Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 15.7K
- Your Practice 7.2K
- Buddhism for Beginners 5.5K
- Meditation 1.2K
- Diet & Habits 161
- Sanghas 379
- Buddhism 4.4K
- Modern Buddhism 1.7K
- Comparing Religions 594
- Arts & Writings 955
- Advanced Ideas 1.1K
- Our Community 6K
- NewBuddhist.com 332
- General Banter 3.7K
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@newbuddhist.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site.
How can BUDDHISTS not be VEGETARIAN?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
That's almost sectarian, will open the door to bashing and criticism and segregates people, creating an us-and-them situation.
People just need to watch their mouths, be respectful, make allowances for the fact that there are those whose ideas do not run parallel with their own, and accept that everybody is different, but ultimately we all seek the cause and relief from suffering.
people are bound to get warm under the collar.
Dedicated meat-eaters will continue to eat meat, and vegetarians will react and respond in different degrees to that. Just as vegetarians receive mixed replies from meat-eaters.
This is a topic, a debate and an issue without solution.
As such, this thread will eventually burn itself out, until such a time as a new thread - on precisely the same topic - arises once more.
lather, rinse, repeat.
People can post where they like, say what they like, think what they like. It's their bag. (Well.... within reason. You know what I mean....;))
Our job is to deal with our own perceptions, evaluate our own points of view, moderate our own input and responses, and know - it's the way it is, because it's the way it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1B59KNDH0o
There is a LOT of truth beneath the humour.:D
I am sure that most militant veggies spend a lot more time thinking about meat, and food, and being indignant, than the average carnivore does.
So this is an apples to oranges comparison, and only confuses the issue.
I know how you feel! When I first came to this site, the first thread I looked at was "Plea to Treat Shugden Practitioners Fairly," and after the first couple of pages I thought, "My god, all people do on this site is insult each other--where's the Buddhism in that?!"
But then I explored a bit more, and found some much nicer threads. If this particular subject is upsetting to you, simply find another. You don't have to leave the site! There are many interesting subjects being discussed here.
Also: try not to let other people's words upset you. You have the power to choose how you respond to things that come at you: you don't have to let them upset you, if you don't want them to.
That's one of the coolest messages in Buddhism, to me: that we don't have to be jerked around by our emotions anymore. We can become "equanimous."
While I don't judge either way of being, neither am I subject to it; and therefore I have little interest in continuing to fence with you on the finer points of your argument.
But I wish you joy and fulfillment in it! :)
Love & Peace
Jellybean
Actually, if you look at the shape of our teeth, we are frugivores ... fruit eaters. We don't have the pronounced canine teeth of carnivores nor the huge grinding molars of herbivores. And most omnivores (bears, hogs) have large canine teeth closer to the carnivore model than our teeth are. We are not naturally designed to eat meat.
Most of the Buddhists I know say they are vegetarians because it just seems "right" with their Practice. But I also know non-Buddhists who are vegetarians: one who says it's cheaper, one who says it's more environmentally-sound, and one who did a meat-free weight-loss diet and she was on it so long that when she started to eat meat again it tasted strange and she no longer liked it. These reasons do not sound like fear of death or near-phobias.
As I've already mentioned in this thread multiple times, if you take the time to read what I've written (e.g., this, this or this), you'll see that I support vegetarianism, not only as a more compassionate option in line with the principle of ahimsa, but as a personal practice as well. Although, I'm not so strict that I won't eat meat if it's offered to me, or if I'm sharing a meal with my girlfriend, etc.
I guess that must mean I really enjoy debating. :D
Got to agree there :skeptical
On Radio 4's Food Programme,during a discussion about 'humane' killing of animals (stunning before killing) vs. halal/kosher, a rabbi made an important point. He has chosen to eschew meat because there are two religious imperative operating at the same time: the dietary laws and the duty to ensure best possible animal care. Having been persuaded that animals suffer more if they are not stunned first and being forbidden to eat pre-stunned meat, he simply has to stop meat-eating.
It reminds me of the old joke about cabin signs on El Al flights out of Israel, which are said to read:
"Fasten Seat Belts
No Smoking
Eat only vegetables"
That the debate should transcend the faith family ghettoes means that we cannot appeal to the rules/laws/norms of one system to persuade those of a different opinion. We can only assist in informing their awareness so that they are able to make a personal choice.
Choosing is what matters, choosing with as much information as possible and freely made with focused attention and compassion for all beings, ourselves included.
But well, what can we not get cancer from now days? So these types of reasons I've seen with vegetarians being too cautious is the reason why I brought up the fear of death seeming like the main reason for them. Me personally I love vegetables, but I like meat too.
I'm a horticulture student. Such things interest me. :)
So, if you are eating to reduce the number of sentient beings harmed by your diet, this might be something to consider. My family (5 people) has purchased a third of a steer to stock our freezers. That third lasts us a year.
Compare that to the number of broccoli stalks one might eat.
Of course, you have to consider that the steer himself ate lots of plants. And you could take it upon yourself to only eat the fruits of plants, so the actual plant doesn't have to die on your account.
It's tricky. I'd say all in moderation. Your intent is to stay alive. Have gratitude to those who have lost their lives to maintain yours. And don't waste those carrots lying in the bottom of the veggie bin! ;)
All the best,
Jellybean
The Dali Lama is not a vegetarian so he must not be a Buddhist.
Adolph Hitler was a vegetarian so he must have been a Buddhist.
One does not make the other.
Yours in the Dharma,
Todd
All the best,
Jellybean
"How can BUDDHISTS not be VEGETARIAN?"
"By eating meat"
The rest are really our stories projected needlessly.
I feel I just answered this very question in another forum here, then I saw this thread.. so, I thought I'd cross-post my answer since it seems to fit the topic. Though as Matt already stated, my story is a needless projection ;)
----
I don't feel Vegetarianism is a religious choice, but rather a personal one. I can only speak for myself, and not everyone, as a result.
I have no sect of Buddhism to which I identify; I do eat meat, and I always will. I strongly believe the food chain is a natural and normal construct. Animals eat other animals, a coyote would not dine on a salad of wild greens, but of course a coyote is not designed to do so either which I recognize. Humans were manufactured biologically to eat both meat and plant matter.
Eating only one or the other (only meat or only plant matter, I do not single out vegetarianism here) can in fact lead to nutritional issues without paying close attention to what you consume in order to have all the proper nutrients (paying close attention to extra vitamins, or to the eating of foods which will specifically make up for the nutrients you lack).
In a way, our bodies are a beautiful balance in and of themselves, in this manner. In my own personal opinion, choosing only one or the other throws off that balance, or causes us to have to concentrate overtly on making sure our bodies remain in a healthy balance despite our choices. It just has never made a lot of sense to me to choose "sides" when it comes to food. I eat, plain and simple, and I am thankful for what I eat, be it any type of matter.
But we do have a biological design, and the technology, through which we are able to make a choice.
That choice is purely a personal one, and as long as we all respect each other's choices, there is no issue at all. Issues only arise when one person, or group of people, chooses to downplay the life choices of another. This is problematic no matter which subject matter you choose to discuss.
All the best,
Jellybean
As a meat-eater, I recognise the hypocrisy of this attempt to rationalise and self-justify. It is an argument that would excuse those who hire killers. We do the best we can rather than the best there is. As for the sutras which say that it's OK to have someone else butcher on our behalf, just like scriptures that justify slavery, for example, they seem very dubious to me - not that I have any evidence that Gotama or Saint Paul did not say them, just that I think they got it wrong.
All the best,
Jellybean
Our training is of the mind. Holding the intention to kill upsets our mind and therefore we refrain from doing it. Holding onto the intention to eat does not upset our mind because it is a wise decision as our bodies need nutrition.
When you walk to your mailbox to gather your mail for the day is your intention to kill hundreds of insects by walking on them?
All the best,
Jellybean
Would he approve of taking a cow and wrapping a chain around it's leg and hoisting it up in the air (breaking it's leg) all the while it is screaming at the top of it's lungs because of the pain, while some guy slices it's neck with a chain saw and bleeds it to death. Would the Buddha approve of this?
you think killing animals was any more humane in his time?
You think regard for life was better then?
And I hate to say it, but if you believe that is how cattle are killed at an abattoir, someone's been feeding you pork pies (lies).
A good friend of mine works in local government in the Food & Hygiene Health and Safety department.
She has to regularly visit abattoir to make sure they conform to EU standards in every conceivable way possible,. And she inspects from the beginning of the process right to the end.
She has to ensure stringent standards are met at all levels, and that includes how the animals are slaughtered.
The method you describe is primitive an barbaric. Cattle are most certainly not slaughtered in that way.
If they didn't, then how does this picture come to exist?
It shows EXACTLY what I described...
But your post certainly seemed to imply that this was the general case.
I'm explaining it isn't and I would suggest that the method you describe almost certainly contravenes some law somewhere.
It just so happens that the big corporations and the politicians that make the laws are good friends here... Livestock are specifically excluded from humane animal treatment laws. I agree that it needs to be stopped, but the only way that is going to happen, IMO, is if the people stop buying the products...
All the best,
Jellybean
I suppose that I would be accused of being melodramatic if I said that it made me think of the concentration camps? So I won't.
I eat meat, I have a serious heart problem and become anaemic very easily and quickly. Also being vegetarian involves too much work for my husband - he does all of the cooking. I'm not prepared to make more demands on top of everything else that he does for me. We compromise with organic and free range meat, eggs and milk - which is a real luxury in a starving world.
All the best,
Jellybean
If you seek to emulate The Buddha's teachings, I suggest you try to remember The Buddha taught us to have compassion for ALL sentient beings, including ones you don't like very much. Perhaps you could remember that next time you look down your nose at those who eat meat.
As far as cattle go, things have actually been drastically improving. Unfortunately, it wasn't out of compassion for the animals from the companies but because they saw it was better for business. The woman who was responsible for this reform (I believe something like half the slaughter houses in North America have followed her model) did this out of gratitude and compassion for them, though.
My dad has worked at one of the largest meat-processing companies in North America all his life and everything possible is done to ensure the cows stay calm and aren't frightened (which would reduce meat-quality). When they're killed, for the same reason it is done as quickly as possible. They are shot in the head and killed instantly. Other large production companies do this or similar (often a captive bolt stunner).
For other animals though, it's still another story unfortunately...
Look I'm hating how a bunch of people look down there noses at us looking down our noses of them looking down there noses at us (:lol:). I couldn't care less if someone eats meat or not. IT'S NATURAL I can't believe people are just, I don't know, but I don't smack my dog and shout at her for eating meat, so why should people get angry at people for doing the terrible crime of being naturally omnivorous, as is natural.
However, any good debater has got to see both sides of the story, you may not like the keeping of animals for food, in which case I, for example, have wild caught fish, and no meat. But whichever, there's no need to be, um, vegetarianists (?) LOL
All the best,
Jellybean