Can a Buddhist eat beef?

Daozen

So I guess by using that same logic you do not eat carrots either?

To produce meat, you must firstly crow vegetable crops to feed the cows (these days, mainly corn, which causes the cows to suffer e coli infections because a cow is evolved to eat grass, and because of these infections cows are dosed with high levels of antibiotics). So, if you believe vegetable cultivation causes suffering, you must admit that meat production causes double-suffering - the suffering of the vegetable grown to feed animals, and the suffering of the animals themselves.

There is meat in the store because people are making an unskillfull living in the meat industry. Not because I buy dead meat.

Their "living" comes from the dollars you spend on their product - meat.

I do not care about the planet I want to reach Nibbana.

Without compassion for your fellow creatures, how will you reach Nibbana?

sndymorn

A few things: I understand that the pig is the most consumed animal in the world. Everyone please go back and revise your posts to reflect that fact ,substituting the words pork , pig, hog, or swine for your use of the "elite's meat", beef. Where an adjective is needed, use porcine.
We are such Westerners are we not? Please try not to generalize (not everyone - many use the term "meat" and more abstractly, "sentient being"), saying "beef " is so first world.

Hey,speaking of the first world, I understand there is a large and growing feral pig population in the USA: they are causing havoc in many rural communities. They look delicious. I know they are a bit lean but something could be done about that. Eating feral hogs could free up farm land and save vegetables, as the protein derived from pigs will not have to be gleaned from normal sources (beef in our case). The "other white meat" is tramping around our back roads looking for trouble. I say we eat them.

These pigs are the bane of the farmers existence as they root up crops and destroy fields. Your carrots will not get to market because of these porcine invaders; your soybeans are being ravaged. Farmers battle, yes battle for their vegetable
crops against them using dogs, and guns, and bullets in the guns, and gunpowder in the bullets.

If you do not grow and protect your own food, the consequences of its production are still on your head. Vegetarians do not get a pass.

sndymorn

Now, how is that for stupid and ridiculous?

InmostLight

@sndymorn I can't tell if that post was sarcastic or not

sndymorn

@sndymorn I can't tell if that post was sarcastic or not

It was stupid and ridiculous and true.

Kartari

as an example: lactose intolerance will make it really difficult to get enough proteins.

Actually, dairy is very easy to replace. Though I suppose that depends on where you live. Milk can be made from anything, it seems: rice, almonds, soy, hemp, coconuts, hazelnuts, oats, etc.. Cheese is more tricky, as non-dairy cheeses often don't melt. But then again, nobody needs cheese for their health, though the taste buds of some will surely disagree.

StaticToybox

as an example: lactose intolerance will make it really difficult to get enough proteins.

Actually, dairy is very easy to replace. Though I suppose that depends on where you live. Milk can be made from anything, it seems: rice, almonds, soy, hemp, coconuts, hazelnuts, oats, etc.. Cheese is more tricky, as non-dairy cheeses often don't melt. But then again, nobody needs cheese for their health, though the taste buds of some will surely disagree.

You'll get my cheese when you pry it from my cold, dead hands!

InmostLight

@sndymorn I've updated a few of the errors in your post to an outlook on how humans are affecting the planet:
Hey,speaking of the first world, I understand there is a large and growing feral human population in the USA: they are causing havoc in many rural communities. They look dangerous. I know they are a bit lean but something could be done about that. Killing feral humans could free up farm land and save vegetables.

These humans are the bane of the plants existence as they use chemical agents harmful to the land and destroy fields. Your carrots will not exist because of these porcine invaders; your soybeans are being ravaged. All species battle, yes battle for their vegetable
crops.

If you do not grow and protect the earth, the consequences of its demise are still on your head

sndymorn

@sndymorn I've updated a few of the errors in your post to an outlook on how humans are affecting the planet:
Hey,speaking of the first world, I understand there is a large and growing feral human population in the USA: they are causing havoc in many rural communities. They look dangerous. I know they are a bit lean but something could be done about that. Killing feral humans could free up farm land and save vegetables.

These humans are the bane of the plants existence as they use chemical agents harmful to the land and destroy fields. Your carrots will not exist because of these porcine invaders; your soybeans are being ravaged. All species battle, yes battle for their vegetable
crops.

If you do not grow and protect the earth, the consequences of its demise are still on your head

Have you heard of something called "tudong?" This is where one goes into the jungle and exists in the Buddha and little else. I read about this guy getting ready to do this and expressing his plan to "watch what the birds eat," and I thought how sad for the bird that they will have to compete with him now.
My thought is ( and my silly post about pigs aimed at) that all is connected and no lifestyle is without a footprint (like your post suggests).
Perhaps where we differ is my decidedly non-Buddhist belief in the primacy of human beings... this notion is a tough one for me to abandon.

Zayl

@Zayl: The meat is only dead and 'there' because you are supporting the industry by buying meat. Beleive me, they're not killing animals for fun, it's purely for profit!

49 reasons to be vegetarian:

http://www.britishmeat.com/49.htm

If I refuse to buy meat, the meat industry will not go away. Besides I tried being a vegetarian and I fell ill and was unable to continue my physical training and my mind got foggy. Humans evolved as omnivores, so I eat a steady diet of both plants and animals. If I ate ONLY meat I'd be having the same problem if I ate ONLY vegetables.

Please, stop being self-righteous, it is unbecoming of you.

sukhita

There is a sutta that tells us that the Buddha did not tolerate a suggestion that monks practice vegetarianism. Did the sutta say why? Or, are people just assuming the reasons?

When the Buddha was invited for meals by rich merchants, he ate meat dishes that were offered to him. And he gave these lay people many teachings, but never talked to them about the "unsatisfactoriness" of buying and consuming meat (in the Pali Canon.) If buying and consuming meat conflicted in any way with the precepts or a person's progress on the Path, why did the Buddha not speak up? After all, he did point out numerous other things a lay person should avoid. I think the Buddha had a valid reason not to comment on this, but I don't have the foggiest idea what it could be. Zayl makes an interesting point "Humans evolved as omnivores, .....". Could that have something to do with it.

There are no easy answers here. Just practice the best you can. Again, as Zayl says, stop being self-righteous.

Sabre

Yes a buddhist can eat beef and it goes like this:

- Open mouth
- Put in meat
- Close mouth
- Chew & taste
- Swallow

Repeat the above until the hamburger/steak/whatever is gone.

Sabre

Sabre

The most dangerous thing I think about vegetarianism is the fact people identify themselves with it. "I am the vegetarian" or "I am the vegan". "I am right", "My eating pattern is more righteous than yours" etc. This makes you hold on to your identity view while Buddhism is about destroying that view. So however you eat, don't identify with it and allow others their own diet is, I think, the wisest thing to do.

Personally I eat meat when I'm eating somewhere and it is offered, but I don't cook it for myself. Vegetarianism really isn't very important to be a Buddhist. I'm 100% sure a person who eats meat can get enlightened and can be the most caring person you have ever met. It's about your intentions, not about what you eat exactly. Far more important is to eat moderately, slowly and thankful for the food you have.

Daozen

@zayl: by your logic, a murderer should keep killing people, because, hey, even if he stops, other murders will still happen. Doesn't make sense, does it?

Victorious

Hey Victorious,

Thats total hippocracy.

So I guess by using that same logic you do not eat carrots either?.

There is truth in what you're saying here.

Obviously

I don't think the two can be compared as equals, however.

First, there is a distinction between ecologically friendly (e.g. organic) farming and conventional farming. The former is more considerate of animal populations while the latter is not. For example, an organic farmer might dedicate a small patch of land to planting certain flowers that attract insects away from the crops, whereas a conventional farm typically resorts to spraying harmful insecticides to kill all insects.

I think you are missing the whole point of Buddhism. Buddhism is not about saving the world. And you are missing the point of my argument. Both ways kills livings beings. Period. The Intention is the same in buying a carrot vs buying a piece of meat. If you have a relavant argument to gainsay that then please present it. Ecological farming is not the issue here.

Second, there is imo a difference between killing an animal and eating its meat and developing land that animals were using to hunt, gather, or live on. In the latter case, the animals still have a chance at survival (e.g. by moving elsewhere), and the intent is not to harm the animals but to plant crops.

Yes you tell that to the animals that got killed while farming carrots and see if they care. They will probably be all like " Ok I see then I guess its all right if you run over my kids with you plough so you can grow carrots for your sallad".
And do they really have a chance of survival elsewhere? No brother they do not that is why so many species are becomming exctinct right now. Did you know that the number of species dying out now is compareable to the number that got extinct when the dinosaurs where eradicatet? Do you really think that is normal?

You are right though in that even farming certainly causes suffering and death for animals, though in both intent and in the degree of that suffering there is a significant distinction.

Which would be?

Of course, if you decided today to stop eating meat, the meat industry would not be phased. But it would cause a very minor decrease in the number of animal deaths per year since that's one less person creating a demand for meat.

And how would the lessened animal deaths which YOU claim is totally unconnected to me further my progress to nibbana?


R
Victor

Sabre

The Intention is the same in buying a carrot vs buying a piece of meat.

This I am not so sure about. When I was quite mindful once I closely watched my intentions when wanting to buy meat and it certainly is different because it is like the animal is killed for you especially. This is something the Buddha did not allow for his monks, they could only eat meat when it was given. This precept must have had a reason.

Now you are not a monk ok, but in the supermarket it is not given. You buy it, so it is killed for you, that's how I see it and how my mind reacted on that moment. Besides, the butcher had to kill and you accept that by buying meat. That's a second reason. You sustain somebody else his not-right livelihood.

This can however be something personal and I don't want to judge your consumption (I don't care about what anybody other than me eats or buys anyway), but I think one should always be mindful of the suffering of animals when consuming meat. To my mind that certainly is not the same as eating a carrot.

So I guess it is middle way again. Don't take vegetarianism to heavy, but also not to light.

Victorious

So I guess by using that same logic you do not eat carrots either?

To produce meat, you must firstly crow vegetable crops to feed the cows (these days, mainly corn, which causes the cows to suffer e coli infections because a cow is evolved to eat grass, and because of these infections cows are dosed with high levels of antibiotics). So, if you believe vegetable cultivation causes suffering, you must admit that meat production causes double-suffering - the suffering of the vegetable grown to feed animals, and the suffering of the animals themselves.

Exactly how does that answer my question? You are saying that buying meat is encouraging someone to kill a living being. I retorted that so is buying carrots on account of all the animals getting killed while farming them and your best answer is that it is ecologically better to grow veggis? How is that any answer to my question?

You still have not answered my initial question Where in the suttas does it say I can not attain nibbana because I buy or eat meat?

There is meat in the store because people are making an unskillfull living in the meat industry. Not because I buy dead meat.

Their "living" comes from the dollars you spend on their product - meat.

My dollars go to the Grocery store. The grocery store money goes to the Merchants and so on. Some of it gets in government pockets and end up funding hospitals and the police etc. Even if you could make a case proving that part of my money ends up at the butcher then how can you prove to me that my intention in buying meat is worse than in buying a carrot? Because I know it is not.

Without compassion for your fellow creatures, how will you reach Nibbana?

Well gee I do not know but I will take a wild guess: By cultivating the Dhamma?
And not attaching to megalomaniac world saving schemes?

:wtf:


R
Victor

Cloud

There's an interesting point. Who is the animal killed for, if not the person who buys it? It may not be known "which" person will buy it, but obviously there's a demand for the product.

Follow that through, and you come to the conclusion that if we purchase meat, we are the intended recipient. It was killed for us. Seems it would be breaking the precept, unless we're trying to get out of it.

Sabre

Exactly how does that answer my question? You are saying that buying meat is encouraging someone to kill a living being. I retorted that so is buying carrots on account of all the animals getting killed while farming them and your best answer is that it is ecologically better to grow veggis? How is that any answer to my question?

The difference is the butcher goes to work thinking: "I'm going to kill some cows today", while the farmer thinks: "I'm going to grow some crops today".

Their intention is totally different. And as you know it is all about intention in Buddhism. So for you to buy meat, there has to be a butcher whose intention it is to kill. If it is possible to have a diet without 'being responsible' for this, why not?

Again, this can be personal and maybe even change over time (everybody is different), but I'm now talking about my own experience. Maybe one day if I get good mindfulness again I will try to buy meat again and see if it is possible, because only then can you really see.

Victorious

The Intention is the same in buying a carrot vs buying a piece of meat.

This I am not so sure about. When I was quite mindful once I closely watched my intentions when wanting to buy meat and it certainly is different because it is like the animal is killed for you especially. This is something the Buddha did not allow for his monks, they could only eat meat when it was given. This precept must have had a reason.

So you think the people at the slaughter house hangs around the conveyer belt and thinks. "Yep there goes the pig that we are going to kill for Victor"?

Well Sabre I do not think so do you?

Besides, the butcher had to kill and you accept that by buying meat. That's a second reason. You sustain somebody else his not-right livelihood.

There are plenty of occupations other than being a Butcher. Why exactly did the butcher have to kill? Killing is our own choice. Most times I choose not to kill.

This can however be something personal and I don't want to judge your consumption (I don't care about what anybody other than me eats or buys anyway), but I think one should always be mindful of the suffering of animals when consuming meat. To my mind that certainly is not the same as eating a carrot.

So while eating meat you should be mindful of the suffering of that particular animal but when eating a carrot you should not be mindful of the suffering/deaths of animals during production of your carrot?

Do you really think that is logical?

This whole Vegitarian thing is a emotional flingy without any root in Buddhism. At least not the suttas.


R
Victor

Victorious

Exactly how does that answer my question? You are saying that buying meat is encouraging someone to kill a living being. I retorted that so is buying carrots on account of all the animals getting killed while farming them and your best answer is that it is ecologically better to grow veggis? How is that any answer to my question?

The difference is the butcher goes to work thinking: "I'm going to kill some cows today", while the farmer thinks: "I'm going to grow some crops today".

Their intention is totally different. And as you know it is all about intention in Buddhism.
So for you to buy meat, there has to be a butcher whose intention it is to kill. If it is possible to have a diet without 'being responsible' for this, why not?

That dear Sabre as you pointed out so carefully is the Buthers intention and the Farmers intention. Not mine. My intention is to not be hungry any more. So you see you are making my point.

The intention is everything when it comes to Karma. I have no intention to kill anybody when buying meat.

But that was not my question.

The quesion that everybody is so carefully avoiding to answer is where in the suttas does it say that I can not reach nibbana because I buy or eat meat.


There is no such place in the suttas.

R
Victor

Sabre

So you think the people at the slaughter house hangs around the conveyer belt and thinks. "Yep there goes the pig that we are going to kill for Victor"?

Well Sabre I do not think so do you?

Ok, he might not be thinking about you, but for sure he is killing and in a way -though very indirect and that's why it's indeed doubt-able whether it matters- you support that.

There are plenty of occupations other than being a Butcher. Why exactly did the butcher have to kill? Killing is our own choice. Most times I choose not to kill.

It's not his choice. The butcher is making bad karma without him knowing he is.

So while eating meat you should be mindful of the suffering of that particular animal but when eating a carrot you should not be mindful of the suffering/deaths of animals during production of your carrot?

Do you really think that is logical?

If you feel a strong connection between a carrot and the died animals, I would advice you to do so, yes. In any way it is a good practice to be thankful for our food. It is a luxury that we can just walk in a supermarket and buy whatever we want and we should be very, very thankful for that.

This whole Vegitarian thing is a emotional flingy without any root in Buddhism. At least not the suttas.


R
Victor

Buddhism is about emotion more than it is about reading suttas. That's why I've said multiple times it is probably personal. You can't just say anybody is wrong or right on this subject.

Sabre

That dear Sabre as you pointed out so carefully is the Buthers intention and the Farmers intention. Not mine. My intention is to not be hungry any more. So you see you are making my point.

But you and the butcher are interconnected through your deed of buying meat. You are not seperate from him and if you see this it becomes harder to buy meat. Or at least for me it did. The endless string of events from you buying meat can be traced back to a guy killing an animal.

The quesion that everybody is so carefully avoiding to answer is where in the suttas does it say that I can not reach nibbana because I buy or eat meat.

Vegetarianism really isn't very important to be a Buddhist. I'm 100% sure a person who eats meat can get enlightened and can be the most caring person you have ever met.

I am not pro or against anything in this thread. I am just applying some counter views to think about because I have not totally worked out this 'problem' yet.

If you think your intentions are pure, then they probably are and then that's great.

Sabre

Daozen

@victorious You pay the grocer for your meat.The grocer pays the wholesaler. The wholesaler pays the farmer. It's no different from paying the farmer directly yourself. Economics 101.

Cloud

Yeah that's what I see. In the old days you'd go to a butcher, he'd prepare the meat for you right there, and you'd pay him. Nowadays we feel a distance from the slaughter of animals because of all the "middle men" and the supermarket. It feels impersonal. Really it's not, it's the same thing. Someone is killing an animal and preparing the meat, and you're paying for it. It doesn't matter what anyone else does, only what you do; that's the only thing that matters for enlightenment, your own karma.

Eating meat isn't going to keep you from Nirvana, but not understanding this might. That's the key, seeing things how they really are. The further we're into delusional thinking, the further from an awakened state of clarity.

Victorious

So you think the people at the slaughter house hangs around the conveyer belt and thinks. "Yep there goes the pig that we are going to kill for Victor"?

Well Sabre I do not think so do you?

Ok, he might not be thinking about you, but for sure he is killing and in a way -though very indirect and that's why it's indeed doubt-able whether it matters- you support that.

How come I support his killing? I do not buy it from the butcher. I buy the meat from the grocery store.

It's not his choice. The butcher is making bad karma without him knowing he is.

What does it matter if he knows he is making bad karma or not? Ignorance of the path is one of the roots of bad karma. His action and his intention is his choice. Buddhism is not fatalistic.

So while eating meat you should be mindful of the suffering of that particular animal but when eating a carrot you should not be mindful of the suffering/deaths of animals during production of your carrot?

Do you really think that is logical?

If you feel a strong connection between a carrot and the died animals, I would advice you to do so, yes. In any way it is a good practice to be thankful for our food. It is a luxury that we can just walk in a supermarket and buy whatever we want and we should be very, very thankful for that.

What do you mean. The animals got killed because the farmer farmed a field of carrots. How can there not be a strong connection?

Buddhism is about emotion more than it is about reading suttas. That's why I've said multiple times it is probably personal. You can't just say anybody is wrong or right on this subject.

You are wrong. I just said that.

Daozen

@cloud yes, exactly. buddhist ethics are about skills to reduce suffering of ourselves and other sentient beings.

Victorious

@victorious You pay the grocer for your meat.The grocer pays the wholesaler. The wholesaler pays the farmer. It's no different from paying the farmer directly yourself. Economics 101.

You answer the parts of my questions that has no real weight. Why is that?
Not well deviced answers are they either. It is still the same as a carrot. Whoever pays who.

Now answer my real question: Where in the suttas does it say I can not attain nibbana because I buy and eat meat?

Victorious

Yeah that's what I see. In the old days you'd go to a butcher, he'd prepare the meat for you right there, and you'd pay him. Nowadays we feel a distance from the slaughter of animals because of all the "middle men" and the supermarket. It feels impersonal. Really it's not, it's the same thing. Someone is killing an animal and preparing the meat, and you're paying for it. It doesn't matter what anyone else does, only what you do; that's the only thing that matters for enlightenment, your own karma.

Eating meat isn't going to keep you from Nirvana, but not understanding this might. That's the key, seeing things how they really are. The further we're into delusional thinking, the further from an awakened state of clarity.

Not a very convincing argument is it if you think about it for a second? Here let me show you:

Someone is farming a field of carrots and you are responsible for every life that dies on that field because you are paying for it.
It doesn't matter what anyone else does, only what you do; that's the only thing that matters for enlightenment, your own karma.

Eating carrots isn't going to keep you from Nirvana, but not understanding this might. That's the key, seeing things how they really are. The further we're into delusional thinking, the further from an awakened state of clarity.

Victorious

@cloud yes, exactly. buddhist ethics are about skills to reduce suffering of ourselves and other sentient beings.

Then you really aught to give up on carrots. Dont you think?

Daozen

@victorious A carrot is not a sentient being

Daozen

@victorious A carrot is not a sentient being

Victorious

@victorious A carrot is not a sentient being

OMG.Have you even bothered to read my arguments?

:banghead:

Victorious

If anybody is interested. This is a bit relevant to this thread. It is about the history of vegitarianism in Buddhism.

http://www.dhammasara.webs.com/JivakaSutta.html Read the comments further down the page.

Daozen

Good link. It explains very well that meat eating is only condoned when necessary. These days, it is never necessary.

compassionate_warrior

It says the suttra in question was written almost 1000 years after the Buddha, and is "a Mahayana text". It says that it's most likely not at all the words of the Buddha.

Zayl

@zayl: by your logic, a murderer should keep killing people, because, hey, even if he stops, other murders will still happen. Doesn't make sense, does it?

So, let me get this straight.

I choose to purchase an item which, no matter what my decision, will always be there to be bought by someone else. I did not kill the item in question, but it is there anyway whether I buy it, or not.

So that suddenly equates to murder? Please stop being so self-righteous and pretentious and drop your attachment to your diet, it is only hindering you. When I buy meat I'm not taking some sort of perverse pleasure in the fact that the animal this meat belongs to died. I feel the same way whether I am buying a steak, or if I am buying a can of paint. I eat meat to survive and supplement my diet. I do not have the spare time or motivation it takes to slave over a veggie-only diet for the sake of saving already dead animals.

I tried going vegetarian once, I managed my diet very carefully making sure I got plenty of proteins from beans and tofu, and what I didn't get from my food I took vitamin supplements for. I still fell ill and became physically weakened to the point where performing daily tasks became rather difficult.

Not everyone can be like you, nor do they care to.

Deal with it.

StaticToybox

There's an interesting point. Who is the animal killed for, if not the person who buys it? It may not be known "which" person will buy it, but obviously there's a demand for the product.

Follow that through, and you come to the conclusion that if we purchase meat, we are the intended recipient. It was killed for us. Seems it would be breaking the precept, unless we're trying to get out of it.

I think the same could be said of grains, fruits and vegetables, especially with modern farming methods. Many beings suffer and die in the production. By buying those grains, fruits and vegetables it could be said that you're supporting their suffering. Unless you grow your own and can personally guarantee that no other creatures are harmed in doing so. But how many of us can say that?

Daozen

@zayl looks like you completely missed my point. Read again, and you will see the murder analogy was about why you don't have to eat meat simply because that's what other people do, which was an excuse you used.

Now, as for buying that meat, as I've already explained, it's really basic economics to understand that, when you purchase an item, you are validating it's existence. Of course the meat sitting on the shelf wasn't personally killed for you, but it might as well have been. If it is easier for you to understand, imagine what happens AFTER you buy that meat: the supermarket must now replace it, so it buys more meat, and THAT meat was ONLY bought because of your purchase. Whichever way you look at it, there is a level of choice and responsibility involved.

I think you DO understand where I'm coming from,because you said you tried being vegetarian. Why was that?

Daozen

@statictoy box A grain, vegetable, or any bacteria and insects living on them are not sentient beings. So their suffering cannot be compared to a cow. Secondly, remember that cows need to be fed grain themselves, so growing grain is unavoidable - a veggie diet avoids the animal suffering.

Zayl

@zayl looks like you completely missed my point. Read again, and you will see the murder analogy was about why you don't have to eat meat simply because that's what other people do, which was an excuse you used.

Now, as for buying that meat, as I've already explained, it's really basic economics to understand that, when you purchase an item, you are validating it's existence. Of course the meat sitting on the shelf wasn't personally killed for you, but it might as well have been. If it is easier for you to understand, imagine what happens AFTER you buy that meat: the supermarket must now replace it, so it buys more meat, and THAT meat was ONLY bought because of your purchase. Whichever way you look at it, there is a level of choice and responsibility involved.

I think you DO understand where I'm coming from,because you said you tried being vegetarian. Why was that?

'cause for awhile my body was unable to eat meat without me getting a bit quesy, plus I decided I wanted to eat a little healthier. I've found a happy balance between the two though. Every meal I eat has a small bit of organic meat, and a wide selection of vegetables and grains.

Feels good.

StaticToybox

@statictoy box A grain, vegetable, or any bacteria and insects living on them are not sentient beings. So their suffering cannot be compared to a cow. Secondly, remember that cows need to be fed grain themselves, so growing grain is unavoidable - a veggie diet avoids the animal suffering.

If you think I am referring to the suffering of bacteria then you've quite missed the point of my post. And if you think that no other beings suffer from the production of your food then you have rather little understanding of modern farming.

Cloud

The deep compassion for animals as being no different from ourselves, seeing only mind and form (of which mind suffers, wants only happiness), comes through practice. It develops over time. It is this compassion that stops someone from buying meat, not that they're told not to. The meat industry is not an "incidental" killing of animals, that is its very purpose, and we might as well be growing humans and eating them if we did not separate human from animal, us from them, "inferior" mind from "superior" mind as if this has weight in nature.

This discussion has gotten really off the rails, to the point of not eating anything at all because there is always some kind of incidental deaths or killing of animals even during the production of vegetables and fruits. This is a sad fact, but going too far from compassion and toward technicality and insanity. Closing this thread unless the OP requests it be re-opened, and even then only if there's good reason.

Use your own judgment people, that's all you can do.