Cruelty in the name of the gods

Raju and Sindu with their mothers at the orphanage (inset) Diyawadane Nilame Nilanga Dela

By Risidra Mendis

The Sri Dalada Maligawa that houses the sacred tooth relic and a place that is worshipped by thousands of locals and foreigners has today become a torture ground for two innocent baby tuskers.

While Buddhists and devotees worship Lord Buddha and the many gods of the devales at the Temple of the tooth relic, Diyawadane Nilame Nilange Dela stands accused of inflicting cruelty on two baby tuskers Raju and Sindu to tame them and present them to the Asgiriya and Malwatte Mahanayakes on August 7.

Despite President Mahinda Rajapakse attempting to revoke his initial order and take the two baby elephants back to Pinnawela, The Sunday Leader reliably learns that the Mahanayakes of the two chapters have prevailed on the President not to retract on his promise.

Inflicting cruelty

The Mahanayakes who are responsible for protecting and preaching Buddhism are allegedly supporting Dela to inflict cruelty on Raju and Sindu. Photos of Dela hitting one of the baby tuskers with a long pole was released to the media recently. According to reliable sources Dela allegedly used heated iron rods to burn the baby tuskers to get them to obey his orders.

The Pinnawela elephant orphanage has 88 elephants and three tuskers (not born at the orphanage). While 50 elephants were born at Pinnawela 65 were previously released to temples.

On July 25 the two baby tuskers were forcibly taken away from Pinnawela. According to eyewitness accounts Dela had arrived with around 50 policemen and forcibly taken the babies away.

Director National Zoological Gardens Duminda Jayaratne also helped Dela achieve his goal by ordering the veterinary surgeons at the orphanage to tranquilise the baby tuskers in the night. A veterinary surgeon said elephants and especially baby elephants are not tranquilised at night as it could be dangerous to their lives.

Tranquilise the babies

However according to reliable sources Jayaratne has ignored all safety measures and ordered the veterinary surgeons to tranquilise the two babies. The director had then left half way through the operation. Was Jayaratne bowing to political pressure and acting like a political stooge to save his job, or was he afraid of Dela's threats when he put the lives of two baby tuskers at risk last week?

Eyewitnesses at the scene said the two baby elephants once tranquilised, struggled to get to their mothers. Dela had refused to sign the document for the release of the two babies and it was the driver of vehicle No. 226-9308 Saman Sisira, who signed for the release of the two babies at the gate. The babies were wounded and one had broken its tusk after he was taken to the Maligawa.

Secretary to the Cabinet D. Wijesinghe and Additional Secretary G. Hapangama having signed the Cabinet paper for the release of the two elephants are now silent on this issue. The Sunday Leader learns that Wijesinghe has told zoo officials that this is an order from the top and not to interfere in this matter.

On whose orders?

The question is whose orders are these government officials following? Is it President Mahinda Rajapakse's, the Mahanayakes or Dela? President Rajapakse responding to letters sent by the Sanga, veterinary surgeons, zoo officials and animal rights activists issued a statement to return the two babies to their mothers.

However The Sunday Leader learns that due to pressure from the Mahanayakes the president has reversed his order. It was President Rajapakse who took a decision to stop the gruesome gassing of stray dogs in the country. It remains to be seen if the President a strong Buddhist himself, will save these two innocent babies from such inhuman treatment in the name of Buddhism and humanity or take the advice of the two Mahanayakes.

Hitting with poles

President Young Zoologists' Association (YZA) Pubudu Weeraratne said one baby is tied to a coconut tree within the premises of Dela's house and the other is being kept in a garage. Having been separated from their mothers at less than three years, the two babies are not even allowed to be together.

"Dela has started hitting the two baby tuskers with poles to tame them. He has also used heated iron rods on the animals to get them to obey. The babies' food consists of coconut and kitul branches. They are not given milk. This food is un-suitable for baby elephants.

"We hear that the babies are not eating this food and are being given saline. Whenever another elephant goes past, they scream in pain for their mothers.

"Pinnawela officials are taking measures to drain out the milk from the mothers to reduce the discomfort caused to the animals. It is vital that these two animals remain at Pinnawela for breeding purposes. Dela has disgraced the entire Buddhist community by what he has done," Weeraratne said.

Taken away in the night

Coordinator Elephant Conservation Forum Shantha Jayaweera said this was the first time that two baby tuskers (the first to be born at Pinnawela) were taken away from the orphanage in the night. "In 1950 a tusker was shot by the government. This is the second time in the history of the country that such cruelty is imposed on two baby tuskers. Dela initially had picked two elephants of ten and 11 years.

"However, when he realised that these two babies were tuskers he allegedly threatened Pinnawela officials and forcibly took them away. He also took two mahouts from the orphanage to be with the babies. If by any chance the animals are harmed he will blame the two mahouts," Jayaweera said.

Speaking to The Sunday Leader Zoologist Dilan Peiris said it is important that the tooth relic is taken in a casket on the back of an elephant in a perahera. "After the perahera these temple elephants are used for hard labour and safaris. They are used to carry logs and taken in the hot sun for safaris. The cruelty imposed on these two babies is a shame to all Buddhists and Buddhism. Inflicting cruelty and taming an elephant to be taken in a perahera is not acceptable in Buddhism," Peiris said.

A punishable offence

Environmentalist Lawyer Jagath Gunewardene says according to a Cabinet paper a request was made for two baby elephants to be gifted to the Malwatte and Asgiriya Mahanayakes. "The cabinet paper does not specifically say two tuskers. When the government took a decision to send a baby elephant to Armenia a court order was issued that babies under five years should not be separated from their mothers," Gunewardene said.

He added that according to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance (CAO) the torture of animals is a punishable offence.

According to Gunewardene the police can take into custody any person who violates this law without a warrant. "We are asking Jayaratne and Lokuge to release the two tuskers to their mothers. In the name of Buddhism we are asking that these animals be released. If elephants are needed for peraheras they can be hired out by Pinnawela and brought back. Brigadier H.A.N.T Perera when he was director of the zoo had said, that at least 60 elephants from the orphanage could be trained and hired out for peraheras," Gunewardene said.

Gunewardene said all wildlife is the property of the state and the state agency that deals with Wildlife is the Department of Wildlife and Conservation (DWC). "All animals in physical custody of the Zoological Department cannot be disposed of even by the minister-in- charge without a permit from the Director of Wildlife. Doing so would be an offence according to the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPA).

However Director DWC Ananda Wijesooriya said his department deals with only wild elephants and not captive ones. Elephants at the orphanage are not wild, so I don't have to issue a permit for elephants to be taken from Pinnawela," Wijesooriya said.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------

"It was a cabinet decision"

Public Recreation Minister Gamini Lokuge said that based on a cabinet decision the two baby elephants were taken from Pinnawela. "The baby elephants are to be gifted to the Mahanayakes. The Mahanyakes went to the orphanage and selected these baby tuskers. The babies were brought to the Dalada Maligawa and kept there to get used to the climate and its surrounding. We have no intention of separating the babies from the mothers. Once the babies are gifted to the Mahanayakes they will be taken back to the orphanage and entrusted to their mothers. When the babies are big enough to take part in peraheras they will be brought back to the temples," Lokuge said.

Lokuge denied reports that Dela was torturing the babies to make them tame before being presented to the Mahanayakes. Despite the photos showing Dela hitting a baby elephant with a pole, Lokuge said he wanted to see the photos before he could comment on the issue.

Lokuge said according to the cabinet decision any animals could be chosen from the orphanage. Commenting on a court order that says that no baby elephant can be separated from its mother until it is over five years old, Lokuge said this was applicable only to elephants who were being sent to foreign countries.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------

Diyawadana Nilame uncontactable

Diyawadana Nilame Nilange Dela was unavailable for comment despite repeated attempts by The Sunday Leader to contact him.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------

FR case filed

A fundamental rights case was filed in the Supreme Court by animal rights' activist Sargarica Rajakarunanayake on Friday (31) asking that the two baby tuskers be immediately returned to their mothers for the sake of their well being.


------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

http://www.thesundayleader.lk/20090802/investigation.HTM

Vegan Buddhist nuns have same bone density as non-vegetarians

A study comparing the bone health of 105 post-menopausal vegan
Buddhist nuns and 105 non-vegetarian women, matched in every other
physical respect, has produced a surprising result. Their bone density
was identical.

The study was led by Professor Tuan Nguyen from Sydney’s Garvan
Institute of Medical Research. He collaborated with Dr Ho-Pham Thuc
Lan from the Pham Ngoc Thach Medical University in Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam. Their findings are now published online in Osteoporosis
International.

“For the 5% of people in Western countries who choose to be
vegetarians, this is very good news,” said Professor Nguyen. “Even
vegans, who eat only plant-based foods, appear to have bones as
healthy as everyone else.”

“Bone health in vegetarians, particularly vegans, has been a concern
for some time, because as a group they tend to have a lower protein
and calcium intake than the population at large.”

“In this work we showed that although the vegans studied do indeed
have lower protein and calcium intakes, their bone density is
virtually identical to that of people who eat a wide variety of foods,
including animal protein.”

--
full story:
http://insciences.org/article.php?article_id=4342

WHAT WOULD GOD SAY ABOUT FUR?

WHAT WOULD GOD SAY ABOUT FUR?

Whoever one may conceive as one's Creator, Greatness is the first thing that comes to our minds and hearts. In the animal rights community, there is much controversy about religion as they all seem to relegate animal to the condition of non-sentient beings merely for human use.

These questions continue being asked but no satisfactory answer has ever been provided. The very fact that animals suffer so horrifically in the hands of humans, with the blessings of religion leaders, has allienated millions of people from religion. The quest for the truth prevail as it is unconscionable the idea that God in His perfection would permit so much perversity against his defenseless creation. Below are some interesting interpretations and references regarding humans v. non-humans:

by Richard Schwartz, Ph.D.

Professor Emeritus, Mathematics

College of Staten Island

Staten Island, NY 10314 USA

Phone: (718) 761-5876

Fax: (718) 982-3631

schwartz@jewishveg.com



According to Professor Schwarts, God Does Not condone mistreatment of animals--anywhere on the Bible. Here's what Dr. Schwarts wrote specifically about the use of fur as clothing:



THE PAIN OF FUR-BEARING ANIMALS

Fur is obtained from animals who are either trapped or raised on ranches. Both involve treatment of animals that appears to be far from the Jewish teachings that have been previously discussed: Animals caught in steel-jaw leg hold traps suffer slow, agonizing deaths. Some are attacked by predators, freeze to death, or chew off their own legs to escape. It has been said that one can get a "feel for fur" by slamming your fingers in a car door. A Canadian Wildlife service report gives an idea of the terror that trapped animals face and their desperate efforts to escape: The stomachs of [trapped] arctic foxes . . . often contain parts of their own bodies. They may swallow fragments of their teeth broken off in biting the trap, and sometimes part of a mangled foot; almost every stomach contains some fox fur, and a considerable number contain pieces of skin, claws, or bits of bone.



Over 100 million wild animals are killed for their pelts every year. Many species of animals killed for their furs have become endangered or have disappeared completely from some localities.Millions of animals not wanted by trappers, including dogs, cats, and birds, die in traps annually and are discarded as "trash animals." Many trapped animals leave behind dependent offspring who are doomed to starvation.



Treatment of animals raised on "fur ranches" is also extremely cruel. Confined to lifelong confinement, millions of foxes, beavers, minks, ocelots, rabbits, chinchillas, and other animals await extinction nothing to do, little room to move, and all their natural instincts thwarted. The animals are simply a means to the maximizing of production and profit, and there is no regard for their physical, mental, or emotional well being. Because of the enforced confinement and lack of privacy, naturally wild animals often exhibit neurotic behaviors such as compulsive movements and self mutilation. The animals finally suffer hideous deaths by electrocution by rods thrust up their anuses, by suffocation, by poisoning, which causes painful muscle cramping, or by having their necks broken.



According to the International Society for Animal Rights, Inc.,to make one fur garment requires 400 squirrels; 240 ermine; 200 chinchillas; 120 muskrats; 80 sables; 50 martens; 30 raccoons; 22 bobcats; 12 lynx; or 5 wolves.



IS FUR NECESSARY?



Judaism puts human beings on a higher level than animals and indicates that animals may be harmed and even killed if an essential human need is met. However, is the wearing of fur truly necessary for people to stay warm during wintry weather? There are many non-fur coats and hats, available in a variety of styles, that provide much warmth. Imitation fur is produced at such a high level of quality that even among Chasidim there is a small but growing trend to wear synthetic "shtreimlach" (fur-trimmed hats).



Based on the prohibition of tsa'ar ba'alei chayim, Rabbi Chaim Dovid Halevy, Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv issued a p'sak (rabbinic ruling) in March, 1992, indicating that Jews should not wear fur. Rabbi Halevy asked: "Why should people be allowed to kill animals if it is not necessary, simply because they desire the pleasure of having the beauty and warmth of fur coats? Is it not possible to achieve the same degree of warmth without fur?"



In his book, The Jewish Encyclopedia of Moral and Ethical Issues, Rabbi Nachum Amsel, a modern Israeli educator, states: "If the only reason a person wears the fur coat is to "show off" one's wealth or to be a mere fashion statement, that would be considered to be a frivolous and not a legitimate need. Rabbi Amsel also points out that hunting for sport is prohibited because it is not considered a legitimate need (Avodah Zarah 18b).



"Even though you make many prayers,I will not listen. Your hands are full of blood. (Isaiah 1:12-15)"



What kind of lesson in Jewish values are young people getting when they see worshippers coming to synagogue in fur coats on the Sabbath day? Not only do animals benefit from our compassion and concern -- we, too, benefit by becoming more sensitive and more humane, as Jews and civilized human beings. Learn more from this link: http://jewishveg.com/schwartz/index.html



ISLAM & ANIMALS:



As with other religions, what Islam teaches about animals and what followers believe and do are often at odds.



Mohammed most expressly outlined his view of the human obligation toward animals in Hadith 3:551, related by his disciple Abu Huraira, who was well-known for his own love of animals.



According to Abu Huraira, "Allah's Apostle said, 'While a man was walking he felt thirsty and went down a well and drank water from it. On coming out of it, he saw a dog panting and eating mud because of excessive thirst. The man said, 'This (dog) is suffering from the same problem as that of mine. So he went down again into the well, filled his shoe with water, caught hold of it with his teeth, and climbed up and watered the dog. Allah thanked him for

his good deed and forgave him.' The people asked, 'O Allah's Apostle! Is there a reward for us in serving (the) animals?' He replied, "Yes, there is a reward for serving any animal."



Hadith 3:551 is perhaps the most emphatic mandate for humane work to be found in any of the primary religious texts of any of the Abrahamic religions.



But Abu Huraira narrated a similar incident to which Mohammed accorded even greater significant. According to Huraira in Hadith 4:538, "Allah's Apostle said, 'A prostitute was forgiven by Allah, because, passing by a panting dog near a well and seeing that the dog

was about to die of thirst, she took off her shoe, and tying it with her head-cover she drew out some water for it. So, Allah forgave her because of that."



Hadith 4:538 promises specific forgiveness of sin to those who help animals, even if the sin is as grave as prostitution is considered to be within Islam, and is compounded by the prostitute having removed her head covering. These are offenses which in parts

of the Islamic world are still punished by stoning or flogging.



In essence, Hadith 4:538 states that practicing compassion for animals is more important than obedience to even some of themost basic social norms. Hadith 4:538 indicates as a cultural goal the education of a society in which everyone is compassionate toward

animals, and therefore no one is stoned or flogged.



Reconciling these teachings with the traditional views that Islam requires animal sacrifice at Ramadan and that Mohammed forbade keeping pet dogs is not as difficult as is commonly believed.



As Al-Hafiz B.A. Masri detailed in his 1987 opus Animals In Islam, recently republished by the Islamic Foundation & Compassion In World Farming, the purpose of Ramadan sacrifice is to share food, as charity, and Mohammed himself outlined other options to the

faithful. The Islamic obligation is to charity, not to slaughter.



Attention to the evolution of language meanwhile indicates that the original meaning of the prohibition on "keeping" a dog pertained to keeping a dog unnecessarily confined, with exemptions outlined for working dogs whose use would require confinement at certain times. This is consistent with Mohammed's often expressed objection to keeping any species confined in a manner causing the animal to suffer.

--

Merritt Clifton

Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

P.O. Box 960

Clinton, WA 98236



Telephone: 360-579-2505

Fax: 360-579-2575

E-mail: anmlpepl@whidbey.com

Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org







JAINISM

JANAISM & COMPASSION TOWARDS ALL LIVING BEINGS:

by Ruth Eisenberg



"The Jain religion is indigenous to India and is one of the oldest religions known to man. It's uniqueness lies in it's total adherence to the principle of Ahimsa - non-violence to all beings. In keeping with this principle Jains are strict vegetarians and do not wear leather, fur or silk, as these products result inviolence to other beings.



Historically Jains have proven to be a religious group that has lived in harmony with animals. During the time when it was common practise in other religions to sacrifice animals to God, the Jains spoke out against this practise. Jain scriptures specifically prohibit animal sacrifice. In addition the Jains were the first cultural/religious group to establish animal shelters

and to this day run them in India.



Jainism is similar to Buddhism in some ways. There are spiritual leaders, as Buddha was, in Jainism whose views and teachings if followed, ultimately lead to liberation of the soul. It differs from Buddhism in that it considers each soul unique and eternal. Every living being (soul) is responsible for it's own actions. Negative karma will result if one practises violence of thought, words or action. Good karmas result from compassionate and loving behavior, but the

ideal is to eventually shed all karmas and attain liberation.



It is because of the belief that every living being has a soul that Jainism teaches complete non-violence to all living beings. The following is a quote from the Acharanga sutra, words of Mahavir, the last great Jain teacher:



"For there is nothing inaccessible for death. All

beings are fond of life, hate pain, like pleasure,

shun destruction, like life, long to live. To all

life is dear." Jain Acharanga Sutra."



Jainism is unequivocal: the harming or killing of a living being for any reason is to be consciously avoided." For additional information please refer to the following website:



http://www.jainworld.com/philosophy/non-violence.asp