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.
question on non-violence
for a while now i have been reading about Buddhism. i have watched several documentaries and listened to several teachings by his holiness the dalai lama. everything i have heard or read makes a lot of sense. in fact it fits my world views almost perfectly. almost.
the question(s) i have revolve around non-violence. specifically the idea of not killing animals.
here is what i understand.
killing and causing harm to people is wrong and you shouldn't do it. one should do their best to help and if you cant do that you should at least avoid causing harm to anyone. this makes sense.
all living things are interconnected and as a result of this interconnectedness you should not kill or harm animals just as you wouldn't people. this kind of makes sense.
i agree that everything is interconnected. however here is where i find the problem.
the natural world that we live in requires beings to consume other beings in order to survive. if we don't eat we die. i don't think vegetarianism is the answer either. plants are just as much alive as animals or insects for that matter. plants interact within our world just as animals do. the interactions are simply more subtle than those of a cow.
life feeds on life.
i really would love to receive an answer to this question. it is the only thing that prevents me from taking refuge. thank you.
the question(s) i have revolve around non-violence. specifically the idea of not killing animals.
here is what i understand.
killing and causing harm to people is wrong and you shouldn't do it. one should do their best to help and if you cant do that you should at least avoid causing harm to anyone. this makes sense.
all living things are interconnected and as a result of this interconnectedness you should not kill or harm animals just as you wouldn't people. this kind of makes sense.
i agree that everything is interconnected. however here is where i find the problem.
the natural world that we live in requires beings to consume other beings in order to survive. if we don't eat we die. i don't think vegetarianism is the answer either. plants are just as much alive as animals or insects for that matter. plants interact within our world just as animals do. the interactions are simply more subtle than those of a cow.
life feeds on life.
i really would love to receive an answer to this question. it is the only thing that prevents me from taking refuge. thank you.
0
Comments
Plants are alive, but are not conscious like animals. That is the difference.
Please don't start another debate about vegetarianism.
A relative used to work as a sales manager at a car dealership. He was under a lot of pressure to ensure a lot of cars were sold and at a good profit margin. When I would watch him work he was always very friendly with the customers, but also very manipulative. He had a high degree of skill getting people to part with their money.
I asked him once if he ever questioned whether manipulating a person into buying a car was the right thing for the person. He said it wasn't something he considered. The customer came in therefore he had the right to try and make the sale. I asked him if he thought the customers were intelligent enough to make their own choice without any pressure. His answer was 'no'. His view was that people were basically too stupid. Because they were stupid, it wasn't wrong for him to manipulate them to his ends.
Outwardly he did nothing wrong, he just sold cars. Inwardly though in order to feel OK with his actions he had to adopt a rather cynical and heartless view of humanity.
Killing living things is the same way. It has an inward effect. Those who routinely kill animals such as hunters have walled off a part of themselves from reality so that they can enjoy the activity. I see this directly with friends who hunt. What they really enjoy is getting into the woods and hanging out with the guys etc., but hunting is the activity that gets them all together. Every single one of them is a very nice person, but has pretty much closed off or walled off a part of themselves without even realizing they have done so.
That said, it's not a rule that you may not kill animals. It's a precept to abstain from killing. how you apply this to your moment to moment existence is up to you. You create your own karmic seeds and you alone determine which seeds get nourished so they grow and which do not.
im not trying to start a vegetarian debate. i assure you i could never be a vegeterarian but for those who are and are happy, then im happy for you.
the problem i have is i enjoy hunting. ill give you a story. this happened before i even really knew what buddhism is.
i took my son hunting for the first time last fall. we went squirrel hunting. something my father took me to do and something his father took him and so on. i enjoy hunting. its peaceful. its calming. they may sound contradictory to you but when i hunt i feel like im really a part of nature. i dont lay out traps or feed buckets. i stalk through the woods and only take a single shot firearm.
after walking aways i sat us down on a slight slope of a trail and waited. we sat for several minutes listening to the forest come back to life. within a few moments i spotted a squirrel only fifty yards away on a low branch. i told my son and took aim. when i fired the squirrel fell to the ground wounded and struggling. i called for my son to follow me and ran up to the squirrel.
my shot had been true was fatal. the squirrel would eventually bleed out. i told my son to take notice of this. how the animal was hit and would die but at the current moment he was suffering. so i explained to him how we needed to end his suffering quickly which we did.
we then took him home, cleaned and ate him.
from what i gather this goes contrary to buddhist teachings. however i dont feel what i did was wrong. it felt right. natural. i didnt enjoy seeing the creature suffer. its actually sad and i felt bad for him. when it comes to killing i feel i have kind of a native american indian philosophy. great respect for the animal.
im not sure how i can reconcile this with the buddhas teachings. maybe i cant.
i enjoy being in the woods without hungting as well but there is something i get from stalking game that i dont feel anywhere else. thanks for the tip on karmic seeds. ill have to look those up.
I'd imagine that with diligent practice of the dharma, you'd eventually lose your taste for hunting.
To understand what I mean by karmic seeds this may help.
My brother used to hunt (as did my father and his father). He lost his taste for the killing part so he still went hunting, but his weapon was a camera. He considered it a real challenge to get close enough for a good shot (no stupid long telephoto lens lol).
In your post you said you explained to your son how the shot wasn't an immediate kill and this caused the animal suffering so you did the right thing and completed the kill to eliminate the animal's suffering. Let me give you a question to consider. Why was that particular animal suffering in the first place?
I agree with Chrysalid though. Don't let your taste for hunting to keep you away from the path that leads to liberation from suffering. I think it very likely you will not struggle with this forever. I think with no direct effort on your part you will lose your taste for it and find other ways to bond with your son, spend time in nature, stalk the animals and perhaps start a new parent-child tradition.
my friends and family have asked me if im a buddhist now because i keep talking about. this topic is why i refrain from saying yes.
My partner used to be in the Military Police. He was a member of the British Armed Forces. He learnt everything he needed to learn about guns, looking after them, cleaning them, firing them and using them for their purpose.
He basically underwent thorough training on how to kill.
A few months ago, walking home, we came across a baby squirrel that had obviously somehow fallen out of its drey. It had evidently sustained internal injuries and was bleeding from the nose. It was virtually hairless, quite cold, and breathing erratically.
We rang a friend of mine on my mobile 'phone. She happens to be a veterinary nurse.
We described what had happened and bit by bit, she basically confirmed that there was no hope for the baby squirrel.
Putting it out of its misery seemed to be the best and kindest thing to do, but this was not something I could bring myself to do.
And neither could my partner.
With tears in his eyes, he dug a shallow hole in the undergrowth, at the foot of the tree, and laid the baby into it, gently. Then we covered it with leaves, twigs and a bit of loose soil, and let it die in peace.
The reason we didn't take it home and put it into a box, indoors was that the warmth would have revived it and prolonged its agony.
It was born naturally, it lived for a while, and it died in line with nature.
I would second username_5's point.
Your squirrel wasn't suffering of anything, before you took a shot at it, so teaching your son about compassion in this way, is just something I personally find totally bizarre.....
I'm not judging you, but think carefully about whether you might be able to develop the skill to NOT inflict harm, wilfully, upon other creatures.
im not surprised or offended by my story making you ill. im a firm believer that eveeryone has a right to their own beliefs. like your partner i spent 7 and half years in the infantry. i spent all of 08 in iraq. trained to kill is an accurate description.
to correct you on a point i wasnt attempting to teach my son compassion. i wanted him to understand the difference between purposeful killing and killing for the pleasure of it. i dont want him to be cruel. the few times he has killed a bug ive adonished him for it. asked him why he did that. often his response was "i dont know." however if an insect represents harm to him or us i tell him its ok to kill it. for example we had some wasps take up residence in our windchimes right outside our front door. this represented a danger to us so we got some bug spray and got rid of them.
im sorry if this bothers you, it is not my intention to offend. i am genuinely trying to sort this beliefs out.
i believe in nessecary killing. thats not to say i condone war and im even rethinking my opinions on capital punishment.
and you are absolutely right that the squirrel was not suffering until i shot it.
civilizations and society are based upon the consumption of natural resources. these resources include both plants and animals. i dont believe in animal cruelty and hate the idea of dog fighting. however i find it hard to see the point of putting an animals right to live before that of a humans.
youre right if youre thinking that i didnt need that squirrel for survival. i didnt. however, society is based upon our early neccessity of hunting animals. i further recognize the fragility of our society after spending a month in new orleans after katrina looking for survivors.
perhaps thats my question. is it right to put an animals well being ahead of a humans?
Once in Savatthi the Blessed Buddha said this:
What, householder friends, is the Dhamma explanation befitting to oneself?
Here, householder friends, a Noble Disciple reflects thus: I am one who wishes
to live, who does not wish to die; I desire happiness & do not like any suffering.
If someone were to take my life, it would neither be pleasing nor agreeable to me.
If I kill whatever another being: One who also wishes to live, who also does not
wish to die, who also desires happiness & who also dislike suffering, that would
neither be pleasant nor acceptable to that other being either...
What is displeasing and disagreeable to me, is also displeasing and disagreeable
to any other being too. How can I inflict upon another being what is displeasing
and disagreeable to myself? Having reflected repeatedly thus, then gradually:
1: He/she will carefully avoid all destruction of any life-form whatsoever...
2: He/she will persuade others also to abstain from all destruction of any life...
3: He/she will speak praising harmlessness and avoidance of all & any killing...
In exactly this way is this good bodily behaviour purified in three respects!!!
The above does not apply to plants because plants do not have these things. If you cut a plant with a knife, it does not endure suffering and the wish to not die does not arise. The same can not be said of an animal.
I personally think there are 3 kinds of intentional killing. Necessary killing, purposeful killing and killing for the pleasure. In my opinion, necessary killing is the only kind of acceptable killing and the prerequisite for necessary killing is that you or someone else is going to die if you do not engage in the act of killing. In other words, if it threatens your life or someone else's by not killing, then it is acceptable. After all, that is the way it works in nature. However, most people these days no longer live "in nature" so to speak, so the justification that it's natural does not apply. True, it was an early necessity. However, the important question is: Is it a current necessity? If not, then the fact that it was before is technically irrelevant.
The Blessed Buddha once said:
One should not kill any living being,
nor cause it to be killed,
nor should one incite any other to kill.
Do never injure any being, whether strong
or weak, in this entire universe!
Sutta Nipāta 2.396
The Noble is not one who injures living beings.
The Noble is one who never injures living beings.
Dhammapada 270
I am a friend of the footless,
I am a friend of the bipeds;
I am a friend of those with four feet,
I am a friend of the many-footed.
May not the footless harm me,
may not the bipeds harm me,
may not those with four feet harm me,
and may not those with many feet harm me.
A. II, 72
I would say it is not right to put any being above any other regardless of what species they are.
I don't know that it is necessary to put the life of an animal above your own. For that matter I don't know that it is necessary to put another human's life above your own. I don't know that it's really the point.
John, in your more quiet and reflective moments do you ever question your choice to hunt? If so I encourage you to spend time listening to your own mind. That's where you will find your peace.
You can either reply to the whole quoted passage, or divide it up.
If you look on the bar above the text, you will see two A's crossed out, Bold, italic and underline... and eventually, a cream-yellow rectangular box, with dot-dash lines in it, and a 'tail'. That's your quote box. if you click it, you'll get [ QUOTE ] then [/ QUOTE ] (without spaces either side of the words).
Then highlight the piece you want to quote, and put it between those quote boxes.
If it's any consolation, it took me ages to get round all the different buttons, icons and tasks on the bar and how to use them....
And here's the rest of your post, done for you
Federica. .
i disagree but wont argue the point here.
this is very profound and answers a lot. thank you.
i disagree with the statement we arent in nature. i believe we are a part of nature no matter how civilized we become. if you meant that we arent needing to kill for survival then you would be correct.
youre right it isnt currently necessary but that doesnt mean it wont be. people often find themselves in survival situations when they least expect it. i like the boy scout motto of always be prepared.
i agree. thank you for the instruction.
Like so...
[ quote ]text you wish to quote[ /quote ]
...only without the spaces.
I will share my own experience. This is how I see things. When I see meat presented at a dinner table, for me it's like seeing my own child butchered and prepared for others to eat. It sickens me on a profoundly deep and visceral level. When I read your story about squirrel hunting, it makes me feel the same as if I heard a person was shot and killed.
As far as diet is concerned, I mentioned before that I understand the purpose of eating meat for survival. Many cultures still practice their ancestral hunting rituals where they honor the spirit of the animals who died to provide for their people. While it still hurts me to imagine the suffering inflicted upon the animals, I feel that at least there was sincere respect and a desire to lessen the pain their prey experienced.
So there's my brief opinion on this matter, for what it's worth.
mugzy while i disagree with you on the meat its fine that you feel that way. i think the more tolerant we are the better.
Shariputra asked Buddha why many monks are reborn in hell, but many lay persons are reborn in the deva realms. Buddha replied, "Monks take their vow for their whole life, but don't keep them. Lay persons take their vows for a day and keep them."
May all we lay persons live with mental and physical peace.
we all do what we feel we can and those who aren't a complete saint and out there saving the world should not be criticized because they fall short of being mother teresa. for me, i find giving up meat very easy. it is not comparable to the starving/homeless/etc. because there is nothing to give up that would put food in their mouths. vegetarianism/veganism is a simple daily choice. if i could make a daily decision to abstain from eating carbs, for example, and that would mean that lives of the less fortunate would be saved, then i would do it in a heartbeat. but as you can see, this is not a logical comparison. perfection is something to strive for, definitely, but don't knock those who aren't there yet.
back to the OP-
i think it is impossible to kill another sentient being and to not have it leave a mark on you. i think these actions change us mentally and thus the way that we interact with the world in the future. i have seen many people with no respect for sentient life, you know, the type that swerve to try and hit squirrels in the road. it is truly disturbing but it also made me wonder what was the first step to becoming like this. i am not suggesting that all hunters/farmers become desensitized to killing animals and do so frivolously. but i have seen those that do. i don't agree with hunting, but i am at least glad that you respect life while you do it.
the reason i find this topic confusing is because some argue that ordering a McChicken is not as bad as killing the chicken yourself because there is no intent to kill. going out and slaughtering the chicken is supposed worse than just eating a sandwich because in this day and age, we are so conditioned to completely remove the concept of the original animal from the meat.
but on the other side of the argument... based upon knowledge of the meat industry, i feel that contributing to this (by purchasing and thus supporting it) is just as bad. and perhaps you could say that it is better to kill a wild animal which lived a normal free life yourself. at times i feel like this is better... but then i wonder about the effect on the mind and it makes me question it all over again.
personally, it all just makes my head hurt and this is exactly why i just don't eat meat. got sick of feeling bad about it, lol. damned if you do, damned if you don't (but not literally, of course, haha).
one thing to consider though, you say that you didn't enjoy seeing the squirrel suffer. but why go hunting at all then? there must be some aspect of it that you enjoy (the anticipation, the difficulty, the achievement). these things are tied in with the killing of the animal. i find it hard to believe that you were disappointed to see your shot hit the target. unless you are in a financial situation where you must hunt for your own survival, it is not possible to say that you do not enjoy the killing, yet enjoy hunting. it is integral.
i think the best thing we can do is just do what we feel appropriate. there was a time i felt that eating meat was appropriate, then i became better informed and found that for me, it no longer felt so. so i stopped. in regards to hunting, i agree with others that it is likely that through practicing you may change the way you feel about it. but until then, i guess if it feels appropriate, continue to do so. i personally am against it, but that is a truth that you must find out for yourself. buddhism is all about finding out truth for yourself, not blind faith.
please feel free to continue to study/practice buddhism regardless of some topics you don't agree with. it is not required that you accept everything outright and indeed, i think that with study and practice, you will begin to see the logic in things that once didn't make sense.
That is what I meant yes. Most people don't need to hunt for survival, unlike previous times.
I would agree it does not mean it won't be in the future. However, my point was: Is it right now? Since Karma is made by what is happening right now.
What I found interesting about the idea of surviving after a disaster is that the idea of hunting for food is very unlikely to actually work with the exception of people who live very remotely. Everywhere else the concentration of humans all needing food and no supply of food coming in from elsewhere would result in the land being hunted to the point where little was left to hunt (no game wardens to enforce seasons and quotas) and the water bodies being fished out as nobody would respect the size/quantity limits.
It would actually seem to make more sense to learn how to raise animals such as chickens that could produce a steady supply of eggs and to learn how to 'guerrilla' garden, particularly those plants with long storage lives than to depend on an abundance of wild life remaining abundant.
I found that an interesting perspective. It's not really on topic, but I thought it somewhat related.
People have a hard time letting go of old habits, especially when they've had their actions justified to them by elders that they respect, like parents.
Thing is with Buddhism, if you kill something for the pleasure or the satisfaction (even if that pleasure comes second or third on a list of reasons to do so, after food or pest control) then you have "wrong view" according to the most basic Buddhist philosophy. If you ever truly want to take up the Way in any serious sense, I'm afraid you'd really need to let go of the desire to kill.
If it's been ingrained into you that killing other animals is a good, useful, even necessary skill then you may have a hard time with that.
This couldn't be more correct. Hunter-gathering isn't a sustainable lifestyle, not if you've got a sizeable population.
No, it would not.
In the West there is a surplus of meat, farmers send as many animals as they can to slaughter, the animals are killed regardless of the demand for meat. Supermarkets throw out tonnes of meat that passes its sell-by-date every day, meat that is perfectly edible. By killing deer instead of buying supermarket meat, all you are doing is needlessly killing even more animals.
If you wanted to eat meat, then it would be better to either buy free range and encourage others to do so, thus doing your little bit to shift the market away from mass production to methods with greater concern for animal welfare. Or, go into the supermarket at the end of the day and buy the meat that is on it's sell-by date, because that's the meat that will go into the bin if no one buys it.
i am glad that you feel welcome.
john, i missed the part where you discussed the need to be prepared for a survival situation. if you feel the need to teach your son this, you can always learn how to shoot on targets. if you want more realism with movement, that's why they invented clay pigeons.
Chrysalid-
your posts are always a pleasure to read.
youre right that agriclture is far more sustainable than hunter gatherer and i practice it as much as i can. however i see hunting as still having a vital part. youre right hunting will be hard for a certain amount of time during a societal type collapse. however, hunting is very important should you find yourself in the middle of nowhere.
thats exactly how i feel.
the boys start out on targets but there is a very big difference in shooting at a target vs shooting at a live creature. i think you would agree it is much harder mentaly to kill a living thing than it is to shoot a tin can. bc you are all right, you are taking a life and that should never be done arbitrarily.
the other reason its different is living animals make decisions that targets dont make. clay pigeons offer a moving target but its not the same. a live bird will not fly in a straight line. a rabbit will turn sharply and abruptly.
i fully respect all of yours decisions not to kill any living thing. the problem i have with your logic is you find it acceptable to kill plants. when i look at the natural world i dont see animals moving in front of a background of green. i see the animals and plants interacting, depending on and competing with each other. i see the walnut tree the same as the squirrel nesting in it. both are alive and both command my respect. if i need firewood ill cut the tree down. or eat the nuts it provides. but when i kill the tree while i need it, i still respect it.
i dont mean to be offensive or to say youre wrong for being a vegetarian, im not. i have no desire to convert anyone to my thinking. this is just how i feel and im just trying to see if it fits into buddhism as everything else i feel does.
thanks again for being awesome.
i do see your point. but just remember that this is coming from someone who does not believe in killing animals. as a child, i used to shoot a lot of guns (yeah, i mean child. i grew up in the country, haha). but i've never hit an actual animal. in my opinion, you can gain the necessary shooting skills for survival situations from the inanimate. as i would not want to actually kill an animal unless i had to, this is what i feel would be the appropriate choice. if i was to condone "killing animals for practice for survival situations", to me, that is the same as condoning "killing animals for fun", if you follow my drift. i only condone killing animals for survival situations because there is no other option. you are not guaranteed to ever have that survival situation come. the necessary condition of "survival" is there for neither "practice situations" or "entertainment purposes".
this is the appropriate way of viewing the world, as indeed, all things are connected. but as others have said, the difference between an animal and a plant is that the plant is not viewed as sentient. sentient is defined as the ability to feel or perceive. there have been scientific experiments on the topic, but as of yet, none have proven plants ability to do so.* the dalai lama once said that if science proved buddhist beliefs wrong, then buddhism would have to change. this is how i feel as well. at the moment, however, there is no reason to change my belief as it is supported by science as well.
you could also consider that aside from root vegetables, taking most fruit and veggies do not kill the plant. many plants/trees make their seed (in a fruit/veg form) attractive to us herbivores/omnivores in an attempt to spread the seed through our feces. i doubt this would be the evolutionary development if it was harmful to the plant.
*i did read an article once about some experiment that seemed to show this, however, this experiment was proven to be unable to be replicated and therefore does not stand up to the scientific method.
I enjoyed being out in the bush, learning an ancient art by studying my prey and their habits and their relationship with their environment and learning hunting and stalking skills.
I enjoyed using fire arms and their correct maintenance, re-loading my own ammo and testing them at the local rifle range.
I enjoyed learning butchery and skinning and tanning techniques.
I took pride in one-shot kills that minimised suffering to the animals.
But once I'd learned all of the above, I began to wonder why I continued in this behaviour.
To cut a long story short - I swapped my rifles for a camera and found that I could still be out in the bush amongst the wildlife still practising many of my former skills but now free of that momentary feeling of regret when I downed an animal. Wildlife photography is guilt-free hunting, imho.
Maybe try it and see?
I DO understand where you're coming from, I respect your ethics and I sincerely hope you can solve your dilemma.
Cheers, Mate!