Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Oneness/ Vegetarianism
If E=MC2 then Energy equal mass. If this is true all things equal each other. If you believe Quantum Physics then all matter at its simplest form is light energy. If we are all light energy; plants, animals, earth, sky, water, ect., Why is vegetarianism favored in Buddhism. Are they not the same as us? Plants=animals.
0
Comments
It's a question of sentience.
Among other Buddhist leaders..the Dalai Lama is not a vegetarian. Ajahn Sumedho is not a vegetarian. Ajahn Chah was not a vegetarian. The 16th Karmapa was not a vegetarian ( but the 17th is ) .
The fact is it is an individual choice...except for Theravadin monks who are supposed to eat what is put into their bowls..including on one famous and possibly apocryphal occasion a leper's finger.
So a vegetarian diet is favoured by some Dharma practitioners and not others.
Its once more a matter of individual conscience. I think the important thing is not to make it a matter by which one side attempts the other side from being seen as" real " Dharma practitioners..and that can work both ways.
There are followers of the Higher Yoga Tantras who tell you that to refuse meat in pujas is heresy.
Just as there are other Buddhists who cannot accept that meat eating should not be seen as proof of insincerity.
What actually happens is that the plants gave out raised levels of ethylene gas in response to a 'threat. Scientists have fed this emission into a machine which transformed it into sound, and called it a scream. This emission of gas is precisely the one that plants give off when stored together, which is why apples help ripen tomatoes, bananas go brown more quickly when stored with other fruits.... it's just a change of influential dynamics in the vicinity - but it doesn't denote pain or discomfort - it's just a registration of an altered existence, influenced by the proximity of a specific influence.
IMHO .. It still does some create suffering that one should be aware of.... just not as much.
In buddhism I'd advise vegetarians interested in the path to the cessation of suffering to be wary of undermining their own efforts at harm reduction by adding their own veggy pride to the mix.
I don't think that the natural world is anything but survival of the fittest. Not correct or incorrect...just opportunistic.
A sentient being at the top of the food chain holds a huge amount of control over how much suffering is created or not.
With empathy, sympathy, tenderness, compassion and love in mind, if given a choice between killing and eating a rabbit or doing the same to a carrot, which do you think creates more suffering?
That is also against the teaching of the Buddha.
And @music - I don't practice Zen Buddhism.
What I'm referring to is what I will refer to as "the catch". Thai Buddhists generally say what you said, but then justify eating meat from the standpoint that the animal was killed by non-Buddhists (in Thailand, the vast majority of butchers are Muslim or Chinese non-Buddhists), and not killed for them specifically. And although a meat-eater myself, I would say that's sort of a loop hole. No, the chicken in the market was not killed for Vincent Lynch, but it was killed for meat buyers who come to that market.
No.
It wouldn't. The animal was destined for the table, if it gets eaten, it gets eaten. By whom, is not an issue. quite a bit of the meat in supermarkets gets wasted anyway due to a little clause known as the 'sell-by' date....
If people really have sleepless nights about the "Yeah, but was it killed 'FOR' me?" issue, then going vegetarian seems to be their only option. By all means be anxious about it, but really, debating the matter in public just makes people become defensive and they then try to justify their stance, with a marinade of guilt thrown in.
Either eat meat, or don't.
If you eat meat, eat it.
If you don't eat meat, then don't.
Whichever, just 'wear the coat'. Don't shake it in front of people like a matador's cloak.
Really, it's that simple.
A brain is needed (I think) to make any distinction of any kind. A plant doesn't suffer from the notion that it is a plant and so doesn't suffer as a seperate thing.
Just an idea.
Somebody hiring a hitman is just as guilty as the shooter, aren't they?
Now, if a plate is put in front of somebody and they know if they don't eat it, it will go to waste... I havn't formulated a complete stance on this yet.
rel="federica">That's the perennial question. 'Killed for the consumer'. Would that be you?
No.
It wouldn't. The animal was destined for the table, if it gets eaten, it gets eaten. By whom, is not an issue. quite a bit of the meat in supermarkets gets wasted anyway due to a little clause known as the 'sell-by' date....
If people really have sleepless nights about the "Yeah, but was it killed 'FOR' me?" issue, then going vegetarian seems to be their only option. By all means be anxious about it, but really, debating the matter in public just makes people become defensive and they then try to justify their stance, with a marinade of guilt thrown in.
Either eat meat, or don't.
If you eat meat, eat it.
If you don't eat meat, then don't.
Whichever, just 'wear the coat'. Don't shake it in front of people like a matador's cloak.
Really, it's that simple.
It really is.
And no amount of jabbering on will make any difference.
I doubt if anyone ever became a veggie because a Buddhist website said so. I doubt if anyone ever became a carnivore because the DL eats meat.
Its lunch.
Choose what you are going to eat and consume it with awareness and gratitude. And concentrate on your own plate.
Its a topic which causes more heat and less light on Buddhist websites than just about any other...
People have a pretty limited understanding, inasmuch as their own physiology. Not that long ago, we thought far different things about animals than we do now. Just because plants are made like us, doesn't mean that we understand them. I have no doubt that our vast universe carries life other than ours. Our planet is perfect for sustaining our brand of life. But I hardly doubt the entire universe only exists of other humanoids and beasts like we have here. There are probably many different types of life forms that we can't even conceive of, and just because they may not have brains doesn't mean they don't feel pain in some manner we can't even comprehend of. I'm not making an argument against eating plants, lol. I just find it interesting. We are energy, and we consume energy to stay alive. This comes from plants, and it comes from animals that injest plants. It is basically a longer food chain of us eating energy from our sun. We might be at the top of the food chain because we have no natural predators (well we like to think we do because we removed ourselves from living in the wild world, when we lived many thousands of years ago, we had plenty of predators) but really, plants are at the top of the food chain, because nothing could live without them.
Because it is an extreme view. Foisting ones extreme views on others causes conflict, bad feelings, and is not right speech.
Because it is an extreme view. Foisting ones extreme views on others causes conflict, bad feelings, and is not right speech.
Was the Buddha making wrong speech when he said "do never kill or cause to kill"?
Basically telling someone "you are a problem and you are not a very good Buddhist if you eat meat" is judgement. I'm pretty sure the generations of Tibetan Buddhists who eat meat would disagree.
As soon as "your path" starts causing great harm to others, then you should not be surprised when someone says something about it... It's not about "your path" or "my path", it's about causing harm to others, which you have no right to do.
No, but it is not relevant in every case. For example:
I live half a mile from the local First Nations village. I know a number of the residents there personally.
Now, anyone can see what has happened to these people as a result of adopting or attempting to adopt a western diet. You can see obesity, diabetes and a whole range of other illnesses that were not natural to them.
Many of the people are poor and can hardly afford to buy expensive imported vegetables in the amount that would be require to raise a healthy family. In any case, why would they want to? They are a fish eating people. It worked for thousands of years till we came along.
When I talk to my fishing friends from down there it is about fishing not converting to a veggie diet. I wouldn't have any friends around here if I tried to convert them to vegetarianism or anything else for that matter.
I don't constantly point out to vegetarian that unless they are 100% self-sustaining the constant transport of their food is damaging the environment, and that animals lose habitat and die so more and more acreage can be bought to plant farmland. I don't point out than when you avoid buying leather, that means you are likely buying footwear made of chemicals that is bad for the environment and causing the destruction of the DNA of living beings and contributing to disease around the world. Why? because I trust they are doing the best they can with the best of intentions. Just like I am. I can guarantee you that if someone hunts and 100% supplies their family with meat they will eat and furs they can use, that they are doing far, far far less damage to the species of animals on the planet than someone who goes to Whole Foods to buy their organic vegetables.