Ebony And Ivory

 
Friday, August 3, 2012
Ebony and Ivory

Live Together
In Perfect Harmony
Side By Side On My Piano Keyboard,
Oh Lord, Why Don't We?
We All Know
That People Are The Same
Where Ever You Go
There Is Good and Bad
In Everyone,
We Learn To Live,
We Learn To Give

"Ebony and Ivory" was banned for a while in South Africa during the Apartheid era.

In the early 19th century mammoth ivory was used, as substantial source, for such products as piano keys, billiard balls, and ornamental boxes.

One thing that Paul forgot to mention was that the piano keys were made of ivory.
I make that record here, even belatedly (he is alive and kicking well unlike the dead elephants).
Paul McCartney is the writer and Stevie Wonder the other of the duet.


This song hit the chart in 1982 and I was in England.
I was neither black nor white but a browny (not a brown Sahib) and was feeling the pinch.

All the jobs I did  up to that point were the ones white man did not want to work.
One place had the highest maternal death and another place had highest neonatal death in UK.

All the same, I worked for humanity and mostly neonates.
Worked hard to improve the lot including newly established wings and hospitals and planning for new ones in Dartford.
I was focused when British doctors were either half drunk or fully drunk and one social worker was killing destitutes to get their social benefits illegally and there was a mad GP and mad nurse murdering NHF patients and babies.
All three were in prison, one committed suicide in the cell.
Then the last case was  a little girl who was seduced by the father who was a policemen.
I had enough and left UK for good never to return.
These people who are agents of human rights, look straight into the mirror and see who is more innocent.
I abhor violence and killing even in war.
But I abhor killing innocent animals, more.

If we look at the history of Ceylon British occupiers killed our Gentle Giants almost to extinction in the hills and where now tea is planted and foreign labour was brought and they were the worst treated slaves until 1975, when British Television exposed them in broad day light.
I do not say their lot is better three years after the war ended and their daily wages are not enough to buy flour or bread!
They are fast leaving the plantation but their leaders are living in cushy Colombo 7 palaces.
They only come up when they need their votes that comes once in every six years.
Now coming to my lead story the Ebony and Ivory.
Ivory trade was regularized only towards beginning of  1980.
In this country we have both Ivory and Ebony.
From 1970 we started decimating the Ebony with 1973 oil price hike and with foreign cash deficit

We started decimating tree cover including in the plantation sector and growing not cash crops but manioc.
The tree felling is continuing with political patronage and now anybody who is somebody with political backing of  two third majority can transport illegal timber anywhere in this blessed country.

We deserve this type of government for our own stupidity.

State laborers were eating maniac with their leaves as vegetable matter and I had to do postmortem on them and the diagnosis was cyanide poisoning.

Now, we are killing the remaining tuskers to adorn the high palaces with ornamentation.

They are venerated for 10 days and the rest of the year they are neglected by wildlife, railway and the hashish cultivators in the deep jungle with ¨Upi Wawamu Rata Nagamu with Hashish¨.

Below is a historical record which I copied form elsewhere in the web for your information.

Japanese, American, Russians and the Chinese are the biggest consumers of illegal IVORY TRADE.

In the early 19th century mammoth ivory was used, as substantial source, for such products as piano keys, billiard balls, and ornamental boxes.

Some estimates suggest that 10 million mammoths still remain buried in Siberia.

The ivory trade is the commercial, often illegal trade in the ivory tusks of the hippopotamus, walrus, narwhal, mammoth, Rhino and most commonly, Asian and African elephants.
Ivory has been traded for hundreds of years by people in such regions as Greenland, Alaska, and Siberia.

The trade, in more recent times, has led to endangerment of species, resulting in restrictions and bans.

Monday, July 30, 2012
Elephants or Starving Monks- A Question?
Elephants or Starving Monks- A Question?
 
In this Modern Buddhist Sri-Lanka and Democracy (Crazy) alternative opinion is suppressed.
If Elephants are given the choice none of them will be willing to be chained to a tree.
They prefer their herd (they are social animals) and roaming in the wild.
I have no objection to taming a single elephant (often with some disability) gone rampage.
Instead of looking after Elephants rich Buddhist monks (residing in big temples) should look after their fellow monks in some remote villages not having a single meal proper on some days (even the ordinary people, Tamils included do not have a square meal in these parts of the country).

Sinhala Buddhists and their political rulers going gradually mad with power.
Problem is many of them in power and high places do not understand that they are even anti-democratic to animals and their welfare.
Now with the rain failing even the birds do not have drinking water, let alone the big elephants in the dry zone.
 
We have thamashas in the big cities sometime with Indian celluloids appearing.

Reproduced is a text what appeared in a local paper last year.
I am not privy to the details and I take no responsibility of its contents and hope the Author does not mind me reproducing it here.
 
I read the Dhamma Padaya and Karaneeya Meithriys Sutta verses (which I read very often) when I am at a loss to how to interpret modern Buddhist practices.

Elsewhere I have classified Modern Buddhist from Eggo to Chicken to EGO (some monks belong to this category).


By Ravi Palihawadana

I completely fail to understand the proclivity of certain Buddhist monks to raise animals in captivity at temples.
Nearly three decades ago, as a 22 year old youth, a few friends and I got up at 4 o’clock in the morning and trekked 10 km along a footpath from the confluence of rivers Ganga and Varuna to Isipatanaramaya at Sarnath, India.
This is supposed to be the path trodden by the Buddha whenever he spent the rainy (Vassana) season at Isipatanaramaya. We walked through mango and bamboo groves. It was an exhilarating experience. We could almost feel the presence of the Buddha and his benevolence towards all living beings.
However, upon reaching Isipatanaramaya, we were dismayed to see caged peacocks.
The whole place was highly commercialized.
The obvious distress of the caged birds was certainly loathsome.
We all felt that the incumbent monk had entirely failed to appreciate the fact that it was the place where the Buddha set in motion a process that would over a period of more than 2500 years help liberate hundreds of thousands if not millions of individuals from all their worldly bonds and set them totally, unconditionally free.
Who in his right mind would want to imprison animals at such a hallowed precinct?
I see Buddhist temples as places that should enable people to free themselves from worldly bonds.
Does it make any sense to keep animals in captivity at such places?
 
Let us examine what the Buddha has said about conduct towards living beings.

In ‘Karaniya Metta Sutta’ (Discourse on Loving Kindness) he says:
"Just as a mother would guard her only child at risk to her own life
Even so towards, all beings
Let one cultivate loving kindness."
 
In Dhammapada, the Buddha declares:
"All are afraid of the rod all, fear death.
Taking oneself as an example, do not beat or kill."
 
And in Vasala Sutta (Discourse on Outcasts), he pronounces:
"Whosoever in this world kills living beings,
Once born or twice born (i.e., first born is an egg and then born for a second time as a hatchling),
In whom there is no sympathy for living beings
Know hint an outcast (untouchable). "

As such, it is with dismay that I learn that it has become a fashion among certain influential Buddhist monks to raise baby elephants at their temples.

 Story
Recently a baby elephant was being transported from one temple to another without obtaining required official approval.
The driver of the truck and the mahout were brought before a court of law and charged with cruelty to a captive elephant. The accused pleaded guilty and were fined. Although only the driver and mahout were hauled up before courts; the calf was being transported at the behest of two highly influential Buddhist monks.
What is most disturbing is that the poor animal was being raised in captivity at the temple of one of those eminent monks.
The observers say, the baby elephant cannot be more than three years old although in its adoption papers its mother’s name has been given as `Kale Alma’, which died about six years ago. The baby has been separated from its mother long before it reached the recommended age for weaning at the expense of its well being.

Besides, it is no secret among elephant lovers that the process euphemistically referred to as taming is cruel. Baby elephants are made to obey a mahout’s orders by keeping them in close confinement, withdrawal of food and water, and by constant merciless beating.

Bearing in mind the Buddha’s words on how to treat all sentient beings; even if we disregard the treatment meted out to this poor baby elephant at the temple and dwell only on this nightmarish episode of transporting it in the cover of night, the implications are appalling.

By cruelly inflicting untold misery on it and thereby placing the life of the cub in danger, the first precept of abstaining from killing has been violated.. Secondly, the cub was robbed of the inalienable right to roam freely in its natural habitat.
Thirdly, false information was furnished about the mother of the animal.
Fourthly, this cruel act had the blessings of individuals intoxicated with political power.
In this preposterous exercise, three or four out of the five basic precepts were violated.
That being so, the consequences of meting out cruel. treatment to the baby elephant at the temple on a day to day basis are unthinkable.

Perhaps it was on witnessing such conduct by certain monks that the late Dr. E.W. Adikaram is supposed to have remarked, "It is my ardent wish that these monks would one day embrace Buddhism!"

Animal lovers may shout from the rooftops.
But it is the Buddhist clergy who must finally decide whether the practice of keeping animals in captivity and separating them fro their mothers at a very tender age is consistent with the teachings of the Enlightened One.
 
Until then there the status quo will remain.
 
Let us fervently hope that this cruel practice will be abandoned before long.