the great vegetarian debate

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Alex123 »

Jhana4 wrote:To show that people who care enough to try reduce the suffering of animals are foolish for trying and to try scare people who are starting to think like that so they will not even try for fear of being ostracized.
Well, samsara is dukkha.

Carnivores eat other animals. Even if humans don't eat chicken, or rabbit, the fox or some other carnivore will. The big predator fish can eat smaller fish... And unlike humans, they do not have humane way of killing their prey.
dagon
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:45 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by dagon »

Jhana4 wrote:
SarathW wrote:Ajhan Sumedho's experience with vegetarian diet:
===========
I found myself
aiming for the vegetarian dishes first so that I could
pass them out according to my own needs. It brought
up a really childish tendency in me. Then one day
another monk saw me doing this, so he grabbed the
vegetarian dish first and only gave me a little spoonful.
I was so angry when I saw that. I took this fermented
fish sauce, this really strong stuff and when I went past
his bowl, I splattered it all over his food! Fortunately,
we were forbidden to hit each other. This is an
absolute necessity for men — to have rules against
physical violence!
:)

Page 28

http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/intui ... reness.pdf
So what is the meaning behind posting this quote? To show that people who care enough to try reduce the suffering of animals are foolish for trying and to try scare people who are starting to think like that so they will not even try for fear of being ostracized.

Good thing the historical Buddha wasn't scared of being different for a principal or we wouldn't have the good things we have now.
Prephaps the text that follows the text you have quoted may help ..
I was trying to live up to an ideal of vegetarian purity,
and yet in the process having these really violent
feelings towards other monks. What’s this about? ItIntuitive Awareness 29
was a vindictive act to splatter all that strong chili
sauce with rotten fish in it over some monk’s food. It
was a violent act in order for me to keep a sense that
I’m a pure vegetarian. So I began to question whether
I wanted to make food into such a big deal in my life.
Was I wanting to live my life as a vegetarian or what?
Was that the main focus that I was aiming at? Just
contemplating this, I began to see the suffering I
created around my idealism. I noticed Luang Por
Chah certainly enjoyed his food and he had a joyful
presence. It wasn’t like an ascetic trip where you’re
eating nettle soup and rejecting the good bits; that’s
the other extreme.
Some of the aggressive and attached people i know are vegetarians - some of the kindest are vegetarians - i guess that it is what is going on in the mind and how the self is identified that makes the difference, not the menu choices that are made.

metta
paul
Last edited by dagon on Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:26 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Ben »

dagon wrote: Some of the aggressive and attached people i know are veterinarians - some of the kindest are veterinarians - i guess that it is what is going on in the mind and how the self is identified that makes the difference, not the menu choices that are made.

metta
paul
Indeed. I have seen the same thing. In my experience it is the person and not the preferred eating arrangements that are usually to blame.
kind regards,

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by cooran »

Well, I don't know any veterinarians - unless you count the last one I took my dog to in order to get his injections. Why single one profession out?

With metta,
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
dagon
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:45 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by dagon »

cooran wrote:Well, I don't know any veterinarians - unless you count the last one I took my dog to in order to get his injections. Why single one profession out?

With metta,
Chris
lol, i was not being mindful, caught out again

thanks mate
regards
User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by BubbaBuddhist »

Image
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10154
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

dagon wrote: Some of the aggressive and attached people i know are vegetarians...
I haven't met any vegetarians like that. I've found that people who care about the welfare of animals also tend to care about the welfare of people.

PS Please don't mention Hitler... :tongue:
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Jhana4
Posts: 1331
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: U.S.A., Northeast

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Jhana4 »

Spiny Norman wrote: It has been proven that Hitler was not a vegetarian ( he ate pork ). His early biographers were British, who used the word "meat" as being synonymous with "beef" and for his occult beliefs Hitler avoided beef.
In reading the scriptures, there are two kinds of mistakes:
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.
Jhana4
Posts: 1331
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: U.S.A., Northeast

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Jhana4 »

dagon wrote: Some of the aggressive and attached people i know are vegetarians...
Not nearly as attached as aggressive and attached as many meat eaters I have met in being frightened to look at how things are done and being open to thinking about changing. I've sat down to lunch with people without saying a word to have them look at my food, ask me if I am a vegetarian, then go into some impassioned diatribe against it. Attached? Aggressive?
In reading the scriptures, there are two kinds of mistakes:
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.
Jhana4
Posts: 1331
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: U.S.A., Northeast

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Jhana4 »

Spiny Norman wrote: I haven't met any vegetarians like that. I've found that people who care about the welfare of animals also tend to care about the welfare of people.
When I used to leaflet I would often get people asking me why I didn't do something for people instead of animals. I would tell them about my donations to the local food bank and then I would ask them what they were doing for the world. I would rarely get an answer.
In reading the scriptures, there are two kinds of mistakes:
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.
Jhana4
Posts: 1331
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: U.S.A., Northeast

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Jhana4 »

Anyone read this book?




Image
In reading the scriptures, there are two kinds of mistakes:
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.
Jhana4
Posts: 1331
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: U.S.A., Northeast

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Jhana4 »

Alex123 wrote: Carnivores eat other animals. Even if humans don't eat chicken, or rabbit, the fox or some other carnivore will. The big predator fish can eat smaller fish... And unlike humans, they do not have humane way of killing their prey.
Humans don't kill humanely. Google on "factory farms" and then google on kosher or halal slaughtering methods. Yes, animals kill other animals. They don't have a choice. Human beings have a choice. Oddly enough that capacity is why Buddhism thinks being born human is so special, it gives us the ability to follow the dhamma.
In reading the scriptures, there are two kinds of mistakes:
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.
Jhana4
Posts: 1331
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: U.S.A., Northeast

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Jhana4 »

dagon wrote: Some of the aggressive and attached people i know are vegetarians - some of the kindest are vegetarians - i guess that it is what is going on in the mind and how the self is identified that makes the difference, not the menu choices that are made.

metta
paul
I don't mean any disrespect Paul. I think the passage you quoted is an argument ad hominem with the underlying motive to discredit vegetarians to make it easier to dismiss them rather than having to think about what they have to say. Isn't that attachment to views, something which Buddhism warns people about?

As to some other implied points, most vegetarians are vegetarians because they are very aware that animals have the capacity to suffer, they want to live like we do and they want to avoid pain like we do. People have a hard time being agreeable when something horrible is in the process of happening. A creature being that suffers like we do, being put into pain and killed.

If any person had that view, they would feel very strongly and would say something about at least avoiding using animal products.

That is the point were I interjected my comment, a subtle making fun of monks seeking out vegetarian food. Someone trying to sustain themselves without hurting another creature like themselves. It is my belief that is the result of many people not being able to handle the fact they could unknowingly be doing something horrible so they discredit the people who provoke those thoughts.

The dhamma is about seeing things as they are, especially unpleasant things we intentionally avoid looking at like death, aging, dukkha. The value in looking at things it would be easier to avoid seeing is to make things better.
In reading the scriptures, there are two kinds of mistakes:
One mistake is to cling to the literal text and miss the inner principles.
The second mistake is to recognize the principles but not apply them to your own mind, so that you waste time and just make them into causes of entanglement.
User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by lyndon taylor »

I went to the cow pasture; no cows eating animals!!! Then I went to the pig farm; no pigs eating animals!!!! Then the sheep pasture; no sheep eating animals! And finally the chicken coop; no chickens eating animals! maybe we should learn something from the animals........
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by BubbaBuddhist »

To all,
I was the moderator of the vegetarian forum of e-sangha for almost four years, and it was easily the bitterestly-contested area on that entire website. We moderators had to take more disciplinary actions, suspend more members ,and delete more posts than on any other section, and from both omnis and veggies. The omnis had their moments, yes, but the veggies quite often called omnis 'baby-killers" and "monsters," among other things. Hell, vegans sent me vitriolic hate-mail because I was 'only' a vegetarian and that wasn't good enough, therefore I had no right to be the moderator. It was unbelievable. Well, almost. I've come to recognize people say things on the internet they would never dare say face-to-face. Accountability has gone out the window.

My take on the whole thing is we have to be as mindful of what comes out of our mouths as what we put in it.

Munching on some celery and hummus,

BB
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?
Post Reply