the great vegetarian debate

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17186
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by DNS »

Hi yawares,

mmm, those moon cakes look good. I don't think I have ever tried them. I have had those sesame/bean ball Korean/Chinese desserts; they are good too.

Ron,

Fish? :shock: And here I thought you were a Jain. :)
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

David N. Snyder wrote:Hi yawares,

mmm, those moon cakes look good. I don't think I have ever tried them. I have had those sesame/bean ball Korean/Chinese desserts; they are good too.

Ron,

Fish? :shock: And here I thought you were a Jain. :)
Hi, Dave. Nope! Me not Jain. Me Tarzan! :tongue: :namaste:
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Which diet are you?

Post by Cittasanto »

Ron-The-Elder wrote:Hi, Dave.

My choices are driven not only by choices, but by health. Try to stick to vegan, but often supplement with (very) small portions of animal flesh. Mostly fish.
isnt that simply being omnivour or flexitarian?

but I am interested how you rational this with the standards you have expressed in this thread?
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Gibraltariana
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:20 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Gibraltariana »

For me the choice to become a vegetarian was more of an animal rights issue than anything else. Who am I to say a livi.g creature has to die so I can eat. Today there are so many resources available to vegetarians to meet their nutritional needs that eating meat is a choice. It's also a personal one, so I don't preach at omnivores.
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: Which diet are you?

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Cittasanto wrote:
Ron-The-Elder wrote:Hi, Dave.

My choices are driven not only by choices, but by health. Try to stick to vegan, but often supplement with (very) small portions of animal flesh. Mostly fish.
isnt that simply being omnivour or flexitarian?

but I am interested how you rational this with the standards you have expressed in this thread?
Dear Friend Cittasanto: My rationale for Medical Veganism is simple, "Fear of death or worse.", which was derived of open heart surgery in 1998, an enarterectomy in 1999 (left carotid surgery), Over 100 Ischemic strokes to right brain perfused from right carotid in 2012, Massive bladder infections due to hospital bred super- version of e-colae bacteria introduced by a poorly managed Foley catheter, while in Intensive Care Unit post surgery.

reference: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 0&start=20" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I still insist that there is no moral superiority for veganism. Veganism is simply a choice which is made for either moral, medical, ethical,environmental or religious reasons. "All life must consume other life to live." And I have stated previously, I hold plant life to be as sacred as all forms of animals, if not more so. As a student and practitioner of Buddhism since 1998 I have learned that all intentional actions (khamma) results in consequences (khamma Vippakha), including dietary habits. My choice to practice Medical veganism was derived from my own personal experience as to health, and a fear of death, which can be stated as clinging to life. :soap:

Through study and debate of the issue over the years I have come to understand the environmental, sociological, and the enormous degree of suffering caused by living as a carnivore, and have become motivated to avoid where and when ever possible, while being tolerant of others, who choose to find their nutrition otherwise. My cats,my wife, family members, friends, and neighbors are prime examples.

The ideal nutritional practice, because it causes the least harm, I have to come to understand is that of fruitatarian, and scavenger, because it meets the requirements of The Noble Eight Fold Path (Right View/Harmonious View) and (Right /Harmonious Livelihood) :anjali: Ron
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Which diet are you?

Post by Cittasanto »

Ron-The-Elder wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:
Ron-The-Elder wrote:Hi, Dave.

My choices are driven not only by choices, but by health. Try to stick to vegan, but often supplement with (very) small portions of animal flesh. Mostly fish.
isnt that simply being omnivour or flexitarian?

but I am interested how you rational this with the standards you have expressed in this thread?
Dear Friend Cittasanto: My rationale for Medical Veganism is simple, "Fear of death or worse.", which was derived of open heart surgery in 1998, an enarterectomy in 1999 (left carotid surgery), Over 100 Ischemic strokes to right brain perfused from right carotid in 2012, Massive bladder infections due to hospital bred super- version of e-colae bacteria introduced by a poorly managed Foley catheter, while in Intensive Care Unit post surgery.

reference: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 0&start=20" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I still insist that there is no moral superiority for veganism. Veganism is simply a choice which is made for either moral, medical, ethical,environmental or religious reasons. "All life must consume other life to live." And I have stated previously, I hold plant life to be as sacred as all forms of animals, if not more so. As a student and practitioner of Buddhism since 1998 I have learned that all intentional actions (khamma) results in consequences (khamma Vippakha), including dietary habits. My choice to practice Medical veganism was derived from my own personal experience as to health, and a fear of death, which can be stated as clinging to life. :soap:

Through study and debate of the issue over the years I have come to understand the environmental, sociological, and the enormous degree of suffering caused by living as a carnivore, and have become motivated to avoid where and when ever possible, while being tolerant of others, who choose to find their nutrition otherwise. My cats,my wife, family members, friends, and neighbors are prime examples.

The ideal nutritional practice, because it causes the least harm, I have to come to understand is that of fruitatarian, and scavenger, because it meets the requirements of The Noble Eight Fold Path (Right View/Harmonious View) and (Right /Harmonious Livelihood) :anjali: Ron
I am really sorry ron but you have not mentioned medical or health reasons at all until now as a reason although you do mention health and it was this
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9229&start=1640#p197423 wrote:As for all the health arguments: Vegans get to live in Samsara longer than carnivores. That is a general medical fact, when you ignore genetics. I am not sure if that is necessarily a good thing based on what I have seen over the years visiting long-lived relatives in nursing homes. If we can live healthily and independently then there is probably some merit in that.
and my argument using health
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9229&start=1720#p199325 wrote:
Ron-The-Elder wrote:So, your argument that these people don't have a choice does not hold water. :toilet:
that actually wasn't my argument, and there was more than just that one part!
There are reasons due to certain conditions beyond our control (such as weather/climate, location, social situation, health, famine to name a few) which can effect.
and I make reference to it as a reason here http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p197899" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by Cittasanto on Wed Aug 08, 2012 7:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Dear Friend Cittasanto: And your point is?
by Bhikkhu Pesala » Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:33 pm

In my opinion a Buddhist shouldn't be a strict vegetarian or vegan. To take such a stance would just be attachment to views. The Āmagandha Sutta makes it clear. To be a vegetarian for reasons of health or frugality makes more sense than for reasons of ethics.

If you lived near a farm where the farmer grew cabbages, and you knew that the farmer shot rabbits. Then at the farm shop, would you buy cabbages, or rabbit meat, both, or neither? On what basis would you make that decision?

All modern farming methods involve the intentional destruction of living beings — even for growing vegetables. If you have time, you can grow your own organic veggies and take reasonable care to ensure that no living beings are killed in the process, but growing wheat and making your own bread is not easy. So, why not just be mindful of your intention and save a whole lot of grief that arises from attachment to views?

In four ways one can break the precept of killing living beings:
One kills living beings by one's own hand
One urges another to do it
One grants permission to another to do it
One speaks in praise of killing
My other point you apparently miss, or with which you disagree, is that Plants are life-forms, too and in many respects sentient if not sapient! Therefore none of us are free from the guilt of killing to eat except for fruitatarianism and scavaging.

In my case, health put me down the nutritional path that I am on. :anjali:
āmagandha

A brahmin. Before the appearance of the Buddha in the world, āmagandha became an ascetic and lived in the region of the Himālaya with five hundred pupils. They ate neither fish nor flesh. Every year they came down from their hermitage in search of salt and vinegar, and the inhabitants of a village near by received them with great honour and showed them every hospitality for four months.

Then one day the Buddha, with his monks, visited the same village, and the people having listened to his preaching became his followers. That year when āmagandha and his disciples went as usual to the village, the householders did not show towards them the same enthusiasm as heretofore. The brahmin, enquiring what had happened, was full of excitement on hearing that the Buddha had been born, and wished to know if he ate "āmagandha," by which he meant fish or flesh. He was greatly disappointed on learning that the Buddha did not forbid the eating of āmagandha, but, desiring to hear about it from the Buddha himself, he sought him at Jetavana. The Buddha told him that āmagandha was not really fish or flesh, but that it referred to evil actions, and that he who wished to avoid it should abstain from evil deeds of every kind. The same question had been put to the Buddha Kassapa by an ascetic named Tissa, who later became his chief disciple. In giving an account of the conversation between Kassapa Buddha and Tissa, the Buddha preached to āmagandha the āmagandha Sutta. The Brahmin and his followers entered the Order and in a few days became arahants. Sn., pp.42-5; SnA.i.278ff.

āmagandha Sutta.-The conversation between the Buddha and the brahmin āmagandha mentioned above (Sn.42ff). According to Buddhaghosa (SnA.i.280ff) this was merely a reproduction of the conversation of the Buddha Kassapa with the ascetic Tissa, who later became his chief disciple.

The sutta is particularly interesting as being one of the few passages in which sayings of the previous Buddhas are recorded. The Buddha's view is put forward as being identical with that which had been enunciated long ago, with the intended implication that it was a self-evident proposition accepted by all the wise.
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Now, this is not to say that eating even fruit is free from health risks. There is method of preparation to consider, and contamination from parasites and pathogens such as E-Coli.

See for example a request for assistance from Bhikkhu Samahita:
uddha-Direct 2844: Urgent Medicine Request!‏

Groups, Newsletters, Photos | 8/07/12
Reply ▼
Bhikkhu Samahita
Schedule cleanup
To 1. 1A, 1. 2A
Dear Dhamma Friends & Supporters:
Unfortunately have I again contracted a parasite infection called Schistosomiasis
(also known as liver-fluke, bilharzia, bilharziosis or snail fever)! from the infected wild
pigs living here in this jungle, who excrement in the mountain stream water supply here…
Some medicine is therefore needed, which is not available here on Sri Lanka. (See below)
If any of you kind Dhamma-friends could get the medicine from your hospital or doctor
or pharmacy/pharmacist or health-care-provider and send it here, it would be VERY fine.
Since the parasite eggs can spread to the brain and spinal cord, which effectively would
disable me completely, then the medicine is somewhat urgently needed!




NEEDED MEDICINE:

A:
Tablets PRAZIQUANTEL 600mg: 36 tablets (for treatment)
(brands: Distoside, Biltricide, Cesol, Cysticide, Zentozide)



and

B: Tablets ARTEMETHER 40, 50 or 100 mg: 300 tablets
(for 1 years prevention)



Send to Mail Address:
Venerable Bhikkhu Samahita
Cypress Hermitage, Bambarella
20838 Tawalantenna
Kandy, Central Province.
SRI LANKA
Phone: (+94) 081 562 0553
Email: [email protected]

Many Thanx in Advance :-)
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Cittasanto »

hi Ron,
Ron-The-Elder wrote:Dear Friend Cittasanto: And your point is?
there is a reason I said you are expounding a Nigantha (Jain) view, not a Buddhist one, and am trying to understand the shift from point "A" to "π"
do read this post and your response http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 20#p199133" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
My other point you apparently miss, or with which you disagree, is that Plants are life-forms, too and in many respects sentient if not sapient! Therefore none of us are free from the guilt of killing to eat except for fruitatarianism and scavaging.

you really should read the posts.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p198876" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Instead of ignoring posts because you deem them as false teachings, try reading and understanding them, and I would suggest you look up what a being is in Buddhism and have recently expressed it in a post but can not find it although here is the sutta I referenced, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But I will say again unless someone intentionally takes a life through body speech or mind they are not guilty of killing.
In my case, health put me down the nutritional path that I am on. :anjali:
great, there is nothing wrong with staying healthy, or with the intention to stay healthy, it is the reason to eat try looking at the reflection on using the requisites.
Wisely reflecting, i use alms food: not for fun, not for pleasure, not for fattening, not for beautification, only for the maintenance and nourishment of this body, for keeping it healthy, for helping with the Holy Life; thinking thus, “I will allay hunger without overeating, so that I may continue to live blamelessly and at ease.”
now the difference here between the fact that this is for mendicants and not lay people is that it is still applicable for lay people, as it is encouraging to eat only what is needed to stay healthy, and preform ones tasks. a neutral interpretive take could be
Wisely reflecting, i use food: not for fun, not for pleasure, not for fattening, not for beautification, only for the maintenance and nourishment of this body, for keeping it healthy, for helping with life's tasks; thinking thus, “I will allay hunger without overeating, so that I may continue to live blamelessly and at ease.”
(change underlined)
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 80#p198095" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (another one of my mentioning of health)
and I do note the Buddha would consider more than a limited set of information seeing as he is all knowing.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 20#p199456" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
One kills living beings by one's own hand
One urges another to do it
One grants permission to another to do it
One speaks in praise of killing
do note these are all direct intentional actions to kill through body speech or mind, not including an intent to sustain oneself through nutriment, as you have claimed.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Dear friend Cittasanto: Just as your video shows people smacking their foreheads in frustration, I find myself venting and gasping a great exhale.

Enough, already! Suggest we let others give it a try. Let us both let go of our attachments to "perception, form, and views" (Thanks for the link) ( I do read your posts, but simply find little to agree with). But, that is as it should be. We are each on a different part of the same path. As the saying goes "beauty is in the mind of the beholder", and nothing is more beautiful than The Dhamma.
-----The End----- " How about those Red Sox?" :tongue:
:anjali: Ron
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Cittasanto »

Ron-The-Elder wrote:Dear friend Cittasanto: Just as your video shows people smacking their foreheads in frustration, I find myself venting and gasping a great exhale.

Enough, already! Suggest we let others give it a try. Let us both let go of our attachments to "perception, form, and views" (Thanks for the link) ( I do read your posts, but simply find little to agree with). But, that is as it should be. We are each on a different part of the same path. As the saying goes "beauty is in the mind of the beholder", and nothing is more beautiful than The Dhamma.
-----The End----- " How about those Red Sox?" :tongue:
:anjali: Ron
its not frustration!
and if you read them you would of known it had been answered, and a great many other things had been covered, like not having it both ways.
my path is finding out what 'exactly' the Buddha taught and seeing if it works, not deciding what the Buddha taught.

but what the hell are the red sox?
Last edited by Cittasanto on Thu Aug 09, 2012 8:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Cittasanto:
my path is finding out what 'exactly' the Buddha taught and seeing if it works, not deciding what the Buddha taught.
Agreed! This is a wonderful approach, but you and I can never know exactly what the Buddha taught, "exactly". We can only know what others said he taught.

What we can know is the preponderance of opinions and what has been reported and to select from that what is reasonable, non-delusional, and as Buddha explained to his son, Rahula, in The Ambalatthika-rahulovada Sutta : Reflecting as if in a mirror upon the potential outcomes of our intended actions: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"What do you think, Rahula: What is a mirror for?"

"For reflection, sir."

"In the same way, Rahula, bodily actions, verbal actions, & mental actions are to be done with repeated reflection.

"Whenever you want to do a bodily action, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily action I want to do — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Would it be an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful bodily action with painful consequences, painful results, then any bodily action of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful bodily action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then any bodily action of that sort is fit for you to do.

"While you are doing a bodily action, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily action I am doing — is it leading to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Is it an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it is leading to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both... you should give it up. But if on reflection you know that it is not... you may continue with it.
And, I put to you one last time that it is not in character for a Buddha to support slaughter, despite what you read in The Suttas. :anjali: Ron
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Cittasanto »

I had eddited the last post but will include it here also
Ron-The-Elder wrote:Cittasanto:
my path is finding out what 'exactly' the Buddha taught and seeing if it works, not deciding what the Buddha taught.
Agreed! This is a wonderful approach, but you and I can never know exactly what the Buddha taught, "exactly". We can only know what others said he taught.

What we can know is the preponderance of opinions and what has been reported and to select from that what is reasonable, non-delusional, and as Buddha explained to his son, Rahula, in The Ambalatthika-rahulovada Sutta : Reflecting as if in a mirror upon the potential outcomes of our intended actions: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
putting it to the test does quite a good job, and not taking passages out of context helps, fine tune things
plus there are markers for what is true teachings.
AN 8.53 A Discourse to Gotami (Samkhitta Sutta) (Excerpt) wrote:‘Those teachings that lead: to dis-passion (calm objectivity), not to passion (intense enthusiasm); to being unfettered (moving with things), not to being fettered (moved by things); to shedding (decrease of troubles), not to accumulating (increase of troubles); to being inwardly content, not to self importance (conceit); to contentment with things, not to discontent (longing for better things); to privacy from external concerns, not to involvement in external concerns; to the application of energy, not to wasting time; to being easily supported (needing little), not to being hard to please (wanting more’): You can definitely hold, ‘This is the teaching, this is the discipline, this is the teacher’s instruction.’
And, I put to you one last time that it is not in character for a Buddha to support slaughter, despite what you read in The Suttas. :anjali: Ron
I have pointed this out before but here it is again
if the Buddha is all knowing he will see there are other reasons to eat meat than what you are clumping it with - one of these reasons is why you eat meat - and as a fully altruistic person to ignore these reasons would show a fixedness in their views which would negate their effacement stance (see bottom of page 83) and the lengthy detailed post you admit to ignoring.

you can not have it both ways the Buddha is either all knowing and compassionate or a narrow minded tyrant who would leave people unable to sustain their body properly.
this not having it both ways also goes for going against ones understanding of the teachings.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Cittasanto:,,,,you can not have it both ways the Buddha is either all knowing and compassionate or a narrow minded tyrant who would leave people unable to sustain their body properly.
this not having it both ways also goes for going against ones understanding of the teachings.


Since we (you) have now entered the realm of non-Harmonious Speech, I will cease to participate in any further conversation with you. You have no understanding of the capabilities of a Buddha any more than I do, or than anyone else living does. We have now entered the 32nd Plane of Existence, The Realm of Pure Speculation. Let's agree to end it respectfully here. :console: :coffee:
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Cittasanto »

Ron-The-Elder wrote:
Cittasanto:,,,,you can not have it both ways the Buddha is either all knowing and compassionate or a narrow minded tyrant who would leave people unable to sustain their body properly.
this not having it both ways also goes for going against ones understanding of the teachings.


Since we (you) have now entered the realm of non-Harmonious Speech, I will cease to participate in any further conversation with you. You have no understanding of the capabilities of a Buddha any more than I do, or than anyone else living does. We have now entered the 32nd Plane of Existence, The Realm of Pure Speculation. Let's agree to end it respectfully here. :console: :coffee:
what is a mirror for? you don't like your own words do you http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p198868" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; but I am the one apparently expounding false teachings, even when I and others can walk the walk of what I believe to be the case.

I am definately not saying I am 100% correct on things. But my argument is based on an ability to put the texts into practice in different situations - which also take into account the ethical and philosophic underpinnings - so it ceases to be pure speculation when there is a demonstrable practicability.

I may not be able to prove an enlightened being is X, Y, or Z, however, I can show through a testable example and records of such behavior - which can either in part or full be applied to multiple situations - whether or not something is likely, no cop-out, and what is less likely to be the case can be seen through this application and be discarded due to that.

you may say non-harmonious, I disagree, it is harsh, but there is a reason, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... gment.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
when you have several times ignored what has been said - either by myself or within the texts - due to a rational they are false teachings without evidence, and thus said dispraise on the teachings, and as a result of this dispraised the Tathagata I am to the extent we are Brothers in the Dhamma obliged!
some may not have the inclination to deal with straw-man or other fallacy arguments of non-practical opinion or popularity, but these are some of the least of my concerns when talking to others here.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Post Reply