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.
Killing Animals
Hi, I'm new to this site
Anyway my Buddy is a Buddhist as well as my self he enjoys sports as my self. kind to people and his dogs. but goes out once in a while Hunting Shooting Rabbits and birds.
Now i don't know is this right or not. Even thou we eat meat buy it from our butchers and cook it enjoy eating meat. is it a Sin to kill an animal to eat it??
I was talking to my Cousin. and talking to him about killing animals to eat.
He was saying when we talk breath were killing anything in that air. we enjoy meat so were agreeing on the killing of the Cow or sheep buy eating it going to fast food places etc were also helping the animal by allowing to be once again into the Realms of Barodo
so can some one please shed light on this, is it ok to kill? but wrong to kill and joke or laugh about the killing but infact pray for the dead animal and wish it for a Human rebirth?
Anyway my Buddy is a Buddhist as well as my self he enjoys sports as my self. kind to people and his dogs. but goes out once in a while Hunting Shooting Rabbits and birds.
Now i don't know is this right or not. Even thou we eat meat buy it from our butchers and cook it enjoy eating meat. is it a Sin to kill an animal to eat it??
I was talking to my Cousin. and talking to him about killing animals to eat.
He was saying when we talk breath were killing anything in that air. we enjoy meat so were agreeing on the killing of the Cow or sheep buy eating it going to fast food places etc were also helping the animal by allowing to be once again into the Realms of Barodo
so can some one please shed light on this, is it ok to kill? but wrong to kill and joke or laugh about the killing but infact pray for the dead animal and wish it for a Human rebirth?
0
Comments
The action of killing other creatures has to be volitional to be harmful.
In other words, killing other creatures by accident (bugs against a car wind shield, mowing the lawn) does not accumulate bad karma because that is not your primary intention, and you don't either mean, or want to do it.
Wilfully hurting or killing another creature - hunting them with the intention and purpose of killing - is totally against Buddhist precepts.
If he is a really practising Buddhist, then he should (a) know this, and (b) not do this.
It sounds as if he is just paying lip-service though.
Note, that some Buddhists do eat meat. The Buddha stated it was permissible providing we did not kill it ourselves, or that we requested someone kill it for us, or that the animal was specifically killed for us (ie, in our honour).
Some would argue that the whole meat industry is geared to 'killing for us' and Buddhists themselves are divided on vegetarianism.
But your friend - and you - are both highly unskilful in your actions if you kill. Whether you eat the animal or not.
Oh and by the way: Welcome to the forum! Thank you for asking.....
do we not have the intention of getting worms out of our dog and kill them as goes with the fleas that would be in their hair or maybe a child's hear. Bed Bugs that would be in our bed.
The question you ask is one which every one of us has asked at some time or other and is useful because it serves to demonstrate that we are not called to some sort of absolute 'perfection' but to a middle way.
As you so rightly say, we cannot live without killing something, even if it is only the action of our immune system eliminating unwelcome bacteria.
And, as Fede says, the key to all this is our intention and our awareness.
I would add that Fede gives you a counsel of perfection. It would be absurd, for example, to starve yourself to death if there was not sufficient vegetable matter to sustain life - as, for example, on the Tibetan plateau. When the Dalai Lama and his companions reached India in 1959, the attempted to follow a vegan diet. He records, in his first autobiography, that they fell ill: he became seriously ill with jaundice and had to adjust his diet accordingly.
In the rich and prosperous countries, eating a vegetarian diet is quite simple and pleasant but I would hesitate to recommend it as some sort of spiritually 'better' path when I consider how much of humanity starves. Much better, if it is not possible to be fully vegetarian, to begin by reducing food intake and cutting down on meat. A moment of concentration and focus on gratitude before and after eating helps to purify our intention as well.
As for hunting, in countries where it is unnecessary for feeding ourselves and our families, I would, personally, deem it unskillful.
In Buddhism, intentions are very important. All intentional actions of body, speech and mind are said to act as causes, which in turn produce effects. The quality of the intention behind any given action (e.g., skillful, unskillful, etc.) conditions the quality of the results of that action and how they're experienced (e.g., pleasant, unpleasant, etc.).
When it comes to killing, for example, Buddhism posits that the intention to kill is inherently unskillful (i.e., rooted in hate or delusion) and leads to unpleasant results in both this life and the next. In the case of killing an animal, the act of killing negatively conditions our consciousness, as well as the results of that particular action. So not only would killing an animal harm the animal by depriving it of life, but it'd negatively impact ourselves in some way too.
The mechanism behind this is called kamma or karma, which literally means "action." For more information about kamma, I'd suggest reading Kamma: A Study Guide.
So from the Buddhist perspective, the act of killing requires the intention to kill. Therefore, the first precept is only breached when one intends to kill another living being, i.e., things like unintentional deaths that result from accidents aren't considered killing. The same applies to eating meat, i.e., eating meat that hasn't been deliberate killed by you or for you at your request is not considered killing or a violation of the first precept.
Jason
I often attend a Centre where the teacher is a Tibetan monk, raised in the Dalai Lama's monastery from age 9. He teaches us that even if we unintentionally kill a sentient being, there will be a degree of negative karma. The amount of negative karma depends on ... (1) did we kill? (2) did we kill intentionally? (3) did we rejoice over the killing? (4) was there no subsequent remorse or behavior change? The more of these that apply, the stronger the negative imprint we have set for ourselves. Well yeah ... if we go around deliberately killing and being happy about it we surely ARE setting mental habits that will affects us into the future!
The Tibetans, clever folk that they are, have a mantra to bless their feet when they arise in the morning, so it is not so harmful when they accidentally step on insects through the day.
Regardless of your own orientation, I think the overall message is that (1) all sorts of karma going to be generated on a continual basis (both positive and negative), and (2) that we need to generate compassion in both attitude and deed throughout our day.
As for the Five Precepts, these are first-level vows that may or may not be taken by laymen. The Tibetan "take" is that it is far better NOT to take the vows than to take them if you cannot keep them absolutely. The explanation is that when you follow the vows, the good karma earned from the good action is amplified immensely. Similarly, when your actions are contrary to the vows, the bad karma earned is also amplified immensely.
I am, many years later, still trying to perfect these vows before I take them. Maybe in my next human life?
According to what I have learnt in Theravada, there is NO negative kamma accrued for an unintentional, non-volitional action.
If you kill something, and it was a complete accident, with no intention on your part at all - there is NO negative kamma accrued.
No mention there of any non-volitional or unintentional action......
This, according to Theravada are the conditions which must be present to accumulate negative Kamma with killing....
From here:
I am thinking that this might be a differing view depending on the school. I also attend a Tibetan Buddhist center, and have heard the teaching that even though it is not our intention to kill these sentient beings, simply by living our day to day lives, we do take the lives of numerous sentient beings and this does incur some negative Karma. Though it is my understanding that because we are not trying to kill these beings, rather it is simply unavoidable and part of the karma of our daily life, it is not such a negative karmic action.
I think you're right. Different schools understand the doctrine of karma in different ways. Theravada, for example, defines karma as intentional actions of body, speech and mind, which conforms to the Buddha's words in AN 6.63:
So in the Theravadin understanding of karma, intention is the key; therefore no intention, no karma.
And yet I often hear it taught in other tradition that unintentional actions also constitute karma, even though this seems to contradict what the Buddha himself appears to have said on the matter. It'd be interesting to know the doctrinal basis for this view.
Hello FoibleFull,
Thank you for this. I think your points are very important, particularly what you say about taking the Precepts.
I would add that the Precepts are not commandments, they are, as Thich Nhat Hanh says, trainings. To import the notion of commandments into Buddhism is to misunderstand the Dharma, I think.
it is unskillful to kill anything.
it is not unskilled to make light of something, or rather, anything.
and killing a creature definitely does not help them in any way, perhaps other than in situations of extreme suffering. by killing a creature you are just cutting short their gains in understanding.
I agree with you. Surely it all comes down to intention? And if the skunk was going to die shortly anyway...
I asked my buddhist teacher about this issue recently, regarding a domestic cat who was dying; would it be OK to have it put to sleep by the vet? I asked. He said intention was important - we should ask whether the assisted death was really for the creature's benefit, or for ourselves, perhaps, if we couldn't stand to see it suffering (or even, couldn't afford more vet's bills!). And that maybe the creature's karma still had to play itself out for a bit longer, in which case hastening its death might interfere with a good rebirth.
Those things considered though, he said that if we were motivated only by kindness for the creature, our own karmic debt would be small.
Frankly, if needs be I'd be prepared to take some negative karma on behalf of the animal anyway.
I've wondered that too. My cats really suffer with fleas and worms in the summer months. The worms in particular can make them very ill. A bad infestation of fleas can go on to kill a kitten.
So, do I treat or don't I? Either way, beings come to harm.
This is hypothesis. The teacher has as much knowledge on the subject as you, in which case I would deem it close to useless to have even proffered the comment.
Karma is one of the Imponderables. Such comments are neither skilful nor helpful.
If he doesn't know, how would he expect you to make a judgement call....?
Please explain?
True. Though by the end of the discussion I had a better idea of the importance of one's intentions when sailing close to the wind with negative actions. At the end of the day, you're on your own with your conscience, it would seem.
<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Ckmh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> It is truly all about intention. If you intend to go out and kill this cow to eat, then yes it is breaking a precept. If you never held the intention of killing then no. the Buddha was quite clear on this matter. And considering he died from food poisoning from eating uncooked pork I think we can conclude it’s based purely on intention.
<o></o>
When we eat meat an animal dies, when we eat vegetables or fruits thousands of insects die from insecticides. Either way something is dying in order for us to eat.
How do we know Buddha died of food poisoning? (Imagines CSI...)
<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Ckmh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> Can it be proven of course not I am clearly going off of what has been supposedly passed down. Regardless of the truth of that matter the fact still remains that it still based solely on intention no?
Who holds the debt?
Insight! I owe you a chicken.
There is some contention that it was a mushroom, that was called 'pork meat'... But in actual fact, he died of an accute intestinal infection.
Once home, I'll post the link......(I'm in the library at the mo'....:D)
both the idea of karmic debt and no-self are based upon dependent origination and are compatible with the teachings.
karmic connections between beings are being made all of the time, some of those connections are positive and some are negative, but there is most certainly a relationship.
since both parties and the relationships are based on causes and conditions the possibilities for karmic back and forth is endless.
I honestly feel that, if i feel it would be ok to kill them it would be ok for me to be killed.
I don't know anything about right or wrong in that sense.
It is absolutely wrong to kill animals for food. It it the most basic and gross error of sentient beings to do so. You cannot justify it by saying the animal will go to a happy bourne by eating it - only a siddha endowed with magic powers, or a Buddha can effectively transfer the consciousness of a deceased being to a particular realm. If an ordinary person kills and eats it, it will in most cases be reborn in hell, and probably will see you and your friend there and will get its revenge. I'm not trying to be contrite here, I am telling you the truth.
You ought to abandon killing animals and only eat vegetarian food unless you absolutely have no choice. Otherwise, you will never be very happy - truly so - and after this life is finished, you will be born in hell, as a ghost, an animal, a demon, or a miserable human being.
This has been explained by the Buddha in a thousand ways in a hundred sutras - there can be no doubt about it. All sentient beings love life. They all fear death. Just as you and I do.
Even in non-Buddhist faiths there is the prohibition against killing animals, and the people of those faiths know nothing of enlightenment and the profound vows of bodhisattvas, yet they still desist from the evil vice of destroying life. In that case, how could a respectable Buddhist destroy life.
If you have any doubts, you should consult the Chapter on Meat-Eating in the Lankavatara Sutra. Read it. Understand it. It is unequivocal. There can be no misunderstanding:
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]The Bhagavan said this to him: For innumerable reasons, Mahāmati, the Bodhisattva, whose nature is compassion, is not to eat any meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]bhagavāṁstasyaitadavocat-aparimitairmahāmate kāraṇairmāṁsaṁ sarvamabhakṣyaṁ kṛpātmano bodhisattvasya |[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif] I will explain them [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tebhyastūpadeśamātraṁ vakṣyāmi |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, in this long course of transmigration here, there is not one living being that, having assumed the form of a living being, has not been your mother, or father, or brother, or sister, or son, or daughter, or the one or the other, in various degrees of kinship [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]ha mahāmate anena dīrgheṇ[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]ā[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]dhvanā saṁsaratāṁ prāṇināṁ nāstyasau kaścitsattvaḥ sulabharūpo yo na mātābhūtpitā vā bhrātā vā bhaginī vā putro vā duhitā vā anyatarānyataro vā svajanabandhubandhūbhūto vā |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]and when acquiring another form of life may live as a beast, as a domestic animal, as a bird, or as a womb-born, or as something standing in some relationship to you; [this being so] how can the Bodhisattva-Mahāsattva who desires to approach all living beings as if they were himself and to practise the Buddha-truths, eat the flesh of any living being that is of the same nature as himself? Even, Mahāmati, the Rakshasa, listening to the Tathagata's discourse on the highest essence of the Dharma, attained the notion of protecting [Buddhism], and, feeling pity, refrains from eating flesh; how much more those who love the Dharma! [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tasya anyajanmaparivṛttāśrayasya mṛgapaśupakṣiyonyantarbhūtasya bandhorbandhubhūtasya vā sarvabhūtātmabhūtānupāgantukāmena sarvajantuprāṇibhūtasaṁbhūtaṁ māṁsaṁ kathamiva bhakṣyaṁ syādbuddhadharmakāmena bodhisattvena mahāsattvena ? rākṣasasyāpi mahāmate tathāgatānāmimāṁ dharmasudharmatāmupaśrutya upagatarakṣabhāvāḥ kṛpālavā bhavanti māṁsabhakṣaṇavinivṛttāḥ, kimuta dharmakāmā janāḥ | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]T[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]hus, Mahāmati, wherever there is the evolution of living beings, let people cherish the thought of kinship with them, and, thinking that all beings are [to be loved as if they were] an only child, let them refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]evaṁ tāvanmahāmate teṣu teṣu jātiparivarteṣu sarvasattvāḥ svajanabandhubhāvasaṁjñāḥ sarvasattvaikaputrakasaṁjñābhāvanārthaṁ māṁsaṁ sarvamabhakṣyam |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]So with Bodhisattvas whose nature is compassion, meat is to be avoided by him [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]kṛpātmano bodhisattvasyābhakṣyaṁ māṁsam |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Even in exceptional cases, it is not [compassionate] of a Bodhisattva of good standing to eat meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]vyabhicārādapi mahāmate māṁsaṁ sarvamabhakṣyaṁ cāritravato bodhisattvasya | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]The flesh of a dog, an ass, a buffalo, a horse, a bull, or man, or any other [being], Mahāmati, that is not generally eaten by people [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]śvakharoṣṭrāśvabalīvardamānuṣamāṁsādīni hi mahāmate lokasyābhakṣyāṇi māṁsāni | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]is sold on the roadside as mutton for the sake of money; and therefore, Mahāmati, the Bodhisattva should not eat meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tāni ca mahāmate vīthyantareṣvaurabhrikā bhakṣyāṇīti kṛtvā mūlyahetorvikrīyante yataḥ, tato'pi mahāmate māṁsamabhakṣyaṁ bodhisattvasya ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]For the sake of love of purity, Mahāmati, the Bodhisattva should refrain from eating flesh which is born of semen, blood, etc [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]śukraśoṇitasaṁbhavādapi mahāmate śucikāmatāmupādāya bodhisattvasya māṁsamabhakṣyam | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]For fear of causing terror to living beings, Mahāmati, let the Bodhisattva who is disciplining himself to attain compassion, refrain from eating flesh [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]udvejanakaratvādapi mahāmate bhūtānāṁ maitrīmicchato yogino māṁsaṁ sarvamabhakṣyaṁ bodhisattvasya |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]To illustrate, Mahāmati: When a dog sees, even from a distance, a hunter, a pariah, a fisherman, etc., whose desires are for meat-eating, he is terrified with fear, thinking, "They are death-dealers, they will even kill me." [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tadyathāpi mahāmate ḍombacāṇḍālakaivartādīn piśitāśinaḥ sattvān dūrata eva dṛṣṭvā śvānaḥ prabhayanti bhayena, maraṇaprāptāścaike bhavanti-asmānapi mārayiṣyantīti |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]In the same way, Mahāmati, even those minute animals that are living in the air, on earth, and in water, seeing meat-eaters at a distance, will perceive in them, by their keen sense of smell, the odour of the Rakshasa and will run away from such people as quickly as possible; for they are to them the threat of death [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]evameva mahāmate anye'pi khabhūjalasaṁniśritān sūkṣmajantavo ye māṁsāśino darśanāddūrādeva paṭunā ghrāṇenāghrāya gandhaṁ rākṣasasyeva mānuṣā drutamapasarpanti, maraṇasaṁdehāścaike bhavanti |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]For this reason, Mahāmati, let the Bodhisattva, who is disciplining himself, to abide in great compassion, because of its terrifying living beings, refrain from eating meat. Mahāmati, meat which is liked by unwise people is full of bad smell [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tasmādapi ca mahāmate udvejanakaratvānmahāmaitrīvihāriṇo yogino māṁsamabhakṣyaṁ bodhisattvasya anāryajanajuṣṭaṁ durgandham | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]and its eating gives one a bad reputation which turns wise people away; let the Bodhisattva refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]akīrtikaratvādapi mahāmate āryajanavivarjitatvācca māṁsamabhakṣyaṁ bodhisattvasya |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]The food of the wise, Mahāmati, is what is eaten by the Rishis; it does not consist of meat and blood. Therefore, Mahāmati, let the Bodhisattva refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]ṛṣibhojanāhāro hi mahāmate āryajano na māṁsarudhirāhāraḥ, ityato'pi bodhisattvasya māṁsamabhakṣyam ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]In order to guard the cittas of all people, Mahāmati, let the Bodhisattva whose nature is holy and who is desirous of avoiding censure on the teaching of the Buddha, refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]bahujanacittānurakṣaṇatayāpi apavādaparihāraṁ cecchataḥ śāsanasya mahāmate māṁsamabhakṣyaṁ kṛpātmano bodhisattvasya |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]For instance, Mahāmati, there are some in the world who speak ill of the teaching of[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif] the Buddha [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tadyathā mahāmate bhavanti loke śāsanāpavādavaktāraḥ | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif][they would say,] "Why are those who are living the life of a Śramaṇa or a Brahmin reject such food as was enjoyed by the ancient Rishis, and like the carnivorous animals, living in the air, on earth, or in the water? Why do they go wandering about in the world thoroughly terrifying living beings [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]kiṁcitteṣāṁ śrāmaṇyam, kuto vā brāhmaṇyam ? yannāmaite pūrvarṣibhojanānyapāsya kravyādā ivāmiṣāhārāḥ paripūrṇakukṣayaḥ khabhūmijalasaṁniśritān sūkṣmāṁstrāsayanto jantūn samutrāsayanta imaṁ lokaṁ samantataḥ paryaṭanti |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]disregarding the life of a Śramaṇa and destroying the vow of a Brahmin? There is no Dharma, no discipline in them." There are many such adverse-cittaed people who thus speak ill of the teaching of the Buddha [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]nihatameṣāṁ śrāmaṇyam, dhvastameṣāṁ brāhmaṇyam, nāstyeṣāṁ dharmo na vinayaḥ, ityanekaprakārapratihatacetasaḥ śāsanamevāpavadanti | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]For this reason, Mahāmati, in order to guard the cittas of all people, let the Bodhisattva whose nature is full of pity and who is desirous of avoiding censure on the teaching of the Buddha, refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tasmādbahujanacittānurakṣaṇatayāpi apavādaparihāraṁ cecchataḥ śāsanasya mahāmate māṁsaṁṁ sarvamabhakṣyaṁ kṛpātmano bodhisattvasya ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, there is generally an offensive odour to a corpse, which goes against nature; therefore, let the Bodhisattva refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]mṛtaśavadurgandhapratikūlasāmānyādapi mahāmate māṁsamabhakṣyaṁ bodhisattvasya |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, when flesh is burned, whether it be that of a dead man or of some other living creature, there is no distinction in the odour [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]mṛtasyāpi hi mahāmate manuṣyasya māṁse dahyamāne tadanyaprāṇimāṁse ca, na kaścidgandhaviśeṣaḥ |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]When flesh of either kind is burned, the odour emitted is equally noxious [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]samamubhayamāṁsayordahyamānayordaurgandhyam | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Therefore, Mahāmati, let the Bodhisattva, who is ever desirous of purity in his discipline, wholly refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]ato'pi mahāmate śucikāmasya yoginaḥ sarvaṁ māṁsamabhakṣyaṁ bodhisattvasya ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, when sons or daughters of good family, wishing to exercise themselves in various disciplines such as the attainment of a compassionate heart, the holding a magical formula, or the perfecting of magical knowledge, or starting on a pilgrimage to the Mahāyāna, retire into a cemetery, or to a wilderness, or a forest, where demons gather or frequently approach; or when they attempt to sit on a couch or a seat for the exercise; they are hindered [because of their meat-eating] from gaining magical powers or from obtaining emancipation. Mahāmati, seeing that thus there are obstacles to the accomplishing of all the practices, let the Bodhisattva, who is desirous of benefiting himself as well as others, wholly refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]śmaśānikānāṁ ca mahāmate araṇyavanaprasthānyamanuṣyāvacarāṇi prāntāni śayanāsanānyadhyāvasatāṁ yogināṁ yogācārāṇāṁ maitrīvihāriṇāṁ vidyādharāṇāṁ vidyāṁ sādhayitukāmānāṁ vidyāsādhanamokṣavighnakaratvānmahāyānasaṁprasthitānāṁ kulaputrāṇāṁ kuladuhitṝṇāṁ ca sarvayogasādhanāntarāyakaramityapi samanupaśyatāṁ mahāmate svaparātmahitakāmasya māṁsaṁ sarvamabhakṣyaṁ bodhisattvasya | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]As even the sight of objective forms gives rise to the desire for tasting their delicious flavour, let the Bodhisattva, whose nature is pity and who regards all beings as his only child, wholly refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]rūpālambanavijñānapratyayāsvādajanakatvādapi sarvabhūtātmabhūtasya kṛpātmanaḥ sarvaṁ māṁsamabhakṣyaṁ bodhisattvasya | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Recognising that his mouth smells most obnoxiously, even while living this life, let the Bodhisattva whose nature is pity, wholly refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]mukhaṁ cāsya paramadurgandhi ihaiva tāvajjanmani, ityapi kṛtvā mahāmate kṛpātmanaḥ sarvaṁ māṁsamabhakṣyaṁ bodhisattvasya |[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif] [The meat-eater] sleeps uneasily and when awakened is distressed [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]duḥkhaṁ svapiti, duḥkhaṁ pratibudhyate |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]He dreams of dreadful events, which makes his hair rise on end [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]pāpakāṁśca romaharṣaṇān svapnān paśyanti |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]He is left alone in an empty hut; he leads a solitary life; and his spirit is seized by demons [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]śūnyāgārasthitasya caikākino rahogatasya viharato'syāmanuṣyāstejo haranti |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Frequently he is struck with terror, he trembles without knowing why, there is no regularity in his eating, he is never satisfied. In his eating he never knows what is meant by proper taste, digestion, and nourishment. His visceras are filled with worms and other impure creatures and harbour the cause of leprosy. He ceases to entertain any thoughts of aversion towards all diseases [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]utrasyantyapi, kadācitsaṁtrasyantyapi, saṁtrāsamakasmāccāpadyante, āhāre ca mātrāṁ na jānāti nāpyaśitapītakhāditākhāditasya samyagrasapariṇāmapuṣṭyādi samāsādayati, krimijantupracurakuṣṭhanidānakoṣṭhaśca bhavati vyādhibahulam, na ca pratikūlasaṁjñāṁ pratilabhate | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]When I teach to regard food as if it were eating the flesh of one's own child, or taking a drug, how can I permit my disciples, Mahāmati, to eat food consisting of flesh and blood, which is gratifying to the unwise but is abhorred by the wise, which brings many evils and keeps away many merits; and which was not offered to the Rishis and is altogether unsuitable? [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]putramāṁsabhaiṣajyavadāhāraṁ deśayaṁścāhaṁ mahāmate kathamiva anāryajanasevitamāryajanavivarjitamevamanekadoṣāvahamanekaguṇavivarjitamanṛṣibhojanapraṇītamakalpyaṁ māṁsarudhirāhāraṁ śiṣyebhyo'nujñāpyāmi ? [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Now, Mahāmati, the food I have permitted [my disciples to take] is gratifying to all wise people but is avoided by the unwise; it is productive of many merits, it keeps away many evils; and it has been prescribed by the ancient Rishis. It comprises rice, barley, wheat, kidney beans, beans, lentils, etc., clarified butter, oil, honey, molasses, treacle, sugar cane, coarse sugar, etc.; food prepared with these is proper food [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]anujñātavān punarahaṁ mahāmate sarvāryajanasevitamanāryajanavivarjitamanekaguṇavāhakamanekadoṣavivarjitaṁ sarvapūrvarṣipraṇītaṁ bhojanam, yaduta śāliyavagodhūmamudgamāṣamasūrādisarpistailamadhuphāṇitaguḍakhaṇḍamatsyaṇḍikādiṣu samupapadyamānaṁ bhojanaṁ kalpyamiti kṛtvā |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, there may be some irrational people in the future who will discriminate and establish new rules of moral discipline, and who, under the influence of the habit-energy belonging to the carnivorous races, will greedily desire the taste [of meat]: it is not for these people that the above food is prescribed [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]na ca mahāmate anāgate'dhvani ekeṣāṁ mohapuruṣāṇāṁ vividhavinayavikalpavādināṁ kravyādakulavāsitāvāsitānāṁ rasatṛṣṇāvyavasitānāmidaṁ praṇītaṁ bhojanaṁ pratibhāṣyate |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, this is the food I urge for the Bodhisattva-Mahāsattvas who have made offerings to the previous Buddhas, who have planted roots of goodness, who are possessed of faith, devoid of discrimination, who are all men and women belonging to the Śākya family, who are sons and daughters of good family, who have no attachment to body, life, and property, who do not covet delicacies, are not at all greedy, who being compassionate desire to embrace all living beings as their own person, and who regard all beings with affection as if they were an only child [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]na tu mahāmate pūrvajinakṛtādhikārāṇāmavaropitakuśalamūlānāṁ śrāddhānāmavikalpānāṁ bahulānāṁ śākyakulakulīnānāṁ kulaputrāṇāṁ kuladuhitṝṇāṁ kāyajīvitabhogānadhyavasitānāmarasagṛdhrāṇāmalolupānāṁ kṛpālūnāṁ sarvabhūtātmabhūtatāmupagantukāmānāṁ sarvasattvaikaputrakapriyadarśināṁ bodhisattvānāṁ mahāsattvānamiti vadāmi ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Long ago in the past, Mahāmati, there lived a king whose name was Siṁhasaudāsa [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]bhūtapūrvaṁ mahāmate atīte'dhvani rājābhūtsiṁhasaudāso nāma | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]His excessive fondness for meat, his greed to be served with it, stimulated his taste for it to the highest degree so that he [even] ate human flesh [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]sa māṁsabhojanāhārātiprasaṅgena pratisevamāno rasatṛṣṇādhyavasānaparamatayā māṁsāni mānuṣyāṇyapi bhakṣitavān |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]In consequence of this he was alienated from the society of his friends, counsellors, kinsmen, relatives, not to speak of his townsmen and countrymen [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tannidānaṁ ca mitrāmātyajñātibandhuvargeṇāpi parityaktaḥ, prāgeva paurajānapadaiḥ |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]In consequence he had to renounce his throne and dominion and to suffer great calamities because of his passion for meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]svarājyaviṣayaparityāgācca mahadvayasanamāsāditavān māṁsahetoḥ ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, even Indra who obtained sovereignty over the gods had once to assume the form of a hawk owing to his habit-energy of eating meat for food in a previous existence; he then chased Viśvakarma appearing in the guise of a pigeon [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]indreṇāpi ca mahāmate devādhipatyaṁ prāptena (pūrvābhūtvā) pūrvajanmamāṁsādavāsanādoṣācchyenarūpamāsthāya kapotaveṣarūpadhārī viśvakarmā samabhidruto'bhūt |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]who had thus to place himself on the scale [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tulāyāṁ cātmānamāropita āsīt | [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]King Śibi feeling pity for the innocent [pigeon had to sacrifice himself to the hawk and thus] to suffer great pain [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]yasmādrājā anaparādhibhūtānukampakaḥ śibī duḥkhena mahatā lambhitaḥ | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Even a god who became Indra the Powerful, after going through many a birth, Mahāmati, is liable to bring misfortune both upon himself and others; how much more those who are not Indra! [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tadevamanekajanmābhyastamapi mahāmate devendrabhūtasya śakrasyāpi sataḥ svaparadoṣāvahanamabhūt, prāgeva tadanyeṣām ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, there was another king who was carried away by his horse into a forest. After wandering about in it, he committed evil deeds with a lioness out of fear for his life, and fools were born to her. Because of their descending from the union with a lioness, the royal fools were called the Spotted-Feet, etc. On account of their evil habit-energy in the past when their food had been flesh, they ate meat even [after becoming] king [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]anyeṣāṁ ca mahāmate narendrabhūtānāṁ satāmaśvenāpahṛtānāmaṭavyāṁ paryaṭamānānāṁ siṁhyā saha maithunaṁ gatavatāṁ jīvitabhayādapatyāni cotpāditavantaḥ siṁhasaṁvāsānvayātkalmāṣapādaprabhṛtayo nṛpaputrāḥ pūrvajanmamāṁsādadoṣavāsanatayā manuṣyendrabhūtā api santo māṁsādā abhūvan |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]and, Mahāmati, in this life they lived in a village called Kuṭīraka ("seven huts"), and because they were excessively attached and devoted to meat-eating they gave birth to Dākās and Dākinīs who were terrible eaters of human flesh [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]ihaiva ca mahāmate janmani saptakuṭīrake'pi grāme pracuramāṁsalaulyādatiprasaṅgena niṣevamānā mānuṣamāṁsādā ghorā ḍākā vā ḍākinyaśca saṁjāyante |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]In the life of transmigration, Mahāmati, such ones will fall into the wombs of such excessive flesh-devouring creatures as the lion, tiger, panther, wolf, hyena, wild-cat, jackal, owl, etc.; they will fall into the wombs of still more greedily flesh-devouring and still more terrible Rākshasas [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]jātiparivarte ca mahāmate tathaiva māṁsarasādhyavasānatayā siṁhavyāghradvīpivṛkatarakṣumārjārajambukolūkādipracuramāṁsādayoniṣu pracuratarapiśitāśanā rākṣasādighoratarayoniṣu vinipātyante |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Falling into such, it will be with difficulty that they can ever obtain a human womb; how much more [difficult] attaining Nirvana! [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]yatra vinipatitānāṁ duḥkhena mānuṣyayonirapi samāpadyate, prāgave nirvṛtiḥ | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Such as these, Mahāmati, are the evils of meat-eating; how much more numerous [evil] qualities that are born of the perverted minds of those devoted to it [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]ityevamādayo mahāmate māṁsādadoṣāḥ prāgeva niṣevamānānāṁ samupajāyante, viparyayācca bhūyāṁso guṇāḥ |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]And, Mahāmati, childish individuals are not aware of all this and other evils and merits [in connection with meat-eating] [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]na ca mahāmate bālapṛthagjanā etāṁścānyāṁśca guṇadoṣānavabudhyante | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]I tell you, Mahāmati, that seeing these evils and merits the Bodhisattva whose nature is pity should eat no meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]evamādiguṇadoṣadarśanānmahāmate māṁsaṁ sarvamabhakṣyaṁ kṛpātmano bodhisattvasyeti vadāmi ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]If, Mahāmati, meat is not eaten by anybody for any reason, there will be no destroyer of life [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]yadi ca mahāmate māṁsaṁ na kathaṁcana kecana bhakṣayeyuḥ, na tannidānaṁ ghāteran |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, in the majority of cases the slaughtering of innocent living beings is done for pride and very rarely for other causes [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]mūlyahetorhi mahāmate prāyaḥ prāṇino niraparādhino vadhyante svalpādanyahetoḥ | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Though nothing special may be said of eating the flesh of living creatures such as animals and birds, alas, Mahāmati, that one addicted to the love of [meat-] taste should eat human flesh! [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]kaṣṭaṁ mahāmate rasatṛṣṇāyāmatisevatāṁ māṁsāni mānuṣānyapi mānuṣairbhakṣyante, kiṁ punaritaramṛgapakṣiprāṇisaṁbhūtamāṁsāni |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, in most cases nets and other devices are prepared in various places by people who have lost their sense on account of their appetite for meat-taste, and thereby many innocent victims are destroyed for the sake of the price [they bring in]—such as birds, Kaurabhraka, Kaivarta, etc., that are moving about in the air, on land, and in water [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]prāyo mahāmate māṁsarasatṛṣṇārtairidaṁ tathā tathā jālayantramāviddhaṁ mohapuruṣaiḥ, yacchākunikaurabhrakakaivartādayaḥ khecarabhūcarajalacarān prāṇino'naparādhino'nekaprakāraṁ mūlyahetorviśasanti | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]T[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]here are even some, Mahāmati, who are like Rākshasas hard-hearted and used to practising cruelties,[/FONT]<SUP></SUP>[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]who, being so devoid of compassion, would now and then look at living beings as meant for food and destruction— no compassion is awakened in them [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]na caiṣāṁ mahāmate kiṁkanīkṛtarūkṣacetasāṁ rākṣasānāmiva gataghṛṇānāṁ kadācidapi prāṇiṣu prāṇisaṁjñayā ghātayatāṁ bhakṣayatāṁ na ghṛṇotpadyate ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]It is not true, Mahāmati, that meat is proper food and permissible for the Śrāvaka when it was not killed by himself, when he did not order others to kill it, when it was not specially meant for him [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]na ca mahāmate akṛtakamakāritamasaṁkalpitaṁ nāma māṁsaṁ kalpyamasti yadupādāya anujānīyāṁ śrāvakebhyaḥ | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Again, Mahāmati, there may be some unwitted people in the future time, who, beginning to lead the homeless life according to my teaching, are acknowledged as sons of the Śākya, and carry the Kāshāya robe about them as a badge, but who are in thought evilly affected by erroneous reasonings. They may talk about various discriminations which they make in their moral discipline, being addicted to the view of a personal soul. Being under the influence of the thirst for [meat-] taste, they will string together in various ways some sophistic arguments to defend meat-eating [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]bhaviṣyanti tu punarmahāmate anāgate'dhvani mamaiva śāsane pravrajitvā śākyaputrīyatvaṁ pratijānānāḥ kāṣāyadhvajadhāriṇo mohapuruṣā mithyāvitarkopahatacetaso vividhavinayavikalpavādinaḥ satkāyadṛṣṭiyuktā rasatṛṣṇādhyavasitāstāṁ tāṁ māṁsabhakṣaṇahetvābhāsāṁ granthayiṣyanti |[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]mama cābhūtābhyākhyānaṁ dātavyaṁ maṁsyante | [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]They think they are giving me an unprecedented calumny when they discriminate and talk about facts that are capable of various interpretations. Imagining that this fact allows this interpretation, [they conclude that] the Bhagavan permits meat as proper food [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tattadarthotpattinidānaṁ kalpayitvā vakṣyanti-iyamarthotpattirasminnidāne, bhagavatā māṁsabhojanamanujñātaṁ kalpyamiti |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]and that it is mentioned among permitted foods and that probably the Tathagata himself partook of it [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]praṇītabhojaneṣu coktam, svayaṁ ca kila tathāgatena paribhuktamiti | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]But, Mahāmati, nowhere in the sutras is meat permitted as something enjoyable, nor it is referred to as proper among the foods prescribed [for the Buddha's followers] [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]na ca mahāmate kutracitsūtre pratisevitavyamityanujñātam, praṇītabhojaneṣu vā deśitaṁ kalpyamiti ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]If however, Mahāmati, I had the citta to permit [meat-eating], or if I said it was proper for the Śrāvakas [to eat meat], I would not have forbidden, I would not forbid, ail meat-eating for these Yogins, the sons and daughters of good family, who, wishing to cherish the idea that all beings are to them like an only child, are possessed of compassion, practise contemplation, mortification, and are on their way to the Mahāyāna [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]yadi tu mahāmate anujñātukāmatā me syāt, kalpyaṁ vā me śrāvakāṇāṁ pratisevituṁ syāt, nāhaṁ maitrīvihāriṇāṁ yogināṁ yogācārāṇāṁ śmaśānikānāṁ mahāyānasaṁprasthitānāṁ kulaputrāṇāṁ kuladuhitṝṇāṁ ca sarvasattvaikaputrakasaṁjñābhāvanārthaṁ sarvāmāṁsabhakṣaṇapratiṣedhaṁ kuryām, kṛtavāṁśca |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]And, Mahāmati, the interdiction not to eat any kind of meat is here given to all sons and daughters of good family, whether they are cemetery-ascetics of forest-ascetics, or Yogins who are practising the exercises, if they wish the Dharma and are on the way to the mastery of any vehicle, and being possessed of compassion, conceive the idea of regarding all beings as an only child, in order to accomplish the end of their discipline [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]asmin mahāmate dharmakāmānāṁ kulaputrāṇāṁ kuladuhitṝṇāṁ ca sarvayānasaṁprasthitānāṁ śmaśānikānāṁ maitrīvihāriṇāmāraṇyakānāṁ yogināṁ yogācārāṇāṁ sarvayogasādhanāya sarvasattvaikaputrakasaṁjñābhāvanārthaṁ sarvamāṁsapratiṣedham ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]In the canonical texts here and there the process of discipline is developed in orderly sequence like a ladder going up step by step, and one joined to another in a regular and methodical manner; after explaining each point meat obtained in these specific circumstances is not interdicted [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tatra tatra deśanāpāṭhe śikṣāpadānāmanupūrvībandhaṁ niḥśreṇīpadavinyāsayogena trikoṭiṁ baddhvā na taduddiśya kṛtāni pratiṣiddhāni |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Further, a tenfold prohibition is given as regards the flesh of animals found dead by themselves [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tato daśaprakṛtimṛtānyapi māṁsāni pratiṣiddhāni |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]But in the present sutra all [meat-eating] in any form, in any manner, and in any place, is unconditionally and once for all, prohibited for all [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]iha tu sūtre sarveṇa sarvaṁ sarvathā sarvaṁ nirupāyena sarvaṁ pratiṣiddham |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Thus, Mahāmati, meat-eating I have not permitted to anyone, I do not permit, I will not permit [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]yato'haṁ mahāmate māṁsabhojanaṁ na kasyacidanujñātavān, nānujānāmi, nānujñāsyāmi |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Meat-eating, I tell you, Mahāmati, is not proper for homeless monks [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]akalpyaṁ mahāmate pravrajitānāṁ māṁsabhojanamiti vadāmi |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]There may be some, Mahāmati, who would say that meat was eaten by the Tathagata thinking this would calumniate him. Such unwitted people as these, Mahāmati, will follow the evil course of their own karma-hindrance, and will fall into such regions where long nights are passed without profit and without happiness [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]yadapi ca mahāmate mamābhyākhyānaṁ dātavyaṁ maṁsyante tathāgatenāpi paribhuktamiti, tadanyeṣāṁ mahāmate mohapuruṣāṇāṁ svakarmadoṣāvaraṇāvṛtānāṁ dīrgharātramanarthāyāhitāya saṁvartakaṁ bhaviṣyati | [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, the noble Śrāvakas do not eat the food taken properly by [ordinary] men, how much less the food of flesh and blood, which is altogether improper [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]na hi mahāmate āryaśrāvakāḥ prākṛtamanuṣyāhāramāharanti, kuta eva māṁsarudhirāhāramakalpyam |[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif] Mahāmati, the food for my Śrāvakas, Pratyekabuddhas, and Bodhisattvas is the Dharma and not flesh-food; how much more the Tathagata! [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]dharmāhārā hi mahāmate mama śrāvakāḥ pratyekabuddhā bodhisattvāśca nāmiṣāhārāḥ, prāgeva tathāgatāḥ |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]The Tathagata is the Dharmakāya, Mahāmati; he abides in the Dharma as food; his is not a body feeding on flesh; he does not abide in any flesh-food. He has ejected the habit-energy of thirst and desire which sustain all existence; he keeps away the habit-energy of all evil passions; he is thoroughly emancipated in citta and knowledge; he is the All-knower; he is All-seer; he regards all beings impartially as an only child; he is a great compassionate heart [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]dharmakāyā hi mahāmate tathāgatā dharmāhārasthitayo nāmiṣakāyā na sarvāmiṣāhārasthitayo vāntasarvabhavopakaraṇatṛṣṇaiṣaṇāvāsanāḥ sarvakleśadoṣavāsanāpagatāḥ suvimuktacittaprajñāḥ sarvajñāḥ sarvadarśinaḥ sarvasattvaikaputrakasamadarśino mahākāruṇikāḥ |[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmati, having the thought of an only child for all beings, how can I, such as I am, permit the Śrāvakas to eat the flesh of their own child? How much less my eating it! That I have permitted the Śrāvakas as well as myself to partake of [meat-eating], Mahāmati, has no foundation whatever [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]so'haṁ mahāmate sarvasattvaikaputrakasaṁjñī san kathamiva svaputramāṁsamanujñāsyāmi paribhoktuṁ śrāvakebhyaḥ, kuta eva svayaṁ paribhoktum ? anujñātavānasmi śrāvakebhyaḥ svayaṁ vā paribhuktavāniti mahāmate nedaṁ sthānaṁ vidyate ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]So it is said [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]tatredamucyate- [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Liquor, meat, and onions are to be avoided, Mahāmati, by the Bodhisattva-Mahāsattvas and those who are Jina-heroes [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]madyaṁ māṁsaṁ palāṇḍuṁ na bhakṣayeyaṁ mahāmune | bodhisattvairmahāsattvairbhāṣadbhirjinapuṁgavaiḥ || 1 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Meat is not agreeable to the wise: it has a nauseating odour, it causes a bad reputation, it is food for the carnivorous; I say this, Mahāmati, it is not to be eaten [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]anāryajuṣṭadurgandhamakīrtikarameva ca | kravyādabhojanaṁ māṁsaṁ brūhyabhakṣyaṁ mahāmune || 2 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]To those who eat [meat] there are detrimental effects, to those who do not, merits; Mahāmati, you should know that meat-eaters bring detrimental effects upon themselves [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]bhakṣyamāṇe ca ye deṣā abhakṣye tu guṇāśca ye | mahāmate nibodha tvaṁ ye doṣā māṁsabhakṣaṇe || 3 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Let the Yogin refrain from eating flesh as it is born of himself, as [the eating] involves transgression, as [flesh] is produced of semen and blood, and as [the killing of animals] causes terror to living beings [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]svājanyādvyabhicārācca śukraśoṇitasaṁbhavāt | udvejanīyaṁ bhūtānāṁ yogī māṁsaṁ vivarjayet || 4 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Let the Yogin always refrain from meat, onions, various kinds of liquor, allium, and garlic [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]māṁsāni ca palāṇḍūṁśca madyāni vividhāni ca | gṛñjanaṁ laśunaṁ caiva yogī nityaṁ vivarjayet || 5 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Do not anoint the body with sesamum oil; do not sleep on a bed, perforated with spikes; for the living beings who find their shelter in the cavities and in places where there are no cavities may be terribly frightened [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]mrakṣaṇaṁ varjayettailaṁ śalyaviddheṣu na svapet | chidrācchidreṣu sattvānāṁ yacca sthānaṁ mahadbhayam || 6 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]From eating [meat] arrogance is born, from arrogance erroneous imaginations issue, and from imagination is born greed; and for this reason refrain from eating [meat] [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]āhārājjāyate darpaḥ saṁkalpo darpasaṁbhavaḥ | saṁkalpajanito rājastasmādapi na bhakṣayet || 7 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]From imagination, greed is born, and by greed the mnd is stupefied; there is attachment to stupefaction, and there is no emancipation from birth [and death] [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]saṁkalpājjāyate rāgaścittaṁ rāgeṇa muhyate | mūḍhasya saṁgatirbhavati jāyate na ca mucyate || 8 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]For profit sentient beings are destroyed, for flesh money is paid out, they are both evil-doers and [the deed] matures in the hells called Raurava (screaming), etc [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]lābhārthaṁ hanyate sattvo māṁsārthaṁ dīyate dhanam | ubhau tau pāpakarmāṇau pacyete rauravādiṣu || 9 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]One who eats flesh, trespassing against the words of the Muni, is evil-cittaed; he is pointed out in the teachings of the Śākya as the destroyer of the welfare of the two worlds [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]yo'tikramya munervākyaṁ māṁsaṁ bhakṣati durmatiḥ | lokadvayavināśārthaṁ dīkṣitaḥ śākyaśāsane || 10 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Those evil-doers go to the most horrifying hell; meat-eaters are matured in the terrific hells such as Raurava, etc [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]te yānti paramaṁ ghoraṁ narakaṁ pāpakarmiṇaḥ | rauravādiṣu raudreṣu pacyante māṁsakhādakāḥ || 11 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]There is no meat to be regarded as pure in three ways: not premeditated, not asked for, and not impelled; therefore, refrain from eating meat [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]trikoṭiśuddhamāṁsaṁ vai akalpitamayācitam | acoditaṁ ca naivāsti tasmānmāṁsaṁ na bhakṣayet || 12 ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Let not the Yogin eat meat, it is forbidden by myself as well as by the Buddhas; those sentient beings who feed on one another will be reborn among the carnivorous animals [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]māṁsaṁ na bhakṣayedyogī mayā buddhaiśca garhitam | anyonyabhakṣaṇāḥ sattvāḥ kravyādakulasaṁbhavāḥ || 13 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif][The meat-eater] is ill-smelling, contemptuous, and born deprived of intelligence; he will be born again and again among the families of the Caṇḍāla, the Pukkasa, and the Domba [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]durgandhiḥ kutsanīyaśca unmattaścāpi jāyate | caṇḍālapukkasakule ḍombeṣu ca punaḥ punaḥ || 14 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]From the womb of Dākinī he will be born in the meat-eaters' family, and then into the womb of a Rākshasī and a cat; he belongs to the lowest class of men [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]ḍākinījātiyonyāśca māṁsāde jāyate kule | rākṣasīmārjārayonau ca jāyate'sau naro'dhamaḥ || 15 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Meat-eating is rejected by me in such sutras as the [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Hastikakshya,[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif] the [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Mahāmegha,[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif] the [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Nirvāna[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif], the [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Aṅgulimālika[/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif], and the [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Laṅkāvatāra [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]hastikakṣye mahāmeghe nirvāṇāṅgulimālike | laṅkāvatārasūtre ca mayā māṁsaṁ vivarjitam || 16 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif][Meat-eating] is condemned by the Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, and Śrāvakas; if one devours [meat] out of shamelessness he will always be devoid of sense [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]buddhaiśca bodhisattvaiśca śrāvakaiśca vigarhitam | khādate yadi nairlajjyādunmatto jāyate sadā || 17 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]One who avoids meat, etc., will be born, because of this fact, in the family of the Brahmins or of the Yogins, endowed with knowledge and wealth [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]brāhmaṇeṣu ca jāyeta atha vā yogināṁ kule | prajñāvān dhanavāṁścaiva māṁsādyānāṁ vivarjanāt || 18 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Let one avoid all meat-eating [whatever they may say about] witnessing, hearing, and suspecting; these theorisers born in a carnivorous family understand this not [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]dṛṣṭaśrutaviśaṅkābhiḥ sarvaṁ māṁsaṁ vivarjayet | tārkikā nāvabudhyante kravyādakulasaṁbhavāḥ || 19 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]As greed is the hindrance to emancipation, so are meat-eating, liquor, etc., hindrances [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]yathaiva rāgo mokṣasya antarāyakaro bhavet | tathaiva māṁsamadyādyā antarāyakaro bhavet || 20 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]There may be in time to come people who make foolish remarks about meat-eating, saying, "Meat is proper to eat, unobjectionable, and permitted by the Buddha." [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]vakṣyantyanāgate kāle māṁsādā mohavādinaḥ | kalpikaṁ niravadyaṁ ca māṁsaṁ buddhānuvarṇitam || 21 ||[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]Meat-eating is a medicine; again, it is like a child's flesh; follow the proper measure and be averse [to meat, and thus] let the Yogin go about begging [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]bhaiṣajyaṁ māṁsamāhāraṁ putramāṁsopamaṁ punaḥ | mātrayā pratikūlaṁ ca yogī piṇḍaṁ samācaret || 22 || [/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif][Meat-eating] is forbidden by me everywhere and all the time for those who are abiding in compassion; [he who eats meat] will be born in the same place as the lion, tiger, wolf, etc [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]maitrīvihāriṇāṁ nityaṁ sarvathāṁ garhitaṁ mayā | siṁhavyāghravṛkādyaiśca saha ekatra saṁbhavet || 23 || [/FONT]
I don't know how you can argue with that.
Even if you're not a Mahayana Buddhist and don't believe the Mahayana sutras are the Word of the Buddha, I still don't know how you can argue with the above.
Which beings? Which parties? You can't have it both ways.
these karmic imprints are left on the alaya of the base conciousness of both beings which alows for future causality to take place in later lifetimes.
this could potentially include the killed being from the previous life causing harm to the killer in this life either by intention or inadvertently.
this is a primary reason why buddhist teachings include methods to purify karma.
So who are all these beings? Where does this fit in the doctrine of nonself?
What does it mean, to purify karma? Is that like purifying gold?
"who are these beings?"
these beings are like you and I, sentient, non-Buddha's living within samsara. these beings are made up of contaminated aggregates that they ignorantly perceive as a self.
the contaminated aggregates are based on causality and are empty of inherent existence and are therefore selfless.
Just because the base subtle consciousness stores karmic imprints and transmigrates doesnt mean it is a self. The subtle consciousness is empty as well, therefore there is no contradiction.
The methods to purify karma are used to removed or diminish the imprints on the subtle consciousness in order to remove obstacles and impediments on the path, and unfortunate circumstances, including those brought about by other beings through previous karmic connections etc.
its not really like purifying gold since the act of purifying karma is more like the removal of potentiality.
Fine, but then it's not a debt, because there is no one accountable for the imprints.
I think the use of the word debt implies some accountability that is inaccurate in regards to the actual teachings, unfortunately the English language doesnt really have the terminology built in to convey Buddhist meaning the way Sanskrit, Pali, and Tibetan do.
Can i just make a point? (NOT to you personally jhana, i mean in general regrding the subject)
I have heard this brought up before also, people go round and round for ever trying to think up ways they are 'killing'.
I have been in the position of having a dying animal who was in pain and miserable.
I have to say, that if an animal is suffering, and the vets expert opinion is that there is no hope and the animal is miserable, enevitably dying slowly in agony, then how can there be any bad karma in having the animal helped to go to sleep? Either on yourself, or on the animals rebirth?
If there was another way, and you just couldn't be bothered to look after it, then yes, obviously this is cruel to just 'be done with it'. Of course it is.
But if there is a way to stop that animals agony by helping it along to sleep, then that surely is compassion and kindness. I cant see it as anything else. Theres no bad karma anywhere there.
If a vet tells you there is no hope, and you choose to take it home and watch if suffer in agony until it dies, then quite simply . . . . . .
you are an utter complete b*****d.
End of.
I still say, to walk away or just watch must be worse karma, it just must be. I can NEVER ever understand how that kind of ending life can in any way be wrong.
Like i said before, if anyone could take home thier pet when the vet said there is no hope, and watch it die in agony, then i do not want to have anything to do with that person. To me, that kind of heartless cruel person could never be what i thought a compassionate Buddhist would be.
Karma or not, thats just too wrong to ever be right.
My point exactly, its a brave thing to do. Takes guts.
I used to understand it this way as well.
Let me start this way: you do not have to be vegetarian to be Buddhist. Not even all monks are Buddhist. They take what they're offered.
MONKS are not allowed to kill anything intentionally or have anything killed for them specifically to eat, and they are not supposed to witness the death either.
Now does your friend do this for sport or for survival? For sport is not ok - that is needless death.
If he kills it to EAT, though, that's not necessarily BAD. It's not necessasrily GOOD, either. There is such a thing as neutral Karma. Through buying meat or ANYTHING through a supermarket, you are indirectly causing vasts amounts of suffering and numerous indirect and direct ways. At least if your friend hunts, he can ensure the animal is killed as quickly and painlessly as possible. Is that what he's doing? If not, why? You mentioned joking about it... is that what he does? I hope not...
But on the otherhand, should an animal attack you for food someday, I hope you won't be angry.
UGH that's horrible..
Lalavajra:
You're saying that as if someone else's actions, choosing to kill it, will send it to that realm? Why would that be?
See, I used to think this too. But if I KNOW that billions of sentient lifeforms are dying because of sprays on fields (as for organic crops, they dont thrive as well, and more land is needed to feed the same number of people, which creates more suffering too!), and hundreds of thousands of little animals die as those crops are harvested, and the Earth and all that live in it is severly being damaged just process these foods and bring them across the country to our stores, is that REALLY better? Those deaths are an indirect result of choosing to eat a fruit, but if I'm aware of that indirect result, does that not place any responsibility on me?
If everyone could grow their own garden and choose to grow it organically and sustain themselves and their family properly in that way then that would be wonderful. But it isn't practical.
After you just gave Fivebells flack in another Thread for supposed trite, it seems that's all you're providing as well. When I read those words, it sounds like nothing but dogma to me.
The Dalai Lama eats meat because of a medical condition. Would you speak those words to him too?
Did you know it's considered unskillful and may even generate bad Karma if you, a vegetarian, were offered meat and turned it down? So...
It's suggested that if we eat meat, we buy from local sources at least and KNOW the animals are treated decently and killed in a manner that causes the least suffering. As well we should try to eat larger animals, so that only one life dies to feed many.
Good god. =|
I said "not talking bout the skunk". Also, you can't say "Oh you! Lalavajra! You judge everyone...except yourself". Just because a person says something about someone, doesn't automatically mean they never are self-critical and only ever criticise others. The one statement does not follow the other.
Or should we all, as soon as we have commented about a person, automatically make a criticism of ourself as well? Bizarre.
Since Fivebells says "No self, no karma, no killer, no-one killed", what could possibly be wrong with me saying I should kill Fivebells? No karma, no killer, no-one killed? What's wrong then?
If you weren't talking about the skunk then why quote it? That was the last thing he/she said and then you jumped in and started attacking them.
No, it's true, perhaps you are self-critical. It's just that, so far I've seen you attack this person in multiple Threads for seemingly no reason at all. That's from an outsider's perspective. If you have some personal vendetta going on perhaps it best to keep it to PMs, yeah? Because like I said, from an outside perspective, it looks like you're just jumping on someone constantly for no reason at all.
I suppose it comes off more as a personal attack and even somewhat threatening rather than simply making a logical and hypothetical retort when it's preceded by comments like this: "Fivebells you are so arrogant and self-centred. It's frankly revolting."
Those comments just aren't necessary. And by including them, you're hurting your chances of Fivebells possibly seeing your point of view (a point of view which I agree with in this regard - "no-self" it not meant to be taken literally and to excuse any action we choose - it's meant to inspire compassionate action and have us be mindful of our choices BECAUSE we are are all one - the animal that died to feed me is me and I am it).
In the Swearing thread I scolded Fiveballs for being glib, trite, dismissive, and so on, which I clearly pointed out.
In this thread I chastised him/her for his/her views about no karma,no self, no killer, no-one killed.
Yes, I saw what you did. And it seems to be for no reason. My issue is not what you say but how incredibly rudely you say it. Obviously were responding to the "no karma/no self/no killer/no one killed" but you also quoted another post that you apparently weren't addressing with your response at all - generally when you quote someone you are directly responding to whatever it is they said as well. It looked like the "skunk" comment provoked you to respond in the end. I apologize for being so incredibly stupid and unperceptive. o.o
But who are you to chastise and scold another member?
They simply stated their opinion.
Can't you offer yours and make a counterpoint without making it personal and throwing out insults left and right?
This site isn't another e-sangha, is it? If so...