What is unique in human compare to animal?

[chownah]

If you can tell the difference between humans and animals then the way you tell the difference is what you see as being unique to humans and what you see as being unique to animals.
chownah

[waterchan]

When was the last time a chimpanzee made a post on Dhamma Wheel?

[Ben]

When was the last time a chimpanzee made a post on Dhamma Wheel?

image.jpg (115.17 KiB) Viewed 1644 times

[curiosity]

.

[Mkoll]

"Get your stinkin' paws off me you damn, dirty ape!"



EDIT:

Can someone let me know via PM or a post here if my picture of Charlton Heston's snarling face is showing up on your screen below the quote and above this edit?

[SarathW]

Hi Curiosity
This is a good question. Only thing I can find is that there are different plane of existence. (See the link below) Human realm is one of them and it separates from animal realm. Animal are considered ignorant, they act on instinct and can’t teach them ethics.

It is possible that a human may have a rebirth as an animal due to his grave ignorance. The only assurance we have as a human is to attain Sotapanna state so one will never borne to woeful state.

See P341
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/buddh ... gsurw6.pdf

[Thule]

There's some classification of animals in the case of killing:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... html#prec2

Acts of taking life are differentiated by way of their degree of moral gravity. Not all cases of killing are equally blameworthy. All are unwholesome, a breach of the precept, but the Buddhist texts make a distinction in the moral weight attached to different kinds of killing.

The first distinction given is that between killing beings with moral qualities (guna) and killing beings without moral qualities. For all practical purposes the former are human beings, the latter animals, and it is held that to kill a fellow human being is a more serious matter ethically than to kill an animal. Then within each category further distinctions are drawn. In the case of animals the degree of moral gravity is said to be proportional to the animal, to kill a larger animal being more blameworthy than to kill a smaller one. Other factors relevant to determining moral weight are whether the animal has an owner or is ownerless, whether it is domestic or wild, and whether it has a gentle or a vicious temperament. The moral gravity would be greater in the former three alternatives, less in the latter three. In the killing of human beings the degree of moral blame depends on the personal qualities of the victim, to kill a person of superior spiritual stature or one's personal benefactors being more blameworthy than to kill a less developed person or one unrelated to oneself. The three cases of killing selected as the most culpable are matricide, parricide, and the murder of an arahant, a fully purified saint.

[Vanda]

phpBB .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkMfohB2Gtw