Uh Oh ....There goes the neighbourhood......
Shoshin
No one in particularNowhere Special Veteran
Kia Ora,
More friendly banter but with a somewhat serious twist (but not too serious I hope).....
I had just written a fairly long post but then accidently deleted it(or was it just karma ?), so here's the short version...
This thread was inspired by Earthninja's thread on "Moral Dilemma" which reminded me of an article I read a few years back about a Buddhist who was up on a 'cruelty to animals' charge, it was to do with him keeping stray cats on his property, some were in very poor health and he wouldn't have them humanely put down by the vets...
Given the "Do no harm" approach to living that many (but not all) Buddhists try to live by, would a somewhat devout Buddhist practitioner make a good neighbour ? After all no loud all-night parties, no swearing, arguing stealing, violence etc etc, just peace, smiles and serenity, but one must take into account the no kill policy, which would mean if a rodent infestation occurs on their property, they would not call in pest control or put down poisons to kill them, ok they might try live humane cage trapping, but then they have to release them in an area where they will not be detrimental to the native flora & fauna (which I might add is no easy task)...Their property and their neighbours could end up being overrun with rodents...
So under the circumstances... Who in their right mind would like a devout Buddhist for a neighbour ? .
.. :scratch: ..
A Buddhist moving in down the street "Uh Oh There goes the neighbourhood!" ,, 
..
Metta Shoshin 
Comments
Reminds me of the time I entered Wat Arun in Thonburi, Thailand...through the back gate. Minga...the odor of cat pee was rife. Turns out when Thais want to get rid of a cat or dog it is not uncommon of them to simply give the animal to the temple so that no harm comes to the animal. Those odors are not uncommon at some Thai temples.
Kia Ora@vinlyn,
It's interesting especially when one takes into account the possibility of some of the animals having rabies...
Metta Shoshin
I think your view of "devout": might be just a tad blinkered.
I know people who I would call devout, who have house parties that can get loud (they like Zepplin, and Floyd). They drink. They smoke a little pot (remember it's legal for recreational use here). Despite these proclivities, these folks, the ones I'm thinking of, are the most commited, studied, and practiced Buddhists I know.
They aren't my neighbors, but I wish they were. My neighbors are pretty dull.
Buddhist 'Practice' is a question of individual choice and interpretation. We already have a thread, (as you pointed out) which discusses the personal perception and definition/interpretation of the Precepts, so I'm not going to duplicate that discussion here;
Suffice to say that I personally, think nothing of swatting flies and mosquitoes, (they harbour and carry all manner of filthy diseases) and will do whatever necessary to rid an animal of a flea infestation or ticks (ditto likewise).
I can't be too precious about it.
I don't honestly know if I can - or should - categorise such insects as 'sentient beings', but anything with two/four legs, a sensory system and a backbone is "higher up the scale" as far as I am concerned.
But that doesn't stop me from taking appropriate measures with regard to their treatment and care.
I adore animals - I'm a Dog Behaviourist, and believe me when I tell you, given the choice of human or canine company, give me Fido, the vast majority of the time - but I also have a responsibility to those I live with, and among.
Yes, some doctors do recommend a rabies vaccination if a Westerner will live in Thailand. Those soi dogs can be cantankerous.
Boring Buddhist neighbours would suit me. I have one next door neighbour who is culturally a non practicing Buddhist. When I was just beginning meditating yesterday early morning, some all night partying neighbours were loudly, drunkenly singing, 'Still have not found what I am looking for . . .'
Made me LOL.
Must have been future Buddhas . . .
I know people who I would call devout, who have house parties that can get loud (they like Zepplin, and Floyd). They drink. They smoke a little pot (remember it's legal for recreational use here). Despite these proclivities, these folks, the ones I'm thinking of, are the most commited, studied, and practiced Buddhists I know.
Kia Ora Chaz,
I guess our definition of devout differs somewhat....But that's ok....
Metta Shoshin
Kia Ora @lobster,
I'm a boring ol' Buddhist neighbour, no partying, loud noises, etc etc, however my neighbour stopped me in the street the other day to tell me how nice the smell of incense was that was coming from my flat, he said it reminded him of his time in Asia ...I use to light the incense to cover up the smell of ganja .:D .. ...I no longer indulge in Jah herb, so nowadays it's just pure incense smoke that he can smell ...
Metta Shoshin
yeah.
Right.....
.
I can't determine what 'devout' would be for other Buddhists, so in my case, living on a small farm, I cope with this issue on a daily basis. Being mindful and respectful to all living creatures (including the human neighors) is not something to consider lightly.
I have to respect the tastes and basic health of my neighbors; if a mouse skitters across my kitchen floor, I go looking for mouse holes and let my cats take care of it while other people would want to bleach their whole house and squeal and cringe on a table top. It would not meet my definition of 'devout' to be a proximal cause of someone else's hysteria erm, hygienic notions. I have a very high tolerance for living creatures in spite of my own irritation, but what is mindful and compassionate about grossing out the neighbors?
In case I sound casual about basic cleanliness and contagion, I am, but I won't inflict it on YOU no matter how sure I am you are fantasizing about invisible just-the-thought-of-the-mouse-in-my-house cooties.
I'm fastidious about cleanliness, hygiene and washing, particularly when I'm cooking and preserving pickles.... it's imperative everything is clean and sterile, otherwise, the whole process could be ruined and you waste and throw away good food.... However, I'm not too mad-keen on sweeping the floor every day, or vacuuming the carpets....
Cook? Definitely.
"Housewife"...? Mmmmm...not so much....
Your neighbors make the neighborhood what it is.
One bad neighbor can sour what another good neighbor can grace and vise versa.
A neighbor who understands ceasing from evil, doing only good and purifying their heart/mind sounds fine to me.
That reminds me @Shoshin of another neighbour who does smoke Ganga and drink and is a devout hedonist . . .
One day I was Skyping a Sufi friend in Israel. I was sitting by an open window next to the neighbours garden. My Israeli friend would regularly smoke with Palestinians, partly to ease the pain of a diving accident. To my amazement, the Skype connection was so good I could smell the Ganga. I mentioned this to my Jewish friend over the internet phone service. My comment must have amused my neighbour, who must have heard, 'I can smell the Ganga from here.' He was probably in the garden having a surreptitious spliff. Either that or Skype is really, really good . . .
Have not caught a whiff of weed since . . . great neighbour.
.
rodents are not a problem.
If anybody have a similar solution to mosquitoes? Please?
Kia Ora@Victorious,
I use to deal with these types of devices when they were first on the market back in the 90s , they remind me of the Mosquito teen deterrent...
Metta Shoshin
Kia Ora federica,
Well let's just say _most_of the time it's pure incense.... .
...
Metta Shoshin
A devout Buddhist would make it so that a rodent infestation does not even happen in the first place.
They would be very good neighbors! A devout Buddhist insistent on a no kill policy would understand the cause and effect relationship of rodent infestations and would remove the cause so they are not put in that precarious position to begin with. 
But even if they were, live trapping and relocating rodents is not detrimental to the native flora and fauna because the rodents themselves are the native fauna! Live trapping rarely, if ever, leads to a whole neighborhood becoming infested.
And what if a devout Buddhist community takes over an old house and it becomes clear that it has a substantial rat population ? Which is exactly what happened at Samye-Ling in Scotland.
On another point neither the Brown or Black Rat is native to the UK.
They were introduced by trading ships and have done enormous damage to the native mammal, reptile and bird population ever since.
That's their decision. Has nothing to do with any of us.
Extraordinary. You said " a devout Buddhist would make it so that a rodent infestation would not happen in the first place " which itself is an argument so specious as to be breath taking.
You then go on to dismiss a scenario where devout Buddhists buy an old house and find that it comes with rat population... after they have moved in. Which I would guess is far from unique.
A resident rat population would particularly welcome a vegetarian tenant..they are veggies themselves...
You did not address the fact at all that rats are not part of the natural fauna of Europe. despite your claim to the contrary.
They originated from Asia and were accidently imported by human beings.
The reality is that the monks who founded Samye-Ling discovered that they had a rat population.
They also had a visit from local authorities who were checking to see whether they should be allowed to cook and serve food to people on retreat .
So, what were their options ?
>
I could not disagree with this statement any more than I do, if I tried.
Wrong.
EVERYTHING has something 'to do with us' by a process of separation.
Just as ripples in a pond spread outwards, everything that happens to nature, the ecology and the locations we occupy, is the responsibility of everyone who deems that they have 'a right to be where they are'.
@Citta If all you want to do is argue just for the sake of arguing, have at it! I'm not interested.
What I meant was how they decide to follow the precepts or not, has no bearing on how you or I decide to follow the precepts. Following or not following the precepts, in some particular manner, is one's own decision, not someone elses.
No, I am interested in peoples responses to the dilemma that the Samye Ling monks found themselves in.
I suggested that for Buddhists to buy a house and find that it has rats, mice, fleas , pigeons etc is probably quite common.
My wife and I rented an expensive apartment temporarily and when summer came hundreds of fleas emerged from the fitted carpet..the owner of the apartment had kept cats there.
The flea eggs had lain dormant.
I was also pointing out that releasing rats into the wild may or may not be a good thing, but either way they are not native.
I googled and they are not native to the USA either.
They arrived there in the same way as they arrived in Europe.
You're just interested in arguing...
Look who's talking! It takes 2 to tango, so why don't we all sit this one out?
Go to the bar, buy an orange juice, with ice, sit, sip through a straw, and chill...
Signed, ~The Barmaid ~
I am hoping that someone else might be interested in the dilemma that the Samye-Ling monks found themselves in.
They bought an old house..ironically it was an old Hunting Lodge..
They bought it as a base for retreats for lay people.
Opening it to the public, and in particular providing meals, meant that it had to comply to UK Health And Safety Laws and had to be inspected before being opened to the public.
They discovered that there was a well established rat colony in the main house.
When food was put out during ritual pujas the rats would pour out en masse..
Would would you have done if you were them ?
I would have called in the exterminators and made offerings/prayers for the rats.
Precisely as the monks who had to get in pest control did, when they were over-run with cockroaches....
There's only so much one can do in the face of an infestation of that kind....
Generally speaking, where you get an infestation or epidemic of any invasive kind, it's usually because humans have taken up residence.
Cockroaches go where it's warm, moist and food is plentiful.
Rats also go where the shelter, food and inadvertent comfort is...
We tend to be the common denominator, so it's a curse of the human race that we have to resort to 'violence' to rid ourselves of what we have been a cause of, in the first place.
There's no easy answer; there never is.
But there IS an answer, however unsavoury or unpalatable it is.
And in the case of Buddhists, 'guilt/remorse' is the price we pay for the convenience of managing to live comfortably.
@Citta, I am interested in the "dilemma" since I've recently had despair and frustration over ridding my house of tiny moths (along with the bigger miller moths that come through twice a year). The big moths are easy, the little ones are just very, very hard to catch and release. A couple of days ago I decided I would dispatch the ones in my sleeping space each night - but I have agonized over it.
I think the Samye-Ling monks could try trapping, then closing off access, then sanitation plus moderate trapping, which would bring the infestation to a manageable level.
I remember some Buddhist tale of an activity that monks avoided because it resulted in animal deaths...but they were happy to let householders do the activity in their stead since it was something necessary. Can't remember the details, but...does passing off such a noxious activity to others, count as "do not kill"? hmm. Could the monks hire an exterminator and keep their karmic hands clean?
Which is what happened at Samye-Ling @federica. After a good deal of heart searching all round.
And then..... do 'what' with the rats....?
>
No, that's not really a fair option, and sadly, as far as we are aware, it doesn't "work" like that.
Imagine if you asked a hit-man to kill your neighbour.
You think, simply because someone else did the deed for you, you'd be exempt? Not according to the Law of the Land, you wouldn't.
It's the same here, I'm afraid....
They tried humane traps and blocking tunnels, and chanting mantras..@Nele.
The problem was that there were hundreds of rats..and the inspection was weeks away...
But at no time did they suggest that the lay people at the centre should shoulder the karma.
@Citta Did they try the ultrasound? That really works. I have tried it on smaller scale to keep forest mice away from a cottage in the forest.
I would not have bought a house that was infested with hundreds of rats to begin with!
And where would the rats go..in the middle of the Scottish Highlands ? Nearest town 6 miles.
That's all very well, after the event.... Many people buy houses riddled with woodworm, without knowing it....
You can stop being argumentative now, @seeker242....
Enough said, I hope.
Ok?
.
Any pest inspector can easily tell if a home is infested or not. It's not difficult. It's just not wise to buy a home without a proper pest inspection. What would I do? I would not have bought a house that was infested with hundreds of rats to begin with!
If one is going to be unwise while purchasing a house, well then they have to deal with the consequences. The best way to keep the precepts in a situation like this, is to not put yourself in that situation to begin with.
To which my answer would be to another abode. Hark hark hark.
But the question was did they try it or no?
No, the events we are talking about was before such technology @Victorious.
The monks arrived as exiles from India, most of them had little English or knowledge of western life.
The house was given to them by a trust set up to propagate Buddhadharma .
But even if that technology had been an option it doesn't resolve the issue of a whole community of rats in a very harsh landscape with no where to go..
I would suggest that it would not have been a humane solution in this case...
Just kill the damn rats and don’t make such a big deal of it.
Praying for them after the act I think is pretty hypocrite.
Well, it made the monks feel better, and remember: intention is all.
I'm certain none of us can say hand on heart, that we have absolutely never, ever gone against our own principles...
And, @zenff, there's no need, I think, to be quite so forceful.
Simply because you'd have no qualms about it, doesn't mean others would be comfortable with that level of ruthlessness....
I have a hard time thinking it's ok to think that humans should put their lives, the lives of neighbors, children, the elderly and numerous other beings like dogs, at risk in order to save disease-spreading animals. It's not an easy choice, but when comparing them, there seems to be no real choice to me. We do whatever we can to avoid attracting pests to begin with. If we happen to get a few, we live trap them (from bugs to mice to raccoons or whatever) and we release them in a safe area. But because of the spread of Lyme's and West Nile in this area, ticks and actively biting mosquitoes don't get a pass from us. I cannot, as a parent, allow bugs to pass such threatening diseases to our family.
It doesn't mean we should take the decision lightly, or do all we can otherwise. But it seems to me that since we are the only beings on the planet who can actively study and practice the dharma, that it is important to take care of ourselves so we can properly do so, and to me, that includes not exposing ourselves and especially vulnerable people, to disease to save the life of an actively attacking bug.
I had to laugh at the idea that a devout Buddhist will simply not allow it to happen. You should stop over, we have literally hundreds of mosquitoes covering the screens of our windows right now. I'd like to know how I can prevent that from happening, because it would allow me to water my garden without getting dozens of potentially disease spreading bug bites. When there are so many, but spray does little.
I agree with @federica as far as the monks and the rats. Despite whether we agree with health code rules or not, many of them have saved numerous lives, and if we want to do things that require we obey the code, that is kind of just how it goes to protect others. It would certainly be possible to contact various animal experts to ask if it was possible to move the colony or encourage them to leave. Many mammals actually can be chased off by talk radio. They do not like the constant presence of humans most of the time, and if you put talk radio to go 24/7 often time they will move their family voluntarily after a day or so. It works with raccoons quite well. Here, a lot of people trap them (live) and release them, but don't realize the one they trapped had babies and then the babies have no mom. If you put the radio to go, mom will move everyone. Works for a lot of species.
a manageable level.
a manageable level of rats? Damn, don't move into my neighborhood.
@vinlyn, I have a "manageable" level of rodent activity in and around my house. House mice inside - when I see one I set a live trap. Maybe one or two a year. Outside (garden, garage and toolshed) I have voles, deermice, packrats, etc. I keep larger live traps set in the garage and toolshed. When I catch one, I drive it several miles away and release. (Most likely, those release-ees become hawk or owl dinner.)
I'm not too squeamish about rodents in general. As a grad student in parasitology, I trapped many, many animals, mostly rodents, for study purposes. Got bitten a few times even. They're just little beings trying to survive, not "attackers" of humans.
What triggered the “forceful” sound is that I truly believe that as a human being I have (and need to have) this “ruthless” mode at my disposal.
I need to be ruthless occasionally towards abusive people, towards aggressive sellers and towards overly dominant partners. I am no doormat, not all of the time anyways. And it’s the same with our furry friends. If I don’t show the dog its place he’s going to be the alpha-male in the house and that’s not acceptable. And as to rats; well there’s no place for them in my house; sorry about that.
I do bodhisattva-vows occasionally. I vow to save all sentient beings. I think this implies that I accept the imperfections of human existence as a part of my Buddhist vows.
It’s impossible to live without getting dirty hands.
You can’t duck choices in life - like this one - where being ruthless is required.
As a Dog Behaviourist, I'd be curious to know just how you 'show the dog its place'... :skeptic: .
Because if you use force - it's the wrong way.
And 'forcefulness' is completely unnecessary during a normal discussion.
You can be forceful with rats if you so wish; but transmitting that same forcefulness here, isn't ... 'acceptable'....
Depending. Need I remind you of your outburst of profanity the other day? Lol.
Maybe we disagree here, but I think sometimes a little “forcefulness” is needed to get through to people (and dogs). The patient approach (again in my opinion) isn’t always sufficient.
@zenff, people, yes.
Dogs, I'm absolutely 110% convinced this is completely and utterly unnecessary.
They can't communicate on our level.
most dogs are artificially 'kept' (by breeding practices) at the equivalent age of that of a toddler/young child. Simply because we have a scale of chronological development and can say, for example, that a 7-year-old dog is between 45 and 50 years of age in "human" terms, that does not in any way reflect their mental age.
Therefore, in the vast majority of cases, you're dealing with a 2 - 4 year-old child.
@Citta, yes, but I was making a point.... and it wasn't directed personally as an insult to anyone....