the great vegetarian debate

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by chownah »

There is enough food produced at present to adequately feed the world's present population. The major agricultural practice which wastes the resources we will need in the future is not range fed cattle production, rather it is the chemically fed, chemically protected mono culture plantations created by industrial scale agriculture. Industrial agriculture is the single human activity which does the most damage to the environment. It consumes large amounts of fossil fuel and chemical fertilizer both which add to global warming. Agricultural runoff from chemically fertilized and treated farm land is creating huge dead zones in the oceans of the world which results in not only the reduction of the world"s marine food supplies but also kills coral whose degradation increases global warming. In industrial agriculture the goal is to kill everything except the crop you are growing for PROFIT.......the result is wholesale destruction of the ecosystem with zero diversity which in some places extends to beyond the horizon.
chownah
dagon
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:45 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by dagon »

chownah wrote:There is enough food produced at present to adequately feed the world's present population. The major agricultural practice which wastes the resources we will need in the future is not range fed cattle production, rather it is the chemically fed, chemically protected mono culture plantations created by industrial scale agriculture. Industrial agriculture is the single human activity which does the most damage to the environment. It consumes large amounts of fossil fuel and chemical fertilizer both which add to global warming. Agricultural runoff from chemically fertilized and treated farm land is creating huge dead zones in the oceans of the world which results in not only the reduction of the world"s marine food supplies but also kills coral whose degradation increases global warming. In industrial agriculture the goal is to kill everything except the crop you are growing for PROFIT.......the result is wholesale destruction of the ecosystem with zero diversity which in some places extends to beyond the horizon.
chownah
What goes along with what has been said is that one of the clear benefits of reducing, if not eliminating, meat from the diet is lost. The health benefits that should accrue are offset by the indigestion of agricultural chemical along with the food. Associated with that is the destruction of life forms extending up the food chain and the near sterilization of the degraded soils.

It is interesting to consider in the context of right livelihood what The Buddha would have made of pesticide producers and sellers? Traders in poisons?

metta
paul
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Alex123 »

Today's fruits and vegetables have far less nutritional content and far more pesticide (and other pollutants) than before. Some food is irradiated. Some is genetically modified (for profit). I used to drink up to 4 liters of blended fruits and greens per day... Didn't help me at all. Greens appear to me like damp paper or something.

Corn for example, is modified to produce Bt toxin to kill the bugs who eat it. While the makers claim that by cooking it, you neutralize poison, I doubt it. No thanks. If lifeforms die when eating raw corn - I don't think it is very safe to eat it even if it is cooked.
Genetically modified maize (corn) is a genetically engineered corn plant with agronomically desirable traits. Corn that is resistant to herbicides has been developed, as has corn that expresses insecticidal proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis bacteria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_maize
ImageImage
Image
Resistant to herbicides = it can be sprayed with a lot of toxic chemicals and don't die. Hopefully washing it well removes most of them.
Insecticide = it kills insects. I doubt it is beneficial to eat it for anyone, including humans.
So here, this vegetarian food is responsible for death of many insects, and (hopefully not) for bad health decades from now for humans who eat it.

So going from organic meat to vegetarianism, IMHO, is over-hyped when it comes to health. Also, consider this. Our body is made from animal flesh, not from cellulose or other vegetarian substances. The more similar the food is to our body's make up, the better. Protein from animal based sources is better than plant based protein. Some say that soy protein is good. But not for men, and not 90%+ of it for any gender because most of soy is genetically modified.

Soy is a legume, which contains high amounts of phytic acid. Phytic acid binds to minerals (like calcium, magnesium, copper, iron and zinc), interfering with the body's ability to absorb them (which is usually a bad thing). Soy is also known to contain "antinutrients," among them enzyme inhibitors that interfere with protein digestion. The Chinese figured out about 2,000 years ago that antinutrients and phytic acid could be deactivated during fermentation, but in the processed-food laden land of the West, we've chosen cultural ignorance in favor of quick and cheap. Most of the soy we eat is unfermented...
There is also a risk of breast and other reproductive cancers for women and the potential for testicular cancer and infertility in men.
link
No thank you.
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by seeker242 »

cooran wrote:Hello all,

Not sure if this article by Ajahn Brahmavamso has been posted before:

Vinaya: what the Buddha said about eating meat
http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books6/Ajahn ... g_meat.htm

With metta,
Chris
What he says is interesting. Although, I always wonder what he would have said if they had meat production factory farms back then? I can't see any way in which he would approve of such a thing. Especially when you are not a beggar monk and can easily choose what to eat or not eat. The average supermarket these days has something like 40,000 different products. Of course, it's not all food but that's besides the point! I have always wondered what the Buddha would have said if the monks, instead of being beggars, shopped at a supermarket with thousands of things to chose from. Would he have said "it's better to choose this rather than this"? I think it's highly likely that he would have said something like that.
Jhana4
Posts: 1331
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: U.S.A., Northeast

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Jhana4 »

I was at a retreat a few weeks ago listening to a question and answer session. A woman asked if the Buddha advocated vegetarianism. The vice abbot of the monestary, in a non-snarky friendly, but funny tone of voice said that subject was a matter of contention. People who want to eat meat, contend about it.

No disrespect to anyone, but I think that one line from the vice-abbot could sum up this whole huge thread.
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.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

Jhana4 wrote: People who want to eat meat, contend about it.
:thumbsup:
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

Alex123 wrote: Protein from animal based sources is better than plant based protein.
Arguable point, but for me not that relevant because I didn't stop eating meat for health reasons. It's basically that I like animals and don't want them to suffer unecessarily.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

seeker242 wrote:I have always wondered what the Buddha would have said if the monks, instead of being beggars, shopped at a supermarket with thousands of things to chose from. Would he have said "it's better to choose this rather than this"? I think it's highly likely that he would have said something like that.
And of course he did say something like that, ie the 3-fold rule. Most of us do have a choice, and I'd suggest that Right Intention is of relevance here.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by daverupa »

Spiny Norman wrote:
Jhana4 wrote: People who want to eat meat, contend about it.
:thumbsup:
There has been snarkiness from many sources in this thread, friends, those you mention and those you overlook. Please refrain from generating yet more of the same. Substantive discussion is here amongst the chaff.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

daverupa wrote:
Spiny Norman wrote:
Jhana4 wrote: People who want to eat meat, contend about it.
:thumbsup:
There has been snarkiness from many sources in this thread, friends, those you mention and those you overlook. Please refrain from generating yet more of the same. Substantive discussion is here amongst the chaff.
I think this is a substantive point, Dave. Some people just like eating meat.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by daverupa »

Spiny Norman wrote:I think this is a substantive point, Dave. Some people just like eating meat.
Do not underestimate equanimity in such a case.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by seeker242 »

Spiny Norman wrote:
Alex123 wrote: Protein from animal based sources is better than plant based protein.
Arguable point, but for me not that relevant because I didn't stop eating meat for health reasons. It's basically that I like animals and don't want them to suffer unecessarily.
I don't think it's an arguable point as there is no scientific evidence to back that statement up. Protein is simply amino acids combinations. Lysine is Lysine regardless of where it comes from. The Lysine you get from beans is the exact same thing as what comes from meat. Same with all the other amino acids. The only real difference is the amino acid profiles and rates of absorption. The idea that plant protein is somehow inferior is a long ago debunked myth.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Spiny Norman »

daverupa wrote:
Spiny Norman wrote:I think this is a substantive point, Dave. Some people just like eating meat.
Do not underestimate equanimity in such a case.
Do you mean somebody who doesn't mind what they eat, as opposed to somebody who likes eating meat and doesn't want to give it up?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by daverupa »

Spiny Norman wrote:
daverupa wrote:
Spiny Norman wrote:I think this is a substantive point, Dave. Some people just like eating meat.
Do not underestimate equanimity in such a case.
Do you mean somebody who doesn't mind what they eat, as opposed to somebody who likes eating meat and doesn't want to give it up?
Neither of those is what you said first, so I'm having a hard time answering you. I was responding to "people who just like eating meat" and the apparent distress which can arise on perceiving someone belonging to this broad category. Presumably the most distress will be experienced by vegetarians et al, though this category is broad enough to cover even those who will eat well-done steaks but who recoil in disgust at seeing a rare steak.

But now it's a choice between someone who doesn't care, and someone who not only likes meat but doesn't want to give it up. Neither one was denoted at first, so how can either one be the specific group I meant?
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Alex123 »

seeker242 wrote:I don't think it's an arguable point as there is no scientific evidence to back that statement up. Protein is simply amino acids combinations.
There are these issues:
Protein should have balanced, complete amino-acid profile, and easily digested.

Even though some nuts and seeds do contain all essential amino-acids, I wonder how easy it is for the body to absorb them.

Image
Post Reply