Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Gwi
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:33 am
Location: Indonesia

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by Gwi »

bodom wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:41 pm
Gwi wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 3:36 pm So ...

someone who making a mat of thorns
Their bed may be torturing themselves
If they were The thorns pierce to death
and had no other seat options besides
Thorns and still refuses to seat it??


I following Buddhå Gotamå
:anjali:
The topic is about vegetarianism not mats of thorns. As I have said I am not personally a vegetarian and the Buddha certainly didn't forbid it or say it was self torture so I will let those who are speak for themselves. The Buddha has already spoken for me.

:anjali:

I following MN 51, i wont
Make a mat from a bed of thorns.
(The practice of self-torture)
I accept meal n fish.


Love the animals, because they are very delicious.
Bahagia Tidak Harus Selalu Bersama

Dhammapadå 370
"Tinggalkanlah 5 (belantara) dan patahkan 5 (belenggu rendah),
Serta kembangkan 5 potensi (4 iddhipādā + 1 ussoḷhi).
Bhikkhu yang telah menaklukkan 5 kungkungan (belenggu tinggi),
Lebih layak disebut 'orang yang telah mengarungi air baih (saṃsārå)'."
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Kamma is intention. If someone gives them leftover meat to eat, then it isn’t an unwholesome act.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Anatta777
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:46 pm

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by Anatta777 »

I think it has something to do with the caste system at the time too. Being Hunter or trappers was considered a low caste. But The Buddha and monks had compassion for all beings. Why would they deny the merits of offering meats when they have no intentions of harm.

The buddha said its not the eating of meats that's defiling of the mind. It's lust, hatred, and delusion that defiling.
Mr. Seek
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:45 am

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by Mr. Seek »

I think the Buddha just did what had to be done in order to establish a stable connection with the laity. Beggars can't be choosers, not excessively at least, being satisfied with what whatever falls into their bowl.
bpallister
Posts: 662
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2021 2:13 am

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by bpallister »

Veganism is not self-torture these days. Maybe 20 or 30 years ago, but not now
bpallister
Posts: 662
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2021 2:13 am

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by bpallister »

Mr. Seek wrote: Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:58 am I think the Buddha just did what had to be done in order to establish a stable connection with the laity. Beggars can't be choosers, not excessively at least, being satisfied with what whatever falls into their bowl.

that's my understanding of it too
User avatar
Gwi
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:33 am
Location: Indonesia

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by Gwi »

bpallister wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 1:48 pm Veganism is not self-torture these days. Maybe 20 or 30 years ago, but not now

Lie on a mat of thorns is not self-torture these days.
Maybe 20 or 30 years ago, but not now. :console:


MN 51 is a proof.
self-torture not because of torment.
Not always.
Attachments
1.gif
1.gif (31.55 KiB) Viewed 1318 times
Last edited by Gwi on Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bahagia Tidak Harus Selalu Bersama

Dhammapadå 370
"Tinggalkanlah 5 (belantara) dan patahkan 5 (belenggu rendah),
Serta kembangkan 5 potensi (4 iddhipādā + 1 ussoḷhi).
Bhikkhu yang telah menaklukkan 5 kungkungan (belenggu tinggi),
Lebih layak disebut 'orang yang telah mengarungi air baih (saṃsārå)'."
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by salayatananirodha »

https://legacy.suttacentral.net/en/snp2.2 wrote:Taking life, torture, mutilation too,
binding, stealing, telling lies, and fraud;
deceit, adultery, and studying crooked views:
this is carrion-stench, not the eating of meat.

Those people of desires and pleasures unrestrained,
greedy for tastes with impurity mixed in,
of nihilistic views, unstable, hard to train:
this is carrion-stench, not the eating of meat.

The rough, the cruel, backbiters and betrayers,
those void of compassion, extremely arrogant,
the miserly, to others never giving anything:
this is carrion-stench, not the eating of meat.

Who’s angry, obstinate, hostile and vain,
deceitful, envious, a boastful person too,
full of oneself, with the wicked intimate:
this is carrion-stench, not the eating of meat.

Those of evil ways, defaulters on debts,
imposters, slanderers, deceitful in their dealings,
vile men who commit evil deeds in this world:
this is carrion-stench, not the eating of meat.

Those people unrestrained for living beings here,
taking others’ property, on injury intent,
immoral, harsh and cruel, for others no respect:
this is carrion-stench, not the eating of meat.

Towards others greedy or hateful—they attack them,
ever on misdemeanours bent,
they go to darkness after death;
such beings as this fall headlong into Hell:
this is carrion-stench, not the eating of meat.

Not from fish and flesh tasting and not by nudity,
not by the plucking of head-hairs,
nor growing of matted locks,
not by the smearing of the ashes of the dead,
not wearing abrasive skins,
not following sacrificial fires,
or worldly austerities for gaining immortality,
nor mantras, nor offerings,
oblations, seasons’ services
can purify a mortal still overcome by doubt.

Who lives with sense-streams guarded, well-aware,
in the Dharma firm, enjoying gently rectitude,
beyond attachments gone, all dukkha left behind,
that wise one’s unsullied by the seen and the heard.
eating meat is not blameworthy
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
bpallister
Posts: 662
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2021 2:13 am

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by bpallister »

Gwi wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:49 am
bpallister wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 1:48 pm Veganism is not self-torture these days. Maybe 20 or 30 years ago, but not now

Lie on a mat of thorns is not self-torture these days.
Maybe 20 or 30 years ago, but not now. :console:


MN 51 is a proof.
self-torture not because of torment.
Not always.
false equivalency
DiamondNgXZ
Posts: 390
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2021 5:40 am

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by DiamondNgXZ »

Gwi wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:49 am
bpallister wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 1:48 pm Veganism is not self-torture these days. Maybe 20 or 30 years ago, but not now

Lie on a mat of thorns is not self-torture these days.
Maybe 20 or 30 years ago, but not now. :console:


MN 51 is a proof.
self-torture not because of torment.
Not always.
Actually, given the density of the thorns, it could be not painful, and not producing blood. Anyway, this is false usage too. The passage in MN 51 refers to people begging alms for food. Do you beg alms for food? Do most lay people do that? No. Lay people have choices.

Remember that the Buddha didn't want lay people to purposely have animals killed to offer to monks (MN 55), yet, what do lay people do nowadays? Most lay people purposely cook special food just to offer to monks. So where do they got the meat from? Supermarket? Or maybe in rural areas, they go to live market and ask for that chicken to be killed.

In any case, as a monk, it's risky to accept meat offered specially for monks, given that we might not know if the lay people actually gone to the market to purposely get the animals killed. How often is MN 55 cited in dhamma talks to prevent such practise? Given that meat cannot be eaten if suspected that it's killed for me, I wouldn't want to eat meat offered specially for monks.

As lay people, you're concern for diet is more immediately tied to global warming. Meat industry warms up the planet. Go vegan out of compassion for the world, humans and animals.

:focus:

I suspect the Buddha wasn't vegan is because that he might had foreseen that Buddhism would spread to regions where it's not possible to be vegan. Eg. Tibet. Buddhism would grow strong in those places and then flourish, eventually, like 2500+ years later (nowadays), people would have a global push to become vegan for environmental, philosophical, compassionate reasons. However, there could still be lab grown meat, so maybe in 10 years from now too, if meat is banned for monks, it's much harder for lay people to provide meal as (all) meat then would be blameless, harmless, produced ethically, same taste as killed for animals, and finally covered the market of meat and drive all animal farms to extinction. So in this sense too meat by itself is not ethically harmful. However, if you're not eating lab grown meat, do be mindful of the cruelty which enabled your taste of it. Eat it like the couple crossing the desert eat their own child. (SN12.63)

Also, Buddha might think it more important not to let veganism become a barrier, prerequisite for people to become Buddhists. The Dhamma food is more important than physical food. However, for long time Buddhists already, it's past time for you to develop compassion and renunciation (of meat).
bpallister
Posts: 662
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2021 2:13 am

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by bpallister »

"In any case, as a monk, it's risky to accept meat offered specially for monks, given that we might not know if the lay people actually gone to the market to purposely get the animals killed. How often is MN 55 cited in dhamma talks to prevent such practise? Given that meat cannot be eaten if suspected that it's killed for me, I wouldn't want to eat meat offered specially for monks."

Seems like semantics, as it's all killed for "someone" and killing is wrong.
User avatar
Gwi
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:33 am
Location: Indonesia

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by Gwi »

MN 51 is a proof.
self-torture not because of torment.
Not always.


Do not go against the words of The Buddhå.


Why Buddhå didnt go vegan?
Answer: MN 51 (u get v 100)
Bahagia Tidak Harus Selalu Bersama

Dhammapadå 370
"Tinggalkanlah 5 (belantara) dan patahkan 5 (belenggu rendah),
Serta kembangkan 5 potensi (4 iddhipādā + 1 ussoḷhi).
Bhikkhu yang telah menaklukkan 5 kungkungan (belenggu tinggi),
Lebih layak disebut 'orang yang telah mengarungi air baih (saṃsārå)'."
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by DooDoot »

Gwi wrote: Tue Sep 21, 2021 1:54 am MN 51 is a proof.
Try to improve your post by quoting from the sutta. It is both inconsiderate and lazy to not write a clear post. :thanks:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Gwi
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:33 am
Location: Indonesia

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by Gwi »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Sep 21, 2021 3:41 am
Gwi wrote: Tue Sep 21, 2021 1:54 am MN 51 is a proof.
Try to improve your post by quoting from the sutta. It is both inconsiderate and lazy to not write a clear post. :thanks:
AN volume 2: 198 (8)
Bahagia Tidak Harus Selalu Bersama

Dhammapadå 370
"Tinggalkanlah 5 (belantara) dan patahkan 5 (belenggu rendah),
Serta kembangkan 5 potensi (4 iddhipādā + 1 ussoḷhi).
Bhikkhu yang telah menaklukkan 5 kungkungan (belenggu tinggi),
Lebih layak disebut 'orang yang telah mengarungi air baih (saṃsārå)'."
DiamondNgXZ
Posts: 390
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2021 5:40 am

Re: Why Buddha didnt go vegan ?

Post by DiamondNgXZ »

bpallister wrote: Tue Sep 21, 2021 1:46 am "In any case, as a monk, it's risky to accept meat offered specially for monks, given that we might not know if the lay people actually gone to the market to purposely get the animals killed. How often is MN 55 cited in dhamma talks to prevent such practise? Given that meat cannot be eaten if suspected that it's killed for me, I wouldn't want to eat meat offered specially for monks."

Seems like semantics, as it's all killed for "someone" and killing is wrong.
Yes, broadly interpreted, it recommends veganism. Specifically interpreted, at least don't serve meat if you're going to dana to monks.

Nowadays, the standards seems to be that people can buy meat from supermarket, so the following from MN55, doesn't happen:
“Jīvaka, anyone who slaughters a living creature specially for the Realized One or the Realized One’s disciple makes much bad karma for five reasons.

When they say: ‘Go, fetch that living creature,’ this is the first reason.

When that living creature experiences pain and sadness as it’s led along by a collar, this is the second reason.

When they say: ‘Go, slaughter that living creature,’ this is the third reason.

When that living creature experiences pain and sadness as it’s being slaughtered, this is the fourth reason.

When they provide the Realized One or the Realized One’s disciple with unallowable food, this is the fifth reason.

Anyone who slaughters a living creature specially for the Realized One or the Realized One’s disciple makes much bad karma for five reasons.”
Yet, let's go back to the days of the Buddha, often there comes a meal invitation for the next day, and the donor invited 500 monks along with the Buddha. So to prepare such a large meal, they obviously didn't had supermarkets with ready made meat, if they have to put meat in the menu, it involves a lot of killing. Thus by logical analysis, it can be deduced that such invitations are vegan/vegetarian meals.

It's good to follow the spirit of it too nowadays, if lay people serve monks, since even if the process of killing is much more removed from the buyer, the killing still happens up the line to provide meat if such meal donation contains it. Strictly speaking, there's no issue if the meat is already dead from supermarket. However, it could be too that some families do have chickens in their home, and on hearing that the monks are coming to meal the next day, killed their chicken and serve it up. Monks who eat meat need to be on guard for those. It's easier to just go vegan.
Post Reply