Acharya Prashant argues that, as the world currently is, man is in fact inferior to animals if a comparison must be made. He points out that the worst acts of unholiness, cruelty, and insensitivity are not perpetrated by animals, but by man. He frequently attacks this notion of human superiority, sharing with his audience that if they can rise to the level of a dog, their life has been fulfilled. A dog, he explains, never falls below the level of a dog, whereas a man often falls much below the level of a man, making him much worse than a dog. While acknowledging that man has the potential to rise, he states this is realized in only one in a thousand cases; in the other 999, man falls and is definitely worse than animals. To see innocence, one must look into the eyes of an animalāa cow, a dog, or even a crocodileāas it is not found in the eyes of a mature adult human. At most, innocence can be seen in human kids, but anyone beyond the age of fifteen would have fallen below the level of a dog. The concept that man is superior to animals is highly misplaced, and one must ask what the yardstick for comparison is. Superiority or inferiority must be decided on a scale of value. The true values that determine the worth of any being are simplicity, innocence, truthfulness, and the ability to love. On this scale, he questions whether human beings or animals possess more of these qualities. He recounts an instance of a small, lonely pup following a group of ten grown-up humans of a different species. The pup showed faith and offered itself, even though any of the humans could have kicked it. He contrasts this by asking if a small human would follow a group of ten large lions with such trust and embrace them. The pup wanted to climb all over them, a display of trust humans are incapable of showing in a similar situation. He concludes by asking how one can claim man is superior to animals when man has very little love and innocence compared to them, and is far more destructive and violent. He criticizes religious masters and texts that claim God created animals for human consumption, stating these are human-centric texts written for human convenience. He argues that if animals were to write a holy text, they would not declare themselves inferior. Such texts, he asserts, are not holy at all but are an ugly invention of the human mind to keep justifying its own excesses.
