Recently Ven S.Dhammika launched a new book "To eat or not to eat meat - a Buddhist perspective", which takes quite a different look at vegetarianism. For those who like to read, but can't find a copy of the book, most of the chapters in the book are adapted from his vegetarianism posts on his blog here...
Vegetarianism I - Buddhist arguments for vegetarianism
Vegetarianism II - Motivation and meat
Vegetarianism III - The last link in the chain
Vegetarianism IV - Some problems with being vegetarian
Vegetarianism V - Meat in Buddhist traditions
Vegetarianism VI - How I became a vegetarian
"I conclude this exploration into the issue of meat eating, vegetarianism and Dhamma with a final question. If vegetarianism is more consistent with the Dhamma why didn’t the Buddha endorse it? " --Ven S.Dhammika
think i already know why...it's a skillful mean by Buddha. Eventually He did endorse it in later part of the path, like we can see in MahaNirvana Sutra. :)
/\
Buddha has endorsed vegetarianism and its merits and benefit to living beings of this Saha stated in most of the sutra. Mortal being ought not to regard themselves having the same standard of spirituality as that of Buddha, who goes on alms for food that was provided with meat or supreme enlightened beings.
Another go reading on benefit of vegetarianism :
Being Vegetarian and Reciting the Buddha's Name are
the Only Ways to Protect the Nation and Quell Disasters
by Great Master Yin Guang
To talk about protecting the country and ending disasters, we must know how to protect the country and how to end disasters. There are two means to reach these goals. One is temporary, while other is long-term. If we can be vegetarians and recite the Buddha's name constantly in the hopes of protecting the country and quelling disasters, then our sincerity will wrought infinite merit. Sincere prayers for the time being are effective to some extent too. But it would be best if we can protect and quell by being vegetarians. If we are vegetarian and recite the Buddha's name, then the power of vows will persist, deviant energy will dissipate while proper energy will grow. With fine intentions, kind words and good deeds, the nation will naturally be protected and disasters will naturally not occur.
Ancient texts say that sages do not get cures for contracted illnesses but get cures for not yet contracted illnesses; do not get cures for existing disturbance but get cures for not yet existing disturbances. Cures for existing disturbances are ineffective; cures for not yet existing disturbances are effective. Curing a nation is the same as curing a sickness; some cure the symptoms, while some cure the source. Curing a sickness is to cure an existing disturbance. To effectively cure an existing illness, we must cure the symptoms first; treat the head for a headache; treat the feet for aching feet. Once the symptoms are gone, then cure the source, making the body's energy and blood circulate smoothly. Recovering to health at the source, one will be energetic and apply oneself with vigor.
Nowadays our nation is at the brink of danger. Therefore I believe that to cure the nation, we must cure both the symptoms and the source. The best way to cure using this two-prong approach is to recite the Buddha's name, do good deeds, avoid killing, be vegetarians and understand deeply the cause and effect of the past, present and future. The fate of our contemporary world is that the various disasters, consequences of hardship, we face are a result of much evil in the past. We know these types of evil retribution are a result of past causes of doing evil. To avoid painful consequences, we must eliminate the causes of pain. We can eliminate causes of suffering done in the past by reciting the Buddha's name and repenting. If we do not plant causes of pain now, we can avoid consequences of pain in the future.
What are the causes of suffering? They are the three poisons of greed, hatred and delusion. What are the causes of goodness? Helping others. If everyone understands the law of cause and effect, then we will avoid all evil, do all kinds of good. Disasters have no way to enter. Unfortunately people nowadays do not understand the law of cause and effect. Therefore they are full of selfishness and are willing to do any evil. They are only concerned about themselves but not others. We should know that helping others is just to help ourselves; hurting others is just to hurt ourselves. Consequently, I always say, cause and effect is the law with which sages rule the world and Buddhas save living beings. Abandoning cause and effect for discussions on how to govern a nation and how to bring peace to the world is as ridiculous and impossible as fishing on trees. The Buddha said, "If we wish to know the causes of our past lives, simply look at what we face in this lifetime. If we wish to know the results of future lives, simply look at what we do in this lifetime." If everything we do in this lifetime is evil, then how can we avoid evil consequences in future lives? We will certainly face the fallouts of being in a family that is unkind in this lifetime. One text says: "Do good and a hundred auspiciousnesses appear. Do ill, a hundred calamities befall." This principle is the same as the law of cause and effect spoken by the Buddha. Fallouts are beyond retribution, proper; they may not be personal retribution. What I enjoy in future lives is my personal celebration or catastrophe. Retribution beyond the personal may be celebrations and catastrophes for offspring, who take on what their ancestors have accumulated.
People do not understand cause and effect and think that people escape karma after death; there is no more favorable or unfavorable consequence. This is the most misleading view for future generations. We must know that after death, people's consciousness does not become extinct. If people realize that their consciousness does not get extinguished, then they will certainly enjoy doing good and not dare to do evil. If they believe that death is the end all and be all, then they will indulge in the present, avoiding no evil or doing every evil.
This type of extremely evil behavior is the result of annihilistic views. If people can avoid all evil and do every good, then the world will naturally be at peace and people will be happy. However, this is still not the most ultimate idea. What is the ultimate practice? Recite the Buddha's name to become reborn in the West, to become liberated from birth and death. At the same time, we must reduce deviance, maintain sincerity, unite the family, living up to one's role. That way not only will the fate of the nation turn, but disasters will disappear too. Today's disasters are a result of everyone's collective karma. If people all recite the Buddha's name and do good, then collective karma can turn and the fated catastrophe will be gone too. For example, during the Battle of Shanghai on January 28, families that recited the Buddha's name enjoyed many miracles. Individuals who cultivate alone can attain responses, not to mention what will happen when a group cultivates. Therefore, a national disaster can also be averted by everyone reciting the Buddha's name sincerely.
Some pple are vegetarian, but heart no good.
Some pple are not vegetarian, but heart is as pure as gold.
Which pple are better?
it's said in MahaNirvana sutra that when the alms are collected back to the sangha, they are Accumulated; wash off the meat; and then distrubuted Equally. so even if some collected more and some collected less, they still have equal amount to eat.
/\
Originally posted by likeyou:Some pple are vegetarian, but heart no good.
Some pple are not vegetarian, but heart is as pure as gold.
Which pple are better?
for the above comparision, it's the non vegetarian.
bad, good, and pure. the term pure do have a higher profoundity to it. good is good, pure is another level higher. it had reached the state of non-attachment and duality between bad non good. if so, they can even eat feces or rotten food and still be ok about it let alone meat/vege. if not, goodness still have the karmic effect of ignorance and are the state of heavenly realms.
/\
it's someone like 金山活佛, who is something similar to the created story of Ji Gong(济公) . He indeed is é…’è‚‰ç©¿è‚ è¿‡ (meat and wine simply passes through the intestine). As in the record, He can also eat metal, rusty metal and it simply passes through the intestine. He can don't eat for days or weeks. He can also eat 100 bowl of rice at once and not be full. He simply say Neither increase nor decrease "ä¸�增ä¸�å‡�". see if one can do that.
/\
Book is short and sweet. Though I think its very academic discussion....
Some pple are vegetarian, but heart no good.
How many on planet earth has attained supreme and heart is as pure.Even many master venerable is constantly meditating to achieve pure nature needless to mention those that just at learning state like the above.
Some pple are not vegetarian, but heart is as pure as gold. Which pple are better?
In this regards, you ought to look at a bigger picture of Planet earth and Saha world in a bigger context. Vegetarian helps to turn bad karmic of past life killing into good karmic and alleviate disaster, catastrophe and contributing towards the well beings of the country as mentioned in Master Yin Guang's statement. Moreoever, a pure gold heart will aware that animals is from gold as well and do not harm to them.
Abstaining from meat is only useful if it is done for health reasons or one dislikes it.
If done for religion - it is stupidity. it is a mere ritual
Originally posted by Fugazzi:Abstaining from meat is only useful if it is done for health reasons or one dislikes it.
If done for religion - it is stupidity. it is a mere ritual
There are many people who are like you have mistaken that Buddhists become vegetarian for religion or ritual. True Buddhists know that there is a deeper meaning for being vegetarian, it is to cultivate compassion (培养慈悲心）。
Buddhism preaches compassion and encourages its followers to put into practice. There is no point if on one hand preaching love and compassion, on the other hand eating animals and cause sufferings. Buddhism preaches true love and compassion.
Buddhism does not equal to vegetarian and vice versa.
In the secular world, people think when one become a buddhist one need to be a vegetarian however this is the incorrect view. After all, wasn't Adolf Hilter was a vegetarian he was known to be animal right activities. He even gave out disgusting graphic animal slaughter report to his guest in order to encourage them to be veggan.
I remember there use to be a Dharma Drum monk who used to study on the same aussie campus as me. According to my friend, who is staying in the same hostel as him,he did not request for a special set of vegetarian cutlery, fridge, or cooking utensil. He just used whatever that was provided. One of friend ever ask him, "Won't cooking the meat broth in the same pot affect the purity of the vegetarian diet." "Well", he said," You ask will the "meat tainted utensil" make my diet unclean. I think it is not what one eat that make one unpure. Is what one think that make one unpure."
In my Nichiren Shu tradition, I have known of a black nun who took up vegetarian diet due to her own inner conviction on respect to all animals. In fact, she even served vegetarian diet to prisoner when she ministered in the prison. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/life/religion/6717424.html
Therefore, as buddhist, we need to �缘 about it rather than flinging over it.
Speaking from a Christian point of view,Christianity considered it mentally ill to value animals more than human life.
Originally posted by likeyou:Some pple are vegetarian, but heart no good.
Some pple are not vegetarian, but heart is as pure as gold.
Which pple are better?
You are right.That is why vegetarianism is mentally ill.A person with a sound mind like Mark Lee a comedian won't do it.
Dear Dharma brothers & sisters,
Do not waste your time replying to Lg. Want to know why ? Read his post below :
When one is a Christian, when one is a Buddhist when one is a Hindu or ... it is a thing, a badge. It is per se organized religion. However, when one is BEING Christ-like one is being Buddha-like and so on so forth it is an ''alive'' phenomenon, one simply is being ...... one is no longer bound by the need or the necessity to have some conceptualized model(s) fulfilled.
As for being vegetarian - it is fine and healthy if one is chooses cos of preference(s) that are freeing the self eg health, taste. This unburdens one.
However, when falls back on scriptures/sutras or .. to justifiy, rationalize and subscribe to a belief - one is already disconnected from one's being.
Also spirituality in its essence transcends all beliefs, religion, sects and in that transcendence one is partaking of an existential herenow experience.
Is there a need to have a home in a churhc, temple or .... when one is has home within and self-fulfilled. Self here, my meaning is that which is porous - the ability to play roles,responsibilities and yet unattached, unidentified or be lost in those situations.
The predicament is that many play roles eg husband, wife, teacher, instructor ....(add on) and get lost in that role(s) or accumulate that expereince and add to the self. The wisewould reconcile to this polarizing and dichotormous predicament and is aware to the fallacy that behind the roles of being ... one is the pure sky!
Originally posted by Lg:
You are right.That is why vegetarianism is mentally ill.A person with a sound mind like Mark Lee a comedian won't do it.
Huh, here you are!
Everyone, pls ignore this shitskin.
He was recently discharged from Buangkok Green Medical Park after undergoing frontal lobotomy.
Originally posted by Fugazzi:Abstaining from meat is only useful if it is done for health reasons or one dislikes it.
If done for religion - it is stupidity. it is a mere ritual
If abstaining from meat is due to compassion, and that arises from the belief of religion. And if that's considered stupid, I am sorry for you.
If not eating meat is due to some stupid adherence mere religious ritual, but then, if there is one less animal to suffer the slaughterhouse.....
We eat meat because we crave meat . As simple as that.
We eat animals because we are more intelligent than them and we don't see them as fellow sentient beings, pretend not to see death as a suffering, prefer not to think of it.
Hope you have a chance to see the efficiency of our slaughterhouse. Then imagine humans supplanted by a higher alien species with a craving for human flesh.
You can continue to eat meat, it is not immoral ,but do not justify it, by calling those who does'nt due to religious reasons, stupid.
Originally posted by likeyou:Some pple are vegetarian, but heart no good.
Some pple are not vegetarian, but heart is as pure as gold.
Which pple are better?
I'd prefer the person with the heart of gold anytime. But if that person is also a vegetarian,it is not bad either.
For unkind people who are vegetarians, let it be their saving grace.
Compassion is a by-product of love for onself (self-acceptance) and the consequence is a radiance that emanates from onself as being love, being kind being compassionate towards all and sundry. If one is unfree on the inside how can one free another. If one is impoverished how can one share.
What is rite now could be wrong the next moment. Nothing is cast in stone.
Empathy and compassion is a welling of one's being. It cannot be cultivated. As I am writing now, what you uttered is just an excuse. it may appear like i m commenting/criticising u but the truth is that what I am on the inside is surfacing.
If one is being kind to an old lady, a stranger, a cat or ... that matters more than all the beleifs. Whether one is being religious or non-religious does not matter. Empathizing suffices!
Circumstances, beliefs, traditions and so on forth dont make one. It is a fallcious myth. It reveals what one is all about - that is the reality!
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
Compassion is a by-product of love for onself (self-acceptance) and the consequence is a radiance that emanates from onself as being love, being kind being compassionate towards all and sundry. If one is unfree on the inside how can one free another. If one is impoverished how can one share.
What is rite now could be wrong the next moment. Nothing is cast in stone.
Empathy and compassion is a welling of one's being. It cannot be cultivated. As I am writing now, what you uttered is just an excuse. it may appear like i m commenting/criticising u but the truth is that what I am on the inside is surfacing.
If one is being kind to an old lady, a stranger, a cat or ... that matters more than all the beleifs. Whether one is being religious or non-religious does not matter. Empathizing suffices!
Circumstances, beliefs, traditions and so on forth dont make one. It is a fallcious myth. It reveals what one is all about - that is the reality!
We inherit the values our circumstances, beliefs, and what not, the moment we enter this existence. Some things we take for granted and perhaps still do, for it is so natural for us to do so. It is when we become aware, and start view things from not so obvious point, that do a retake on our previously held convictions.
Values changes according to society at large. We adopt values which is our beneficial and affordable to us .
True, with empathy and compassion can simply arise by itself from a person with a gentle and kind disposition, but we inherit acts of kindness or lack of, from our existing cultures, which benefit others less well endowed than us, which is still a positive proposition. With a working model in place, we emulate and hope to develop more awareness and compassion. Empathy does not come in equal packages, sad to say !
True compassion arises from the awareness and understanding of suffering, it also call us to see outside of ourselves. We are kind to old ladies, strangers and because we being comfortable in doing, just as not crushing the mosquito that just sucked your blood.
Life Undefined all ''things'' happen n all ''things'' are not missed! It is the self that is the barrier; the predicament of humanity is that of being unable to reconcile to the polarizing/dichotomizing preconceptualized models. moreover, the misconceptions tends/gravitates towards that which is psychological'' (excludes), when the ''spiritual'' realm is a rather freeing and inclusive.
I m for understanding one''self'' and negating one's sense of self and sequentially being meditative/existential. Existence preceded essence; to add/give essence to existence is succumbing to the duality of mind (thinking).
Anyway, i merely share my expereince and whether it resonates or not with the reader, I m not asking anyone to be agreeable. One is free to be and intuit what resonates of oneself!
I have not found you to be wrong in your assertions as things are always changing, therefore values too.
Preconceptualized models loses it relevance, requiring a rethink.
However, your rebuttals habitually apply a dismissive tone, implying the futility of the endeavour of such an inquiry, and the validity of one's view .
Your posting carries a "I right ,you wrong"impression with no attempt to engage from the other's point of view . It strongly suggest no consideration is made of the other poster's mindset, hinting disdain. In that I find you to be presumptous.
I find that inhibitive for individual growth.
@Weychin,
My making others wrong does not make me right. Having said that, just as I am entitled to views shared here, no one is being asked to subscribe to what I have uttered here.