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.
@SpinyNorman said:
Did you miss the bit on Right Intention?
No, I just follow a different path. Good karma can give you good rebirth, not liberation, because karma is what creates beings.
"Who creates no karma obtains the Dharma."
Conventionally, good karma can be seen as better than bad karma, but at the end, both are binding in the same way.
"Good and bad karma cause wandering in this world, and the experiences of happiness and suffering, high and low, are like the revolving of an irrigation wheel." - Longchenpa
Moreover, I do not follow it because somebody important said it centuries ago. I simply find it reasonable and obvious. Good things attach stronger than bad ones.
You're just playing games now. It's BS and dishonest.
0
silverIn the beginning there was nothing, and then it exploded.USA, Left coast.Veteran
@SpinyNorman said:
You're just playing games now. It's BS and dishonest.
Is your goal at playing the one true lie detector to get peeps to not eat any meat?
I think confrontation at this level is ineffective and unskillful - to put it mildly.
@SpinyNorman said:
You're just playing games now. It's BS and dishonest.
You are accusing me of being dishonest and talking BS. On what basis?
Maybe, just maybe, you know that meat is delicious and you need to force yourself not to eat it? You cannot believe that it can be non-factor, when you yourself have put so much effort in dropping it? And now you read that it's irrelevant...
Is this the reason for your frustration?
I play no games, I see no special virtue in my behavior, it came naturally as a consequence of not desiring things. My wife complains when she cooks, because I will never give her hints on what she should prepare. You know what I say?
"Oi dunno."
btw. I do eat meat, but I don't eat ice creams (nor anything containing sugar), because they are unhealthy.
Been a vegetarian for 42 years because it seems like a slightly more compassionate way to survive than the alternative....
but
would warn fellow vegetarians that suggesting that others drop their own eating attachments if we are still attached to our own choices, is unlikely to be heard the way that you intend it to be.
You are walking along the shore of a lake and see somebody fishing. You stop and watch as he gets a bite and reals in a bigmouth bass, the fish fighting all the way. "Buddha says to avoid killing," you tell the man. "The fish should be left alone to live out its karma."
The fisherman removes the fish from the hook. "You carry on about detachment but I'm more detached than you, because I can do this," he says, dropping the fish into the basket to join the others.
What do you, the enlightened Buddhist, do or say at this point? Was the fisherman right or were you right? Who is teaching whom, if any teaching is being done at all?
@silver said: I think confrontation at this level is ineffective and unskillful - to put it mildly.
I really don't care, I'm more concerned about the animals that suffer. If people feel guilty, then that's a good thing, maybe their behaviour will change. I am tired of Buddhists paying lip service to "compassion", it's hypocritical BS.
@SpinyNorman said:
That sounds like the usual Zen cop-out. Sorry but this is not in the least bit convincing.
Not supposed to be convincing. It's pointing out that just because you believe something doesn't mean you should expect others to agree with you, and two people can both be right and both be wrong. Or in Zen cop-out talk, the flag is flapping in the breeze while the two monks argue.
Master Hanh's messages and writings never impressed me that he was one to butt in where he didn't belong. Methinks to believe in SN's way is to play god - one of those old fashioned gods like in the old testament - a wrathful, vengeful god full of blood lust. Jess sayin'
1
silverIn the beginning there was nothing, and then it exploded.USA, Left coast.Veteran
@SpinyNorman said:
That sounds like the usual Zen cop-out. Sorry, but this is not in the least bit convincing.
Thich Nhat Hanh is a wonderful, wise teacher, but the danger of socially engaged Buddhism is that a person can let their emotions swamp their clear mind. Our efforts to help the world become a battle between good and evil. Then our actions become self-defeating.
I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong to care about the suffering of the animals on the Earth. I think you're confusing a calm, detached mind with non-caring or non-compassion.
@silver said: Master Hanh's messages and writings never impressed me that he was one to butt in where he didn't belong. Methinks to believe in SN's way is to play god - one of those old fashioned gods like in the old testament - a wrathful, vengeful god full of blood lust. Jess sayin'
No, you're completely missing the point. I'd suggest you spend some time with TNH's teachings.
@SpinyNorman ... with all due respect...if we're missing the point...why not just let it go?
It seems like your being messy....I dunno.....maybe a smoke break?....Maybe go have a tea ...You're coming across kinda confrontational...
0
silverIn the beginning there was nothing, and then it exploded.USA, Left coast.Veteran
@SpinyNorman said:
Cinorjer:
I find TNH's teachings far more authentic than your sterile intellectual pseudo-Zen.
This thread reminds me of a line from the film "The Outlaw Josey Wales":
"Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining."
We are all born alone and die alone...we have our lives each separate dramas. Iow, no one has the authority and power to dictate to the next. We can fight and kill, argue and debate until the cows come home...but it would seem we're all a law unto ourselves. We answer to no one BUT ourselves.
@SpinyNorman I'm in your corner buddy!
Sometimes it's ok to play hardball among friends!
Just to shake them out of their lala land.
Nisargadatta used to be incredibly kind and compassionate to some people, and fierce and called people out to others. He moulded his teaching to suit the person.
Spiny is passionate about the topic, we can all agree in some sense he is right about not eating meat though?
Whether we do so or not. It would be a more compassionate way to live.
The thing about compassion is, all we can do is offer it. I am all for compassion for animals. It is how I was raised. But it's easy to have compassion for animals. Where is the compassion for the people who are not yet vegetarians? For their delusions, for their inability to change things in their life for whatever reason? Where is compassion for child rapists and murderers? We all have our issues with compassion. But eating meat doesn't have to equal a lack of compassion, either.
Buddhism is a practice. Period. End of story. It is a life long, and many lifetime practice. It is fine to question and encourage people to investigate things in their lives and practices and how they work together. But being judgmental of someone else's practice and place on the path does no one any good.
@lobster said:
Compassion for fluffy things is relatively easy.
Yeah all those animal activists... Save Cecil the lion!!!
Cockroach at home... Kill the thing kill it!
They tell me I can't compare insects and animals... Oh really? Why because lions and humans are at the humans concept of top of the hierarchy therefore better.
Life doesn't care where you sit. It created all of us and will take us. The stories die with the brain.
@SpinyNorman said:
OK, Memphis Belle, I'm bog Irish and not renowned for my tact. Sometimes though things just have to be said.
HAVE to be said? .... hahahaha..no they don't. You could have kept some of that...
just sayin'....
I'll take the Belle and leave the bog.
Your ok with me .... we're good!
1
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
Apart from the moral question of right or wrong, what effect does killing an animal or even just eating meat have on our own mind?
I can say for myself if I were to kill an animal it would take a toll on my emotional state. Is that primarily because I was raised in an environment where that wasn't a part of life? If I were raised in a hunting and fishing family and taking an animals life didn't effect me the same way does that mean I'm not then as compassionate towards animals or that I put human life as that much more important?
I'm genuinely wondering if taking life and eating meat has an inherent effect on the compassion and empathy towards animal life or if the effect more a matter of upbringing. Are people who actively hunt and fish, and to a lesser extent eat meat (which I still do some) able to feel as much empathy for animals than those who don't?
I suppose it seems to me that taking life would effect one's empathy and compassion aside from cultural context but those in this thread that come from hunting cultures seem to say no, so I'm open to other possibilities.
@person
My experience is that while killing creatures compassion is suppressed. That's the reason why it's unsuitable for Buddhists (excluding millions of Asian Buddhists).
Compassion and wisdom should develop together from a Buddhist practice.
That's not to say that one can't be a hunter or fisherman and have deep reverence for all life, and gratitude and understanding for what the creatures have provided.
Or develop incredible insights into life and death and nature and impermanence, from the life that these pursuits can provide.
But while killing there are other forces at work, and compassion takes a back burner.
You would probably find it varies widely by people. Hunters and anglers can't be lumped together. Some do it for "sport" or challenge. Some do it simply because they can and have the money to hire someone to take them to do it. Some do it for food. We never did it for sport, it was always for food and survival. When I was still fairly young, my dad was laid off his job and we did hunt, fish and trap for survival because his pride would not allow us to use government assistance and it would not have been enough anyhow. I went with, and I am grateful for learning those skills. But it was never done with an excitement or adrenaline rush or anything of the sort. It was always done with sadness and reverence for the life taken, and it was like that any time I hunted, and still is when I fish (which has gotten less and less over the years). There was always a few moments of what I could only call prayer (though my dad would never call it that) for the animal who lost it's life. There was never, at least for me and that I observed in my dad, a lack of compassion. It was very much with a sense of "This is only because I have to. I'm sorry."
There are still people here who live in such a way. I don't fault them. Could some of them possibly accept food stamps instead? I'm sure. But I understand why they don't and I certainly wouldn't tell them the other way would be better. It is a definite hardship on a lot of families if they do not get the expected quota from their hunting seasons.
I am both grateful and sorry for those who do not have that experience, who lack that connection to where their food comes from (obviously, specific to those who eat meat/fish). My husband grew up in a farming family (both sides) and he would say the same thing.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@karasti said: Where is the compassion for the people who are not yet vegetarians? For their delusions, for their inability to change things in their life for whatever reason? Where is compassion for child rapists and murderers? We all have our issues with compassion. But eating meat doesn't have to equal a lack of compassion, either.
I'm a little confused by the claim that there is no compassion for those who have not become vegetarians (among others)....
That's a broad accusation.
I do my level best to have compassion for every living sentient being that walks the planet, and to be accused of having none simply because a view is at disparity with mine, is erroneous.
Compassion need not dress up in pink and softness.
Compassion - as has often been said - can sometimes come as a swift and hefty kick to the situpon.
Simply because words seem harsh, it does not denote a lack of compassion.
However, I have to confess that the above strikes me as:
"I kill animals to eat them. Please have compassion for me. I know I should be vegetarian, but when push comes to shove, I have umpteen reasons to justify why I cannot be."
All I know is that, come crunch time for me, when the rubber hits the road, it's time to shift gears and put my foot down, pedal to the metal.
As the famous saying states: " 'Do' or 'do not'. There IS no 'try' "
2
silverIn the beginning there was nothing, and then it exploded.USA, Left coast.Veteran
From all I've read about the Buddha, I get the distinct impression that when it comes right down to it, there are no hard and fast rules - but guidelines, yes ...there are no 'shoulds' and 'thou shalt nots'.
@federica said: I'm a little confused by the claim that there is no compassion for those who have not become vegetarians (among others)....
That's a broad accusation.
It's confusing passion with compassion. There are a few subjects that tend to bring out the passion in some people, depending on their particular passion switches. Vegetarianism and the entire subject of how to treat animals such as hunting and fishing is one. I ran into another button when I was both Buddhist and still in the military and being told a uniform means you can't be a good Buddhist. And those very passionate people against war gave not a thought to how that made me feel when they told me I was personally responsible for innocent people being killed. A few people get passionate defending their belief in past lives and reincarnation. That sort of thing.
The problem with mistaking passion with compassion is that we actually are describing anger. Anger causes you lash out at people and insult them. It causes you search for excuses to justify your anger. People who are passionate don't listen or acknowledge any other valid beliefs in other people.
It's not the Buddhist way.
5
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
Karma from a more secular point of view talks about the psychological effects our actions have. So killing for sport or even sadistic motivations will have more negative effects while killing to provide for ones family would be less. Cultures who hunt and fish seem to also include a sense of appreciation and gratitude for animals which is a positive mental attitude.
Moral actions are varied and complex and shouldn't be looked at in terms of black and white, there are many other motivating factors that influence the effect.
@Cinorjer said:
The problem with mistaking passion with compassion is that we actually are describing anger.
That is my understanding.
Compassion has an element of dispassion, of equanimity in which we are not swamped by our 'righteous anger'. Our judgement is often the righteous indignation of the virtuous convert to ahimsa, carrot munching or being kind to the worthy. What about the unworthy?
Weak compassion? Yep, I am being judegemental [off to the naughty corner again] ...
@federica I was not addressing you with my post about compassion. If I was, I would have tagged you. It was a general comment addressing several things I had seen in recent posts.
And sorry, but I disagree with Yoda. To try, and to work towards something DOES matter and it IS important. It is not always possible to make a change in one fell swoop, for a variety of reasons. Whether you find them acceptable reasons or not doesn't really matter. Not everything can simply be done. Sometimes, doing IS trying, and taking steps to work towards something matters. I've greatly reduced how much meat I eat. More importantly (IMO) I've taken steps to ensure that the meat I do eat is not coming from factory farms. It's quite expensive, so as a result we eat less meat. If you want to tell me that this form of "trying" is not good enough, then ok. But research says otherwise, both for health and environment.
I will certainly never tolerate being put in a position of seeking the compassion or acceptance of others for my diet or lifestyle. Things work until they they don't. It's my business.
I can accept advice about diet choices based on facts or on people's experiences.
I learned that just because I think things are going ok, doesn't mean they are. Heart disease can sneak up on you.
People's compassion and how it works in their lives is their own concern.
When animals are being abused or over harvested or wasted, as well as poaching or hunting threatened species, it's everyone's business.
Someone might be upset that Buddhism is being poorly represented by others whose compassion is not up to their standards. Get over it.
I look within and see nothing, that's wisdom. I look without and see everything is me, that's love. Somehow between these two points my life turns - nisargadatta.
True compassion arises when you see yourself in everything. Literally.
One of the purpose why I posted an inquiry is to see if I could tease apart my old ways of thinking about recreation. In the tradition I'm following, we could make non-harming to ourselves and to all beings a gift to the world. I vowed to follow that precept, made it as a practice.
What really fascinates me is our human capacity to give beings a sense of safety through the practice of loving kindness and compassion. May our practice of non-harming benefits all beings including ourselves.
Comments
Did you miss the bit on Right Intention?
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-sankappo/
No, I just follow a different path. Good karma can give you good rebirth, not liberation, because karma is what creates beings.
"Who creates no karma obtains the Dharma."
Conventionally, good karma can be seen as better than bad karma, but at the end, both are binding in the same way.
Far too convoluted, I think you're just trying to rationalise a dietary choice. I wish you would at least be honest about it.
"Good and bad karma cause wandering in this world, and the experiences of happiness and suffering, high and low, are like the revolving of an irrigation wheel." - Longchenpa
Moreover, I do not follow it because somebody important said it centuries ago. I simply find it reasonable and obvious. Good things attach stronger than bad ones.
Still not being honest. Oh well.
Not being honest with what? I already told you that I eat what I am given. Do you want to hear that I defend meat eating because I like it?
Yes, that would be more honest.
How do you know?
Know what? This just seems like further evasion and BS.
How do you know, that it would be more honest, if I said that I defend meat eating because I like it?
You're just playing games now. It's BS and dishonest.
Is your goal at playing the one true lie detector to get peeps to not eat any meat?
I think confrontation at this level is ineffective and unskillful - to put it mildly.
You are accusing me of being dishonest and talking BS. On what basis?
Maybe, just maybe, you know that meat is delicious and you need to force yourself not to eat it? You cannot believe that it can be non-factor, when you yourself have put so much effort in dropping it? And now you read that it's irrelevant...
Is this the reason for your frustration?
I play no games, I see no special virtue in my behavior, it came naturally as a consequence of not desiring things. My wife complains when she cooks, because I will never give her hints on what she should prepare. You know what I say?
"Oi dunno."
btw. I do eat meat, but I don't eat ice creams (nor anything containing sugar), because they are unhealthy.
Been a vegetarian for 42 years because it seems like a slightly more compassionate way to survive than the alternative....
but
would warn fellow vegetarians that suggesting that others drop their own eating attachments if we are still attached to our own choices, is unlikely to be heard the way that you intend it to be.
You are walking along the shore of a lake and see somebody fishing. You stop and watch as he gets a bite and reals in a bigmouth bass, the fish fighting all the way. "Buddha says to avoid killing," you tell the man. "The fish should be left alone to live out its karma."
The fisherman removes the fish from the hook. "You carry on about detachment but I'm more detached than you, because I can do this," he says, dropping the fish into the basket to join the others.
What do you, the enlightened Buddhist, do or say at this point? Was the fisherman right or were you right? Who is teaching whom, if any teaching is being done at all?
Ask the fish.
I really don't care, I'm more concerned about the animals that suffer. If people feel guilty, then that's a good thing, maybe their behaviour will change. I am tired of Buddhists paying lip service to "compassion", it's hypocritical BS.
That sounds like the usual Zen cop-out. Sorry, but this is not in the least bit convincing.
Not supposed to be convincing. It's pointing out that just because you believe something doesn't mean you should expect others to agree with you, and two people can both be right and both be wrong. Or in Zen cop-out talk, the flag is flapping in the breeze while the two monks argue.
Sterile Zen, intellectual convolution with no heart or soul. One of my teachers was Thich Nhat Hanh, who had a real understanding of compassion:
http://plumvillage.org/mindfulness-practice/the-5-mindfulness-trainings/
Master Hanh's messages and writings never impressed me that he was one to butt in where he didn't belong. Methinks to believe in SN's way is to play god - one of those old fashioned gods like in the old testament - a wrathful, vengeful god full of blood lust. Jess sayin'
Who is there to convince of what?
@SpinyNorman
Thich Nhat Hanh is a wonderful, wise teacher, but the danger of socially engaged Buddhism is that a person can let their emotions swamp their clear mind. Our efforts to help the world become a battle between good and evil. Then our actions become self-defeating.
I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong to care about the suffering of the animals on the Earth. I think you're confusing a calm, detached mind with non-caring or non-compassion.
@Cinorjer:
I find TNH's teachings far more authentic than your sterile intellectual pseudo-Zen.
This thread reminds me of a line from the film "The Outlaw Josey Wales":
"Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining."
No, you're completely missing the point. I'd suggest you spend some time with TNH's teachings.
@SpinyNorman ... with all due respect...if we're missing the point...why not just let it go?
It seems like your being messy....I dunno.....maybe a smoke break?....Maybe go have a tea ...You're coming across kinda confrontational...
We are all born alone and die alone...we have our lives each separate dramas. Iow, no one has the authority and power to dictate to the next. We can fight and kill, argue and debate until the cows come home...but it would seem we're all a law unto ourselves. We answer to no one BUT ourselves.
@SpinyNorman
I've seen your posts on other vegetarian themed posts but don't remember this level of passion about it. Has something changed for you?
@SpinyNorman I'm in your corner buddy!
Sometimes it's ok to play hardball among friends!
Just to shake them out of their lala land.
Nisargadatta used to be incredibly kind and compassionate to some people, and fierce and called people out to others. He moulded his teaching to suit the person.
Spiny is passionate about the topic, we can all agree in some sense he is right about not eating meat though?
Whether we do so or not. It would be a more compassionate way to live.
Let's all just hug it out
The thing about compassion is, all we can do is offer it. I am all for compassion for animals. It is how I was raised. But it's easy to have compassion for animals. Where is the compassion for the people who are not yet vegetarians? For their delusions, for their inability to change things in their life for whatever reason? Where is compassion for child rapists and murderers? We all have our issues with compassion. But eating meat doesn't have to equal a lack of compassion, either.
Buddhism is a practice. Period. End of story. It is a life long, and many lifetime practice. It is fine to question and encourage people to investigate things in their lives and practices and how they work together. But being judgmental of someone else's practice and place on the path does no one any good.
Exactly.
Compassion for fluffy things is relatively easy.
OK, Memphis Belle, I'm bog Irish and not renowned for my tact. Sometimes though things just have to be said.
Yeah all those animal activists... Save Cecil the lion!!!
Cockroach at home... Kill the thing kill it!
They tell me I can't compare insects and animals... Oh really? Why because lions and humans are at the humans concept of top of the hierarchy therefore better.
Life doesn't care where you sit. It created all of us and will take us. The stories die with the brain.
Wow this is pretty deep for a Saturday morning
^^^ Awesome +insightful+LOL ....
It's Friday night here....hahaha
HAVE to be said? .... hahahaha..no they don't. You could have kept some of that...
just sayin'....
I'll take the Belle and leave the bog.
Your ok with me .... we're good!
Apart from the moral question of right or wrong, what effect does killing an animal or even just eating meat have on our own mind?
I can say for myself if I were to kill an animal it would take a toll on my emotional state. Is that primarily because I was raised in an environment where that wasn't a part of life? If I were raised in a hunting and fishing family and taking an animals life didn't effect me the same way does that mean I'm not then as compassionate towards animals or that I put human life as that much more important?
I'm genuinely wondering if taking life and eating meat has an inherent effect on the compassion and empathy towards animal life or if the effect more a matter of upbringing. Are people who actively hunt and fish, and to a lesser extent eat meat (which I still do some) able to feel as much empathy for animals than those who don't?
I suppose it seems to me that taking life would effect one's empathy and compassion aside from cultural context but those in this thread that come from hunting cultures seem to say no, so I'm open to other possibilities.
Good questions @person
My experience is that giving up judgements of others is far harder than avoiding animal carcasuses as food items.
Personally I value the Jain position ...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahimsa_in_Jainism
Soon I will have to remove a tree which is a habitat to a variety of life, including its own. It is for the chop.
Life is complicated.
@person
My experience is that while killing creatures compassion is suppressed. That's the reason why it's unsuitable for Buddhists (excluding millions of Asian Buddhists).
Compassion and wisdom should develop together from a Buddhist practice.
That's not to say that one can't be a hunter or fisherman and have deep reverence for all life, and gratitude and understanding for what the creatures have provided.
Or develop incredible insights into life and death and nature and impermanence, from the life that these pursuits can provide.
But while killing there are other forces at work, and compassion takes a back burner.
Nice one robot.
You would probably find it varies widely by people. Hunters and anglers can't be lumped together. Some do it for "sport" or challenge. Some do it simply because they can and have the money to hire someone to take them to do it. Some do it for food. We never did it for sport, it was always for food and survival. When I was still fairly young, my dad was laid off his job and we did hunt, fish and trap for survival because his pride would not allow us to use government assistance and it would not have been enough anyhow. I went with, and I am grateful for learning those skills. But it was never done with an excitement or adrenaline rush or anything of the sort. It was always done with sadness and reverence for the life taken, and it was like that any time I hunted, and still is when I fish (which has gotten less and less over the years). There was always a few moments of what I could only call prayer (though my dad would never call it that) for the animal who lost it's life. There was never, at least for me and that I observed in my dad, a lack of compassion. It was very much with a sense of "This is only because I have to. I'm sorry."
There are still people here who live in such a way. I don't fault them. Could some of them possibly accept food stamps instead? I'm sure. But I understand why they don't and I certainly wouldn't tell them the other way would be better. It is a definite hardship on a lot of families if they do not get the expected quota from their hunting seasons.
I am both grateful and sorry for those who do not have that experience, who lack that connection to where their food comes from (obviously, specific to those who eat meat/fish). My husband grew up in a farming family (both sides) and he would say the same thing.
I'm a little confused by the claim that there is no compassion for those who have not become vegetarians (among others)....
That's a broad accusation.
I do my level best to have compassion for every living sentient being that walks the planet, and to be accused of having none simply because a view is at disparity with mine, is erroneous.
Compassion need not dress up in pink and softness.
Compassion - as has often been said - can sometimes come as a swift and hefty kick to the situpon.
Simply because words seem harsh, it does not denote a lack of compassion.
However, I have to confess that the above strikes me as:
"I kill animals to eat them. Please have compassion for me. I know I should be vegetarian, but when push comes to shove, I have umpteen reasons to justify why I cannot be."
All I know is that, come crunch time for me, when the rubber hits the road, it's time to shift gears and put my foot down, pedal to the metal.
As the famous saying states: " 'Do' or 'do not'. There IS no 'try' "
From all I've read about the Buddha, I get the distinct impression that when it comes right down to it, there are no hard and fast rules - but guidelines, yes ...there are no 'shoulds' and 'thou shalt nots'.
It's confusing passion with compassion. There are a few subjects that tend to bring out the passion in some people, depending on their particular passion switches. Vegetarianism and the entire subject of how to treat animals such as hunting and fishing is one. I ran into another button when I was both Buddhist and still in the military and being told a uniform means you can't be a good Buddhist. And those very passionate people against war gave not a thought to how that made me feel when they told me I was personally responsible for innocent people being killed. A few people get passionate defending their belief in past lives and reincarnation. That sort of thing.
The problem with mistaking passion with compassion is that we actually are describing anger. Anger causes you lash out at people and insult them. It causes you search for excuses to justify your anger. People who are passionate don't listen or acknowledge any other valid beliefs in other people.
It's not the Buddhist way.
Karma from a more secular point of view talks about the psychological effects our actions have. So killing for sport or even sadistic motivations will have more negative effects while killing to provide for ones family would be less. Cultures who hunt and fish seem to also include a sense of appreciation and gratitude for animals which is a positive mental attitude.
Moral actions are varied and complex and shouldn't be looked at in terms of black and white, there are many other motivating factors that influence the effect.
That is my understanding.
Compassion has an element of dispassion, of equanimity in which we are not swamped by our 'righteous anger'. Our judgement is often the righteous indignation of the virtuous convert to ahimsa, carrot munching or being kind to the worthy. What about the unworthy?
Weak compassion? Yep, I am being judegemental [off to the naughty corner again] ...
@federica I was not addressing you with my post about compassion. If I was, I would have tagged you. It was a general comment addressing several things I had seen in recent posts.
And sorry, but I disagree with Yoda. To try, and to work towards something DOES matter and it IS important. It is not always possible to make a change in one fell swoop, for a variety of reasons. Whether you find them acceptable reasons or not doesn't really matter. Not everything can simply be done. Sometimes, doing IS trying, and taking steps to work towards something matters. I've greatly reduced how much meat I eat. More importantly (IMO) I've taken steps to ensure that the meat I do eat is not coming from factory farms. It's quite expensive, so as a result we eat less meat. If you want to tell me that this form of "trying" is not good enough, then ok. But research says otherwise, both for health and environment.
I will certainly never tolerate being put in a position of seeking the compassion or acceptance of others for my diet or lifestyle. Things work until they they don't. It's my business.
I can accept advice about diet choices based on facts or on people's experiences.
I learned that just because I think things are going ok, doesn't mean they are. Heart disease can sneak up on you.
People's compassion and how it works in their lives is their own concern.
When animals are being abused or over harvested or wasted, as well as poaching or hunting threatened species, it's everyone's business.
Someone might be upset that Buddhism is being poorly represented by others whose compassion is not up to their standards. Get over it.
I look within and see nothing, that's wisdom. I look without and see everything is me, that's love. Somehow between these two points my life turns - nisargadatta.
True compassion arises when you see yourself in everything. Literally.
One of the purpose why I posted an inquiry is to see if I could tease apart my old ways of thinking about recreation. In the tradition I'm following, we could make non-harming to ourselves and to all beings a gift to the world. I vowed to follow that precept, made it as a practice.
What really fascinates me is our human capacity to give beings a sense of safety through the practice of loving kindness and compassion. May our practice of non-harming benefits all beings including ourselves.