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.
is eating non-vegetarian food really needed? think again please.
misecmisc1
I am a HinduIndia Veteran
somehow was browsing internet. saw this documentary link.
So sad to see this documentary film
Is this the way animals are treated? is eating non-veg food really needed?
my request to all is that if you eat non-vegetarian food, then please stop eating non-vegetarian food and eat only vegetarian food.
So sad to see this documentary film
Is this the way animals are treated? is eating non-veg food really needed?
my request to all is that if you eat non-vegetarian food, then please stop eating non-vegetarian food and eat only vegetarian food.
1
Comments
My family try and buy meat products where the animal has lived a life free from unethical conditions.
I think some of the bigger supermarkets are getting on board too (certainly in Australia and the UK through the efforts of people like Jamie Oliver and Curtis Stone).
http://www.coles.com.au/Portals/0/content/pdf/News/Coles Announces Sow Stall Free Initiative.pdf
A certain supermarket in Australia also recently phased out selling eggs that are not free range.
I am an ovo-lacto vegetarian. I only ate meat a couple times a week for a number of years and then finally stopped all together after reading the Pure Land sutras (they have nothing to do with meat, but after reading about Amida's compassion I couldn't bring myself to eat animals anymore). I have also been cutting back on dairy products, though I strongly doubt I would ever be vegan. **Personally** I do think that vegetarianism is a good fit with Buddhism. I know there are many ways to interprate whether or not eating meat is considered ok or not, since there are some conflicting statements in the sutras. However, in focusing on the spirit of things, I simply could not justify continuing to eat meat.
Here's the thing though... (and why I don't believe dietary choices like this should be pushed on other people)
When it comes to food -- there are many factors that come in to play such as individual dietary needs, culture, family situation, availability etc. To ignore that these factors exist and assume that everyone can and should give up meat is to forget one's compassion for their fellow human beings. Pushing for better standards of care for animals as well as addressing environmental concerns is laudable. So is encouraging people to take the time to be mindful of where different foods come from so they can make more informed decisions -- remember that there are many ways to make a positive difference that don't involve giving up meat entirely. Eating less meat (many in the US eat more meat than is actually good for them), buying from sources that are more humane and ecologically sound, etc. We definitely need to ditch the want-more-fast-cheap mentality which helps creates unsustainable herds of livestock and encourages some attrocious methods of keeping animals.
However, the world is never going to be entirely vegetarian -- meat has been eaten for thousands of years and we are omnivores. I'm not trying to make excuses, but be realistic. There are some battles that simply can't be won and trying to fight them will turn off more people than help your cause (I don't eat meat, and I still get really put off by the rather militant vegetarian activist types). I'm not saying you are one of those types, but I think it's worth mentioning as I've seen that attitude in plenty of other places.
no matter what you eat and how you eat it.. beings will die for you to eat.. this is just the nature of reality.
Existence is dukkha.
Do you eat chocolate, 90% produced with child slavery? Cash crops keeping farmers in servitude etc . . .
In short are you a smug veggie proseletizer? Hopefully not. :wave:
Yet there is a still a huge difference between 100 beings dying and 1,000 beings dying. Growing grains to feed to cows and killing the cows, kills many more beings than just growing grains.
Do you really want this forum to be the type of place where people say, "You're not a real Buddhist because you don't _________________________."
Because if that's what this forum is going to about, please tell me, and I'll be a heckuva lot more forceful about stating my opinions about other people's posts.
But those who have, in the past, got kicked off the forum.
Existence is dukkha.
Do you eat chocolate, 90% produced with child slavery? Cash crops keeping farmers in servitude etc . . .
In short are you a smug veggie proseletizer? Hopefully not. :wave:
well if america would adopt policies of bringing birds to their farms through creating homes for them they would in return eat some insects and if we didn create such huge plots of land insects wouldnt be as big of a problem. the indians lived here much longer than we have and they never had these problems because they knew that one shouldnt tear up 5 acres of land and make it all for crops. rather they had a few spots in the forest where they had their crops. no one wins with plants being sprayed with insecticides because it then runs off the crops eventually and gets into the soil once there the plant probly soaks the pesticides up in its roots just like it does water.
also for the amount of beings that die for us to eat animals is much much greater you have to feed the animals for like 5-x years the food you would instead be eating then you have to provide them water. in place of animal protein their are nuts. there is a show on netflix called vegucated and they show how its 6x more energy inefficient to eat animals
wait what NA pop 1-18 mil am i misunderstanding this or are these numbers goofed? are we talking about birds or people? i recognise the 315mil is of people in america but i remember seeing that a few years back plus with all the illegal immigrants flooding in from mexico it cant be accurate any way
Vegetarianism isn't an option for our family. I'm not going to explain why for the 25th time, lol. But we have in the past few years incorporated more organic veggies and fruits, and more kindly raised meats as we've been able. We try to be more careful about what we waste, including when we happen to eat out. We started our own organic garden and try to add more to it every year.
I do recognize my responsibility towards harming life, and I try to make improvements constantly in that regard. Perhaps one day I will end up being vegetarian. But right now it isn't feasible so I do the best I can in other ways.
In a thread about vegetarianism is the place to do it.
And they should have the right to not be badgered about it unless they go off topic about it in a different thread.
Oh, I thought we had the right to the read and post.
The nagging is in the repeated nature of these threads...like every few weeks...most often by the same individuals. That's practically the definition of nagging.
So let's take your philosophy in this post -- if you don't like my posts, then don't read them. I don't like all your posts, but sometimes I find some of your posts very insightful. I don't just read only what I like.
A big one flew into my room the other day. It was wandering around the bathroom when I went to catch it in a glass. As soon as I trapped it, it was startled and I could see that it was not going nuts in there, but searching for a way out. I only had it for a moment but I really felt that it was quite alert and bright.
Fun memory of waking up with a cockroach on my bare skin!
All beings subsist on food. Some beings eat plants. Some eat other beings. Some eat both. The Buddha strongly suggested in various ways for us not to eat other beings, but told his monks it's OK as long as the meat and fish are pure in three ways: if it hasn't been seen, heard, or suspected to have been killed on purpose for them (MN 55), which I take to mean already dead and ready to cook/eat. (It should be noted that in the story behind Dhp 163, the Buddha himself is said to have rejected Devadatta's demand to institute vegetarianism as a requirement, although he had no issue with monks who chose not to eat meat.)
And while it's only a rule that he gave to the monastic sangha, it seems like a good rule to live by in general. I think that vegetarianism is definitely a more compassionate option that's in line with the Buddha's teachings on ahimsa or harmlessness, and it wouldn't hurt for us as Buddhists, or as a society, to eat less meat, particularly in the West where meat consumption is the highest. Besides all the dietary and environmental arguments, the sheer amount of suffering caused by the meat industry is staggering. That said, eating a strictly vegetarian won't end the suffering caused by agricultural farming methods, which kill a large number of insects as well as other 'pests' (e.g., rodent, rabbits, etc.), not to mention the negative environmental impacts of fertilizer use, etc.
(If anyone's interested, you can find some more of my thoughts about this topic here and here. But the short version is, more important than what you eat is how you eat.)
I'm no expert either, none of us are, as far as I see ....
But I, personally, make a big distinction between living things that can THINK, feel/express emotion (such as nurturing and protecting offspring, grief, etc) and experience pain; and other living things that have brains the size of a grain of rice -or smaller - and/or operate on physical survival instinct, alone.
@vinlyn-
You are right, there are different viewpoints on what constitutes "sentience"...
The way I see it; warm-blooded mammals are pretty much all 'sentient' beings.
While insects, reptiles, mollusks, fish, etc are more instinctual creatures functioning on a very limited, basic level of intelligence; about level with the instinctual functioning of a plant. This is "survival intelligence" - not problem solving, thinking, & nurturing intelligence.
To me, it's logical to make these distinctions and have some sort of "hierarchy" amongst living creatures. But I'm not saying lower level creatures and plants have NO 'value'... not saying that at all -- but they aren't 'sentient' beings, again, IMO.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29915025/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/lobsters-crabs-feel-pain-study-shows/
Well, to me is obvious that if a being try to escape from it, then it feel pain, no need of study to demonstrate that. Plants can't escape to being captured and eaten so if they feel suffering is contraproductive to the plant, also some plant count on that to reproduce (like bees with pollen or birds with seeds, etc.). Anyways is difficult know exactly if a being, animal or plant can feel or not pain, so the best is try to cause the less suffering possible to any being.
Just lean back for a second.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octopus
Here a small octopus gives a walk on dry land and leaves a souvenir to some tourists (maybe)
That octopus video... Is that evolution in action or something lol, kind of creepy.
and yes I hold the same value to the life of a bug as I do a cow and myself. We are all sentient beings that wish to be well , happy, and peaceful, and we are all sentient beings in samsara where there is unavoidable suffering that cannot be stopped, only accepted.
so yes I view animals being slaughtered for meat and animals dying for crops in the same light.
I still believe in metta to all sentient beings. Just if I have to choose between a pig or human and 30,000 insects I will choose the pig or human to save.
and I'm not screaming" save" any animal am I? as I've said I'm not even a vegetarian, I'm just speaking through equanimity with regards to all sentient life and the knowledge that there is and always will be dukkha in the world.