sheepdog wrote:Right on! The Abolitionist is essentially one who gives up attachments to all things. Like the Buddhist who has given up attachment to all things, she thereby, as an immediate result, becomes attached to Life, as opposed to the welfarist, who must hold onto his attachments -- to things, to animals -- and as a result destroys Life, as we obviously see by the wholesale destruction of our natural environment. The Abolitionist is so attached to Life that she can even give up her need to use or own animals, because the use and ownership of animals leads to the destruction of Life and the Abolitionist is attached only and completely to Life alone.AnimalFriendly wrote:Reading threads like this makes me want to go full-on buddhist and give up attachments to all things.
Abolition means to leave them alone. Completely. To take no part in the lives of animals. There is no "doing good" for them. Whatever we do to them, is done to them, and it is not for us to decide what is to be done to them, just as it is not for me to decide what is to be done to you. That is the release of all attachments.
I don't know how many people here realize the deep and far-reaching implications of Abolition, both spiritually and practically. It is a radical change of consciousness. You should recognize the significant evolution that you have accomplished.
You're funny. Attachment to life is still an attachment. I'm not even attached to that.
I'm writing a blog for PBS.org, to tie in with an upcoming episode on orphaned cheetahs. I deal a little bit with attachment and how it complicates things in our relationships with animals, and how we should just leave them alone.
