Christianity and Morals by Edward Westermarck

IT has been alleged in a review of a recent book, in which Buddha and Christ are quoted as the highest exemplars of the ideals of love, that "the author betrays either his ignorance of the teaching of Jesus, or his prejudice against Christianity, when he adds: 'In Buddha one finds the more universal sympathy, extending as it does to brute as well as to human life'; for even if Jesus did not give specific instructions on the treatment of animals, do not His references to God's care for the flowers of the field and the birds of the air, God's knowledge of the fall of every sparrow, the shepherd's grief at the loss of one sheep, as an analogy of God's love for every sinner; the lifting of the ox or the ass out of the pit on a Sabbath day, imply that universal sympathy?" I do not see how these cases can be compared at all with Buddha's rules regarding the treatment of animals. A disciple of his may not knowingly deprive any creature of life, not even a worm or an ant; he may not drink water in which animal life of any kind whatever is contained, nor pour it out on grass or clay. And the doctrine which forbids the killing of animate beings is not only professed, but in a large measure followed, by the great majority of people in Buddhistic countries. In Siam the tameness of many living creatures which in Europe fly from the presence of man is very striking. Instances have been known in which natives have quitted the service of Europeans on account of their unwillingness to destroy reptiles and vermin, and it is a not uncommon practice for rich Siamese to buy live fish to have the merit of restoring them to the sea. In Burma, though fish is one of the staple foods of the people, the fisherman is despised; not so much, perhaps, as if he killed other living things, but he is still an outcast from decent society, and "will have to suffer great and terrible punishment before he can be cleansed from the sins that he daily commits." The Buddhists of Ceylon are more forbearing: they excuse the fisherman by saying that he does not kill the fish, but only removes it from the water. In Tibet all dumb creatures are treated with humanity, and the taking of animal life is rather strictly prohibited, except in the case of yaks and sheep needed for food. Owing to the coldness of the climate, flesh forms an essential staple of diet; but the butchers are regarded as professional sinners and are therefore the most despised of all classes in Tibet. Wild animals and even small birds and fish are seldom or never killed, on account of the religious penalties attached to this crime.

Great regard for the lower animal world is also found in other Oriental religions. According to Brahmanism, tenderness towards all creatures is a duty incumbent upon the four castes. It is said that "he who injures innoxious beings from a wish to give himself pleasure, never finds happiness, neither living nor dead." If a blow is struck against an animal in order to give it pain, the judge shall inflict a fine in proportion to the amount of pain caused, just as if the blow had been struck against a man. The killing of various creatures, including fish and snakes, reduces the offender to a mixed caste; and, according to the 'Vishńu Puráńa,' fishermen go after death to the same hell as awaits prisoners, incendiaries, and treacherous friends. To kill a cow is a great crime; whereas he who unhesitatingly abandons life for the sake of a cow is freed even from the guilt of the murder of a Brâhmana, and so is he who saves the life of a cow. Among many of the Hindus the slaughter of a cow excites more horror than the killing of a man, and is punished with great severity, even with death.