is an absolute adventure. Just the mere appearance of their guardian is enough to elicit an unbridled joy that's the human equivalent of winning the lottery. And what about a ride in the car? A walk in the park? A scratch behind the ears? Suggest any of these simple, mundane activities and I usually have to steer clear of Elvis' tail, wagging so ferociously it practically slaps each side of his ribcage. Happy tail, one friend calls it. Indeed, a previous issue of Berkeley's Bark magazine features two pages of smiling dogs. Silly, happy, goofy grins that capture that blissful, joyful essence of all that is dog. If only we could all be content with so little.
I'd love to work and play like a dog, with total dedication, purpose and concentration. Like the service dog that carefully guides his guardian across a busy street or through a bustling crowd. Observe how seriously a border collie will try to herd playing dogs in a dog park. Watch how focused a golden retriever remains on that airborne Frisbee. See how vigorously a labrador swims through water. Nothing lackadaisical or halfhearted here. Dogs aren't mulling over their walk tomorrow, their meal tonight or their nap in 10 minutes. Dogs live in the moment. Enthusiastically, they embrace each second of the here and now, be it a day in the field guiding cattle, a Sunday in the yard chasing squirrels or simply a restful afternoon snoozing in a pool of sunshine. Suddenly, dog-tired sounds more like an aspiration than a complaint.
When mistreated, dogs forgive. When ignored, they still love. When abandoned, they remain loyal. When neglected, they don't judge. They want for one thing only. To hear their human's voice, feel their human's touch, revel in the nearness of the person they love so unconditionally. Without prejudice, bias or discrimination, our canine companions epitomize the best of human nature. Or what human nature should be.
All of which leads me to believe there's a reason why it's often pointed out that dog is "God" spelled backwards. Because both deity and dog have traits we human beings should all aspire to resemble.
And we don't need a study to tell us that.
-
zubair_mahamood
- Posts: 238
- Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 6:12 pm
- Contact:
In general Ismailies are tolerant that’s why no one replies you and wants you to recover!SOLID-FOUNDATION-IN-JC wrote:How many ismailis would like to declare to their friends, fellow employees and business associates that they have secret word (bol) given by their God that will open the gate of heavan?
I do like to discuss my faith with the people who have knowledge because I want to learn, understand and practice it! You or any of your associates can read my posting I have openly written everything about my experiences, I explain my faith to everyone around me and I don’t fear anyone not even God because God loves me and I have no reason to fear God. I help people who misunderstand my faith but to misunderstand one should first understand, in your case its not possible cause you have doctors certificate that ur not in any position to understand anything not even your perception of God. If you live in Europe I can try to spend time with you on weekends to help you recover. I have respect for Christians and Jesus, me and my Muslim friends alone with our non Muslim friends went to famous Notredame Church in Paris on 24th dec and stayed there whole night celebrating Christmas with our Christians friends. I am pound to be an Ismaili my faith have given me education and thank god I implemented it to bridge gap between my friends who come from different religious back grounds, When we joined Management School we were Muslims and Non Muslims but by the end we were humans as well as Management Graduates.
You have two choices 1st to live in depression and complaining or to live happily accepting facts of life! One more thing I want to tell you “Thanks You cause you help me to learn, Your Posting motivate me to learn more about my faith” Thank You May Gods Bless you.
-
arshad1988
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 2:02 am
- Contact:
FOund out something that may clarify the situation a little more.
Scholars differ as to whether a dog is impure or not. We have an authentic Hadith which tells us to wash a utensil, which a dog uses, seven times; one of them with dust and water. Scholars who maintain that dog is not impure argue that the Hadith does not mention any impurities. It simply orders us to wash the traces of a dog in a certain way. Some scholars who take the opposite view maintain that this ruling is the same which is required to remove the impurity of pigs. As such, the dog must be classified in the same grade with regard to impurity as the pig which is unanimously agreed to be impure. Whichever view one wishes to adopt - and we can adopt a scholar's view only on the basis of the evidence supporting it - we would not like to be too close to dogs so that we do not need to have our clothes and other objects washed in that difficult way which the Hadith mentions. There are, however, situations where the dog can be of immense use. One such situation is that which you mention in your letter. All scholars agree that it is permissible to use a guard dog in order to protect one's family and property. Again, we can use a dog for hunting without feeling at all uneasy about that. If one employs a dog for such purposes, one should treat it well, give it food and be kind to it. Islam teaches us to treat our animals in a kind way. When the Prophet saw a weak and thin camel, he said to his companions and to Muslims in all generations: "Fear Allah in your treatment of your animals." A Hadith which explains the proper attitude a Muslim should have toward animals is that which tells the story of a man walking in the desert and getting very thirsty. He was so thirsty that he felt he was sure to die unless he soon found some water to drink. Suddenly he saw a well right in front of him. Having nothing with which to draw from the well, he went down himself and drank his full. When he came out to the top, he found a dog gasping because of thirst. He said to himself: This dog must be as thirsty as I was a few minutes ago. He went down again and filled his shoe with water and brought it up and put it in front of the dog. Allah forgave him all his sins for his kind act to that dog. When the Prophet told this Hadith to his companions they wondered whether one would get reward for kindness to animals. The Prophet said: "You have a reward for any kindness you do to any living creature." To sum up, there is nothing wrong with your employment of dogs to guard your farm against intruders who want to steal your crops. You should be kind to those dogs and try as far as possible to keep them away from yourself and your clothes. It is not necessary for one who has a guard dog or a dog for hunting to treat his dog in the same way as Western people treat their pets.
Scholars differ as to whether a dog is impure or not. We have an authentic Hadith which tells us to wash a utensil, which a dog uses, seven times; one of them with dust and water. Scholars who maintain that dog is not impure argue that the Hadith does not mention any impurities. It simply orders us to wash the traces of a dog in a certain way. Some scholars who take the opposite view maintain that this ruling is the same which is required to remove the impurity of pigs. As such, the dog must be classified in the same grade with regard to impurity as the pig which is unanimously agreed to be impure. Whichever view one wishes to adopt - and we can adopt a scholar's view only on the basis of the evidence supporting it - we would not like to be too close to dogs so that we do not need to have our clothes and other objects washed in that difficult way which the Hadith mentions. There are, however, situations where the dog can be of immense use. One such situation is that which you mention in your letter. All scholars agree that it is permissible to use a guard dog in order to protect one's family and property. Again, we can use a dog for hunting without feeling at all uneasy about that. If one employs a dog for such purposes, one should treat it well, give it food and be kind to it. Islam teaches us to treat our animals in a kind way. When the Prophet saw a weak and thin camel, he said to his companions and to Muslims in all generations: "Fear Allah in your treatment of your animals." A Hadith which explains the proper attitude a Muslim should have toward animals is that which tells the story of a man walking in the desert and getting very thirsty. He was so thirsty that he felt he was sure to die unless he soon found some water to drink. Suddenly he saw a well right in front of him. Having nothing with which to draw from the well, he went down himself and drank his full. When he came out to the top, he found a dog gasping because of thirst. He said to himself: This dog must be as thirsty as I was a few minutes ago. He went down again and filled his shoe with water and brought it up and put it in front of the dog. Allah forgave him all his sins for his kind act to that dog. When the Prophet told this Hadith to his companions they wondered whether one would get reward for kindness to animals. The Prophet said: "You have a reward for any kindness you do to any living creature." To sum up, there is nothing wrong with your employment of dogs to guard your farm against intruders who want to steal your crops. You should be kind to those dogs and try as far as possible to keep them away from yourself and your clothes. It is not necessary for one who has a guard dog or a dog for hunting to treat his dog in the same way as Western people treat their pets.
Of Seals and Men
The ethical debate on our relationship to animals
Bishopfred Henry
Calgary Herald
Sunday, April 27, 2008
CREDIT: Paul Darrow, Reuters
A young harp seal rests on the ice off the coast of Cape Breton island, Nova Scotia.
Paul Watson, chief of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, reacting to the March 29th maritime death of four seal hunters, declared the death of seals a "greater tragedy."
This same individual, I quickly learned, had not been misquoted, but is famous or infamous for such comments --for instance, advocating a population-decimating cap of one billion people in our world and calling human beings "the AIDS of the Earth."
Federal and provincial politicians have entered the fray, suggesting the protest against Canada's annual seal hunt would be less effective if hunters were banned from clubbing animals to death. Apparently most animals are shot, but some are killed by blows from large spiked hakapik clubs.
Animals rights groups often use graphic photos of the clubbing as part of their campaign to ban the hunt altogether as an inhumane exercise.
Sealers argue the hakapik is a device used for manoeuvring on the ice and dispatching seals where necessary by "crushing the hemisphere of the skull" to bleed them out.
Humane society representatives argue removing the hakapik would increase the suffering of seals because seals shot are often only wounded and the sealers would have to cut open live, conscious animals.
The politicians' argument is largely cosmetic and economic in nature, as a ban might persuade the European Union to ignore the pressure to ban the import of seal products. The seals are hunted for their fur, meat and oil, which is rich in omega 3 fatty acids.
Regrettably, most of the parties seem to be on parallel tracks and there isn't much chance of them finding common ground until all the parties begin to address the social movement which parades under the heading of "animal rights."
In his book Animal Liberation, Peter Singer states that the basic principle of equality does not require equal or identical treatment; it requires equal consideration.
This is an important distinction when talking about animal rights.
Should animals have rights? Singer simply answers, "Yes!" Animals surely deserve to live their lives free from suffering and exploitation.
Jeremy Bentham, the utilitarian moral philosopher, stated that when deciding on a being's rights, "the question is not 'can they reason?' nor 'can they talk?' but 'can they suffer?' "
Bentham pointed to the capacity for suffering as the vital characteristic that gives a being the right to equal consideration. All animals have the ability to suffer in the same way and to the same degree that humans do. They feel pain, pleasure, fear, frustration, loneliness and motherly love. Whenever we consider doing something that would interfere with their needs, we are morally obligated to take them into account.
As PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk has said, "When it comes to pain, love, joy, loneliness, and fear, a rat is a pig is a dog is a boy. Each one values his or her life and fights the knife."
Nevertheless, it turns out some animals are more equal than others. One would expect consistency would demand the condemnation of poisoning babies in the womb with a saline solution or cutting them up with surgical tools, but Newkirk and Singer don't believe human beings have the "right to life."
For Newkirk, that's a supremacist perversion. Singer argues that, since a pig may be more intelligent than a retarded child, it is all right to have an abortion, but not to eat bacon.
Philosophically, we should raise the question: Why should sentience or interest be the basis for a natural right? Why should a being's desires or interests entail a right to have them satisfied? Why should a being's capacity to experience pleasure or pain entail a right to have pain alleviated?
The only plausible criterion for acknowledging natural rights is that the being in question has obligations. If I have an obligation to do something, this entails a right that no one prevent me from fulfilling it, and a right to what I need to fulfill it.
Obligations, in turn, imply free choices and the corresponding ability to deliberate. Animals lack that ability. Human possess it. Human infants and mental defectives possess these abilities potentially; they are essentially rational. Animals are not.
We do have indirect obligations to animals arising from our obligation to act rationally, e.g. not cruelly, to respect how our actions affect other human beings and our obligation to respect all the cosmos.
Theologically, the arguments are much more telling and are based on the integrity of creation and responsible stewardship. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
"Animals are God's creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory. Thus men owe them kindness. God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image. Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.
"It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons."
While we are called to respect all creation and must use it wisely, the key is "we can use it."
Following the principle of stewardship, nothing is intrinsically wrong with using animals wisely for labour, transportation, clothing, food or other needs.
Fred Henry is the Roman Catholic Bishop of Calgary
© The Calgary Herald 2008
The ethical debate on our relationship to animals
Bishopfred Henry
Calgary Herald
Sunday, April 27, 2008
CREDIT: Paul Darrow, Reuters
A young harp seal rests on the ice off the coast of Cape Breton island, Nova Scotia.
Paul Watson, chief of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, reacting to the March 29th maritime death of four seal hunters, declared the death of seals a "greater tragedy."
This same individual, I quickly learned, had not been misquoted, but is famous or infamous for such comments --for instance, advocating a population-decimating cap of one billion people in our world and calling human beings "the AIDS of the Earth."
Federal and provincial politicians have entered the fray, suggesting the protest against Canada's annual seal hunt would be less effective if hunters were banned from clubbing animals to death. Apparently most animals are shot, but some are killed by blows from large spiked hakapik clubs.
Animals rights groups often use graphic photos of the clubbing as part of their campaign to ban the hunt altogether as an inhumane exercise.
Sealers argue the hakapik is a device used for manoeuvring on the ice and dispatching seals where necessary by "crushing the hemisphere of the skull" to bleed them out.
Humane society representatives argue removing the hakapik would increase the suffering of seals because seals shot are often only wounded and the sealers would have to cut open live, conscious animals.
The politicians' argument is largely cosmetic and economic in nature, as a ban might persuade the European Union to ignore the pressure to ban the import of seal products. The seals are hunted for their fur, meat and oil, which is rich in omega 3 fatty acids.
Regrettably, most of the parties seem to be on parallel tracks and there isn't much chance of them finding common ground until all the parties begin to address the social movement which parades under the heading of "animal rights."
In his book Animal Liberation, Peter Singer states that the basic principle of equality does not require equal or identical treatment; it requires equal consideration.
This is an important distinction when talking about animal rights.
Should animals have rights? Singer simply answers, "Yes!" Animals surely deserve to live their lives free from suffering and exploitation.
Jeremy Bentham, the utilitarian moral philosopher, stated that when deciding on a being's rights, "the question is not 'can they reason?' nor 'can they talk?' but 'can they suffer?' "
Bentham pointed to the capacity for suffering as the vital characteristic that gives a being the right to equal consideration. All animals have the ability to suffer in the same way and to the same degree that humans do. They feel pain, pleasure, fear, frustration, loneliness and motherly love. Whenever we consider doing something that would interfere with their needs, we are morally obligated to take them into account.
As PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk has said, "When it comes to pain, love, joy, loneliness, and fear, a rat is a pig is a dog is a boy. Each one values his or her life and fights the knife."
Nevertheless, it turns out some animals are more equal than others. One would expect consistency would demand the condemnation of poisoning babies in the womb with a saline solution or cutting them up with surgical tools, but Newkirk and Singer don't believe human beings have the "right to life."
For Newkirk, that's a supremacist perversion. Singer argues that, since a pig may be more intelligent than a retarded child, it is all right to have an abortion, but not to eat bacon.
Philosophically, we should raise the question: Why should sentience or interest be the basis for a natural right? Why should a being's desires or interests entail a right to have them satisfied? Why should a being's capacity to experience pleasure or pain entail a right to have pain alleviated?
The only plausible criterion for acknowledging natural rights is that the being in question has obligations. If I have an obligation to do something, this entails a right that no one prevent me from fulfilling it, and a right to what I need to fulfill it.
Obligations, in turn, imply free choices and the corresponding ability to deliberate. Animals lack that ability. Human possess it. Human infants and mental defectives possess these abilities potentially; they are essentially rational. Animals are not.
We do have indirect obligations to animals arising from our obligation to act rationally, e.g. not cruelly, to respect how our actions affect other human beings and our obligation to respect all the cosmos.
Theologically, the arguments are much more telling and are based on the integrity of creation and responsible stewardship. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
"Animals are God's creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory. Thus men owe them kindness. God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image. Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.
"It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons."
While we are called to respect all creation and must use it wisely, the key is "we can use it."
Following the principle of stewardship, nothing is intrinsically wrong with using animals wisely for labour, transportation, clothing, food or other needs.
Fred Henry is the Roman Catholic Bishop of Calgary
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Family dog kept lost tot warm, safe
Canwest News Service
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
When two-and-a-half-year-old Destiny King visits her aunt's farm, the farm's five-year-old collie follows her everywhere.
So on Monday evening when Destiny wandered into the rugged Ontario bush country, Shilo was right behind. And all through the night, as searchers in planes and on the ground combed the treacherous, rocky area for the missing child, Shilo stayed close, keeping Destiny warm and safe.
The collie's fur was still stuck to the child's tummy when rescuers found her at 5:20 a.m. Tuesday, three kilometres west of the farm, suggesting Shilo had curled around the girl to keep her warm on a night when the temperature fell close to zero.
Destiny told her parents Tuesday that she "went walking to find daddy." She said she became tired and sat down to rest, and that is where rescuers found her with Shilo, who ran away when the search dogs approached. By the time the family returned from the hospital late Tuesday morning Shilo was back at the farm.
"That dog was her saviour and her friend who stayed with her all the time that she was out in the bush," said Destiny's mother, Debbie King. "It was very scary. All I could do was pray that the good Lord above would bring her back home."
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Canwest News Service
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
When two-and-a-half-year-old Destiny King visits her aunt's farm, the farm's five-year-old collie follows her everywhere.
So on Monday evening when Destiny wandered into the rugged Ontario bush country, Shilo was right behind. And all through the night, as searchers in planes and on the ground combed the treacherous, rocky area for the missing child, Shilo stayed close, keeping Destiny warm and safe.
The collie's fur was still stuck to the child's tummy when rescuers found her at 5:20 a.m. Tuesday, three kilometres west of the farm, suggesting Shilo had curled around the girl to keep her warm on a night when the temperature fell close to zero.
Destiny told her parents Tuesday that she "went walking to find daddy." She said she became tired and sat down to rest, and that is where rescuers found her with Shilo, who ran away when the search dogs approached. By the time the family returned from the hospital late Tuesday morning Shilo was back at the farm.
"That dog was her saviour and her friend who stayed with her all the time that she was out in the bush," said Destiny's mother, Debbie King. "It was very scary. All I could do was pray that the good Lord above would bring her back home."
© The Calgary Herald 2008
A Prince Among Dogs
A family's four-legged friend nurses the sick back to health.
By Melody Carlson
No one ever knew it to look at him, but somehow this scraggly little black mutt managed to live up to his name: Prince.
Now, let it be known that we did not name him Prince. If he'd been our dog right from the start, we probably would have named him something much more appropriate, like Scruffy or Scrappy or Scamp. But no, he came to us with the name and "only for a short visit."
His owner, Julie, was an exchange student from Singapore, and she'd found the poor puppy literally lying in the street gutter. She told us how he'd been wet and cold and hungry, and despite her apartment's no pets rule, she had rescued him and taken him in. But after several weeks of hiding the forbidden dog, she brought him to our house "for a short visit."
"Just for a couple of weeks," she promised me, "until I can figure something else out."
But after we'd spent a couple of weeks doggy-sitting, our friend Julie pleaded with us to keep her doggy for good. "You have a yard and a fence," she pointed out. "And I'll come to visit every week."
Of course, she didn't have to push too hard since our boys (ages four and five at the time) had already fallen in love with this peppy little puppy. In fact, we were all taken by the sweet little mutt (a mix of Scotty and other terrier and who knew what else), but we weren't too crazy about the name. "Prince" sounded so formal—more like the name of a German shepherd, Great Dane, or Doberman pinscher. Not a scraggly little black mutt.
Just the same, our family adopted the dog "formerly known as Prince," and although we all tried to come up with a name more fitting, we seemed to be stuck with Prince.
Before too long Prince revealed some of his princely character to our family. It started when our younger son Luke was sick in bed with the flu. Now, Prince didn't usually go upstairs where the boys' rooms were. He usually stuck to me like glue since I was the one who fed him. But on this particular day he disappeared. When I went upstairs to take Luke some juice and check his fever, there was Prince, resting quietly beside my sick boy.
At first I thought maybe Prince was ill too (could dogs get the flu?). But his tail wagged happily when he saw me, and he seemed perfectly fine. He didn't leave Luke's side until Luke began feeling better. That's when I began wondering if we should start calling our dog "Dr. Prince."
Now, if this had happened only once, we might have chalked it up to a fluke or coincidence, but the same thing happened again and again. Whenever anyone in our family was sick, Prince would be right by that person's side, almost as if it was his job to take care of them until they recovered. It was incredible to see this normally active dog put aside his romping needs to display this kind of amazing canine compassion for an ailing family member.
But perhaps the most remarkable Prince memory I have is of the time one of our cats (which Prince normally had little use for) had been hit by a car. Pepper's injured leg was bandaged, and we put him in a cardboard box with a blanket, hoping he would rest and heal with time. And sure enough, when I went to check on Pepper's condition, there was Prince, right there in the box with him. He was peacefully curled up right next to Pepper, keeping the cat warm. It was the strangest thing to see. Even our other cat hadn't gone to that much trouble for his feline friend.
Our little Prince lived for nearly sixteen years. And he was loyal and true to our family the entire time. Even in his final days, when he was in pain and nearly blind, I knew that he would lay down his little life for any of us. By then we had all come to realize that his name hadn't been a mistake at all. Without a doubt, our little mutt had been named appropriately—for he truly was a Prince among dogs.
Excerpted from "A Prince Among Dogs: And Other Stories of the Dogs We Love," Edited by Callie Smith Grant. Published by Fleming H. Revell, a division of Baker Publishing Group. Copyright 2007 by Callie Smith Grant. Used with permission
A family's four-legged friend nurses the sick back to health.
By Melody Carlson
No one ever knew it to look at him, but somehow this scraggly little black mutt managed to live up to his name: Prince.
Now, let it be known that we did not name him Prince. If he'd been our dog right from the start, we probably would have named him something much more appropriate, like Scruffy or Scrappy or Scamp. But no, he came to us with the name and "only for a short visit."
His owner, Julie, was an exchange student from Singapore, and she'd found the poor puppy literally lying in the street gutter. She told us how he'd been wet and cold and hungry, and despite her apartment's no pets rule, she had rescued him and taken him in. But after several weeks of hiding the forbidden dog, she brought him to our house "for a short visit."
"Just for a couple of weeks," she promised me, "until I can figure something else out."
But after we'd spent a couple of weeks doggy-sitting, our friend Julie pleaded with us to keep her doggy for good. "You have a yard and a fence," she pointed out. "And I'll come to visit every week."
Of course, she didn't have to push too hard since our boys (ages four and five at the time) had already fallen in love with this peppy little puppy. In fact, we were all taken by the sweet little mutt (a mix of Scotty and other terrier and who knew what else), but we weren't too crazy about the name. "Prince" sounded so formal—more like the name of a German shepherd, Great Dane, or Doberman pinscher. Not a scraggly little black mutt.
Just the same, our family adopted the dog "formerly known as Prince," and although we all tried to come up with a name more fitting, we seemed to be stuck with Prince.
Before too long Prince revealed some of his princely character to our family. It started when our younger son Luke was sick in bed with the flu. Now, Prince didn't usually go upstairs where the boys' rooms were. He usually stuck to me like glue since I was the one who fed him. But on this particular day he disappeared. When I went upstairs to take Luke some juice and check his fever, there was Prince, resting quietly beside my sick boy.
At first I thought maybe Prince was ill too (could dogs get the flu?). But his tail wagged happily when he saw me, and he seemed perfectly fine. He didn't leave Luke's side until Luke began feeling better. That's when I began wondering if we should start calling our dog "Dr. Prince."
Now, if this had happened only once, we might have chalked it up to a fluke or coincidence, but the same thing happened again and again. Whenever anyone in our family was sick, Prince would be right by that person's side, almost as if it was his job to take care of them until they recovered. It was incredible to see this normally active dog put aside his romping needs to display this kind of amazing canine compassion for an ailing family member.
But perhaps the most remarkable Prince memory I have is of the time one of our cats (which Prince normally had little use for) had been hit by a car. Pepper's injured leg was bandaged, and we put him in a cardboard box with a blanket, hoping he would rest and heal with time. And sure enough, when I went to check on Pepper's condition, there was Prince, right there in the box with him. He was peacefully curled up right next to Pepper, keeping the cat warm. It was the strangest thing to see. Even our other cat hadn't gone to that much trouble for his feline friend.
Our little Prince lived for nearly sixteen years. And he was loyal and true to our family the entire time. Even in his final days, when he was in pain and nearly blind, I knew that he would lay down his little life for any of us. By then we had all come to realize that his name hadn't been a mistake at all. Without a doubt, our little mutt had been named appropriately—for he truly was a Prince among dogs.
Excerpted from "A Prince Among Dogs: And Other Stories of the Dogs We Love," Edited by Callie Smith Grant. Published by Fleming H. Revell, a division of Baker Publishing Group. Copyright 2007 by Callie Smith Grant. Used with permission
Dogs, Cats, and Other Angels
Sometimes the best teachers in our lives have four legs
and a tail.
By Martha Williamson
Not long ago I shared the sad experience of losing my puppy, Jackson Bear. It was a real horror story and many of you were so kind to offer me...
Watch video....
http://blog.beliefnet.com/MarthaWilliam ... ngels.html
Sometimes the best teachers in our lives have four legs
and a tail.
By Martha Williamson
Not long ago I shared the sad experience of losing my puppy, Jackson Bear. It was a real horror story and many of you were so kind to offer me...
Watch video....
http://blog.beliefnet.com/MarthaWilliam ... ngels.html
Woman sells house to clone dog
Five little Boogers well worth the $50,000, she says
Reuters
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
CREDIT: Jo Yong-Hak, Reuters
Californian Bernann McKinney hugs one of five puppies cloned from skin cells of her late, beloved pit bull terrier Booger. "It is a miracle for me," she told reporters.
SEOUL, South Korea - The loss of Booger the pit bull terrier was almost more than Bernann McKinney could bear.
Now she is happy, minus $50,000 and her house, and owner of five cloned Booger puppies.
"It is a miracle for me because I was able to smile again, laugh again and just feel alive again," McKinney told a news conference in the South Korean capital to show off the week-old black puppies -- all of whose names include the word Booger.
They are the work of the biotech firm RNL Bio, affiliated with the South Korean lab, which produced the world's first cloned dog and is staffed with former associates of disgraced scientist Hwang Woo-suk.
She sold her house in the United States to raise the $50,000 for RNL scientists to turn skin cells taken from Booger before he died two years ago into embryos carried by two surrogate dogs for two months until giving birth to the puppies last week.
"I had to make sacrifices and I dream of the day, someday, when everyone can afford to clone their pet because losing a pet is a terrible, terrible loss to anyone."
After rescuing him from a shelter 12 years ago, Booger had become an indispensable part of her life, said the 57-year-old Californian.
The lab said it hoped to make its technology more commercial along with its program to clone sniffer dogs for the Korean customs service.
"As of today, we are at the stage of receiving orders from anywhere in the world," RNL CEO Ra Jeongchan said.
RNL has said it expected to clone about 100 dogs next year and for the price to drop as technology improves.
Hwang has been on trial for more than two years on charges of breaking the law on research ethics and for misusing state funds and private donations.
RNL's research staff is made up of scientists who stayed behind when Hwang left the prestigious Seoul National University after his research results were found to be fraudulent.
- - -
Calgary Herald.com
See a photo gallery from the cloning of the puppies.
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/new ... e3dbb9f9d5
© The Calgary Herald 2008
Five little Boogers well worth the $50,000, she says
Reuters
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
CREDIT: Jo Yong-Hak, Reuters
Californian Bernann McKinney hugs one of five puppies cloned from skin cells of her late, beloved pit bull terrier Booger. "It is a miracle for me," she told reporters.
SEOUL, South Korea - The loss of Booger the pit bull terrier was almost more than Bernann McKinney could bear.
Now she is happy, minus $50,000 and her house, and owner of five cloned Booger puppies.
"It is a miracle for me because I was able to smile again, laugh again and just feel alive again," McKinney told a news conference in the South Korean capital to show off the week-old black puppies -- all of whose names include the word Booger.
They are the work of the biotech firm RNL Bio, affiliated with the South Korean lab, which produced the world's first cloned dog and is staffed with former associates of disgraced scientist Hwang Woo-suk.
She sold her house in the United States to raise the $50,000 for RNL scientists to turn skin cells taken from Booger before he died two years ago into embryos carried by two surrogate dogs for two months until giving birth to the puppies last week.
"I had to make sacrifices and I dream of the day, someday, when everyone can afford to clone their pet because losing a pet is a terrible, terrible loss to anyone."
After rescuing him from a shelter 12 years ago, Booger had become an indispensable part of her life, said the 57-year-old Californian.
The lab said it hoped to make its technology more commercial along with its program to clone sniffer dogs for the Korean customs service.
"As of today, we are at the stage of receiving orders from anywhere in the world," RNL CEO Ra Jeongchan said.
RNL has said it expected to clone about 100 dogs next year and for the price to drop as technology improves.
Hwang has been on trial for more than two years on charges of breaking the law on research ethics and for misusing state funds and private donations.
RNL's research staff is made up of scientists who stayed behind when Hwang left the prestigious Seoul National University after his research results were found to be fraudulent.
- - -
Calgary Herald.com
See a photo gallery from the cloning of the puppies.
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/new ... e3dbb9f9d5
© The Calgary Herald 2008
I don't know if our pir's meant haraam or not.
ejee sag poshakee meesak banaai
us maa(n)he bhareeye zamzam kuvekaa paanee
kutaa kabahee paak na hove
jo dhove so paanee.......................illaahee...........10
sag - heap,mass; dog posh - garment meesak - water bag
kutaa -
He made a water bag from the skin of a dog and filled it with water from the well of zamzam.
Dogs will never be pure even if they wash themselves with the water(of zamzam).
ejee sag poshakee meesak banaai
us maa(n)he bhareeye zamzam kuvekaa paanee
kutaa kabahee paak na hove
jo dhove so paanee.......................illaahee...........10
sag - heap,mass; dog posh - garment meesak - water bag
kutaa -
He made a water bag from the skin of a dog and filled it with water from the well of zamzam.
Dogs will never be pure even if they wash themselves with the water(of zamzam).
Ginans are allegorical and can have multiple layers of meanings. The context of this particular verse is not very clear and as a matter of fact besides the translation that you quoted, there is a a remark "TO BE CLARIFIED' in the source.AsadALLAH wrote:I don't know if our pir's meant haraam or not.
But MHI has pet dogs....
April 9, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
Humanity Even for Nonhumans
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
One of the historical election landmarks last year had nothing to do with race or the presidency. Rather, it had to do with pigs and chickens — and with overarching ideas about the limits of human dominion over other species.
I’m referring to the stunning passage in California, by nearly a 2-to-1 majority, of an animal rights ballot initiative that will ban factory farms from keeping calves, pregnant hogs or egg-laying hens in tiny pens or cages in which they can’t stretch out or turn around. It was an element of a broad push in Europe and America alike to grant increasing legal protections to animals.
Spain is moving to grant basic legal rights to apes. In the United States, law schools are offering courses on animal rights, fast-food restaurants including Burger King are working with animal rights groups to ease the plight of hogs and chickens in factory farms and the Humane Society of the United States is preparing to push new legislation to extend the California protections to other states.
At one level, this movement on behalf of oppressed farm animals is emotional, driven by sympathy at photos of forlorn pigs or veal calves kept in tiny pens. Yet the movement is also the product of a deep intellectual ferment pioneered by the Princeton scholar Peter Singer.
Professor Singer wrote a landmark article in 1973 for The New York Review of Books and later expanded it into a 1975 book, “Animal Liberation.” That book helped yank academic philosophy back from a dreary foray into linguistics and pushed it to confront such fascinating questions of applied ethics as: What are our moral obligations to pigs?
John Maynard Keynes wrote that ideas, “both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else.” This idea popularized by Professor Singer — that we have ethical obligations that transcend our species — is one whose time appears to have come.
“There’s some growth in numbers of vegetarians, but the bigger thing is a broad acceptance of the idea that animals count,” Mr. Singer reflected the other day.
What we’re seeing now is an interesting moral moment: a grass-roots effort by members of one species to promote the welfare of others. Legislation is playing a role, with Europe scheduled to phase out bare wire cages for egg production by 2012, but consumer consciences are paramount. It’s because of consumers that companies like Burger King and Hardee’s are beginning to buy pork and eggs from producers that give space to their animals.
For most of history, all of this would have been unimaginable even to people of the most refined ethical sensibility (granted, for many centuries those refined ethicists were also untroubled by slavery). A distinguished philosopher, Thomas Taylor, reacted to Mary Wollstonecraft’s 1792 call for “the rights of woman” by writing a mocking call for “the rights of brutes.” To him, it seemed as absurd that women should have rights as that animals should have rights.
One of the few exceptions was Jeremy Bentham, the philosopher who 200 years ago also advocated for women’s rights, gay rights and prison reform. He responded to Kant’s lack of interest in animals by saying: “The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?”
In recent years, the issue has entered the mainstream, but even for those who accept that we should try to reduce the suffering of animals, the question remains where to draw lines. I eagerly pushed Mr. Singer to find his boundaries. “Do you have any compunctions about swatting a cockroach?” I asked him.
“Not much,” he replied, citing reasons to doubt that insects are capable of much suffering. Mr. Singer is somewhat unsure about shellfish, although he mostly gives them the benefit of the doubt and tends to avoid eating them.
Free-range eggs don’t seem offensive to him, but there is the awkwardness that even wholesome egg-laying operations depend on the slaughtering of males, since a male chick is executed for every female allowed to survive and lay eggs.
I asked Mr. Singer how he would weigh human lives against animal lives, and he said that he wouldn’t favor executing a human to save any number of animals. But he added that he would be troubled by the idea of keeping one human alive by torturing 10,000 hogs to death.
These are vexing questions, and different people will answer them differently. For my part, I eat meat, but I would prefer that this practice not inflict gratuitous suffering.
Yet however we may answer these questions, there is one profound difference from past centuries: animal rights are now firmly on the mainstream ethical agenda.
Op-Ed Columnist
Humanity Even for Nonhumans
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
One of the historical election landmarks last year had nothing to do with race or the presidency. Rather, it had to do with pigs and chickens — and with overarching ideas about the limits of human dominion over other species.
I’m referring to the stunning passage in California, by nearly a 2-to-1 majority, of an animal rights ballot initiative that will ban factory farms from keeping calves, pregnant hogs or egg-laying hens in tiny pens or cages in which they can’t stretch out or turn around. It was an element of a broad push in Europe and America alike to grant increasing legal protections to animals.
Spain is moving to grant basic legal rights to apes. In the United States, law schools are offering courses on animal rights, fast-food restaurants including Burger King are working with animal rights groups to ease the plight of hogs and chickens in factory farms and the Humane Society of the United States is preparing to push new legislation to extend the California protections to other states.
At one level, this movement on behalf of oppressed farm animals is emotional, driven by sympathy at photos of forlorn pigs or veal calves kept in tiny pens. Yet the movement is also the product of a deep intellectual ferment pioneered by the Princeton scholar Peter Singer.
Professor Singer wrote a landmark article in 1973 for The New York Review of Books and later expanded it into a 1975 book, “Animal Liberation.” That book helped yank academic philosophy back from a dreary foray into linguistics and pushed it to confront such fascinating questions of applied ethics as: What are our moral obligations to pigs?
John Maynard Keynes wrote that ideas, “both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else.” This idea popularized by Professor Singer — that we have ethical obligations that transcend our species — is one whose time appears to have come.
“There’s some growth in numbers of vegetarians, but the bigger thing is a broad acceptance of the idea that animals count,” Mr. Singer reflected the other day.
What we’re seeing now is an interesting moral moment: a grass-roots effort by members of one species to promote the welfare of others. Legislation is playing a role, with Europe scheduled to phase out bare wire cages for egg production by 2012, but consumer consciences are paramount. It’s because of consumers that companies like Burger King and Hardee’s are beginning to buy pork and eggs from producers that give space to their animals.
For most of history, all of this would have been unimaginable even to people of the most refined ethical sensibility (granted, for many centuries those refined ethicists were also untroubled by slavery). A distinguished philosopher, Thomas Taylor, reacted to Mary Wollstonecraft’s 1792 call for “the rights of woman” by writing a mocking call for “the rights of brutes.” To him, it seemed as absurd that women should have rights as that animals should have rights.
One of the few exceptions was Jeremy Bentham, the philosopher who 200 years ago also advocated for women’s rights, gay rights and prison reform. He responded to Kant’s lack of interest in animals by saying: “The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?”
In recent years, the issue has entered the mainstream, but even for those who accept that we should try to reduce the suffering of animals, the question remains where to draw lines. I eagerly pushed Mr. Singer to find his boundaries. “Do you have any compunctions about swatting a cockroach?” I asked him.
“Not much,” he replied, citing reasons to doubt that insects are capable of much suffering. Mr. Singer is somewhat unsure about shellfish, although he mostly gives them the benefit of the doubt and tends to avoid eating them.
Free-range eggs don’t seem offensive to him, but there is the awkwardness that even wholesome egg-laying operations depend on the slaughtering of males, since a male chick is executed for every female allowed to survive and lay eggs.
I asked Mr. Singer how he would weigh human lives against animal lives, and he said that he wouldn’t favor executing a human to save any number of animals. But he added that he would be troubled by the idea of keeping one human alive by torturing 10,000 hogs to death.
These are vexing questions, and different people will answer them differently. For my part, I eat meat, but I would prefer that this practice not inflict gratuitous suffering.
Yet however we may answer these questions, there is one profound difference from past centuries: animal rights are now firmly on the mainstream ethical agenda.
-
star_munir
- Posts: 1670
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 12:55 am
- Contact:
The language of Ginan is figurative and symbolic. According to Abu Ali missionary's interpretation dog here refers to the person who is although loyal and faithful to Lord, but is enemy of his/her brother/sister.AsadALLAH wrote:I don't know if our pir's meant haraam or not.
ejee sag poshakee meesak banaai
us maa(n)he bhareeye zamzam kuvekaa paanee
kutaa kabahee paak na hove
jo dhove so paanee.......................illaahee...........10
sag - heap,mass; dog posh - garment meesak - water bag
kutaa -
He made a water bag from the skin of a dog and filled it with water from the well of zamzam.
Dogs will never be pure even if they wash themselves with the water(of zamzam).
There is a waez on explanation of this Ginan. You may listen it, if you want.