the great vegetarian debate

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 5020
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Jaroen Dhamma Cave, Mae Wang Huai Rin, Lamphun

Re: The "three rules" of eating meat

Post by Dhammanando » Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:03 am

daniil wrote:
Tue Jan 29, 2019 10:34 pm
As a lay person, I cannot bring myself to do it since I pick and purchase the food myself. My intention is to not harm others and thus I avoid approving of the butchers' work and rewarding them for it. Would you see that as wrong view? A misinterpretation of the teaching? Delusion?
Not necessarily. Buddhist vegetarians who advocate vegetarianism using the same kind of consequentialist arguments that are used by non-Buddhist vegetarians wouldn't be misrepresenting the Buddha's teaching, for they wouldn't be representing (or claiming to represent) the Buddha's teaching at all. In my opinion it would be best if they stuck to doing just this.

The problem is when they try to argue their case by invoking teachings like, say, the description of the first precept or the Buddha's teachings on kamma. When they do this they always end up talking nonsense and misrepresenting the teachings in question. In the case of kamma, for example, either they'll go astray by invoking a Jain-like conception of kamma in which the intention prompting one's action is treated as irrelevant, or else they'll play fast and loose with the word "intention", mistakenly supposing the semantic range of this word in English to be co-extensive with that of cetanā in the Pali suttas.

In your case, however, I don't know whether or not you are erring in this way because it's not clear whether the argument in your earlier post was meant to be grounded in dhammic kamma theory or extra-dhammic consequentialism.
“Keep to your own pastures, bhikkhus, walk in the haunts where your fathers roamed.
If ye thus walk in them, Māra will find no lodgement, Māra will find no foothold.”
— Cakkavattisīhanāda Sutta

User avatar
Dan74-MkII
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 10:22 am

Re: The "three rules" of eating meat

Post by Dan74-MkII » Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:15 am

Your last point, Venerable, is what I believe to be the basic cause of consternation among vegetarian-inclined Buddhists,
...mistakenly supposing the semantic range of this word in English to be co-extensive with that of cetanā in the Pali suttas
It seem to me that to take intention as only extending as far as purpose and disregarding the conscious neglect, is the issue here. Consciously neglecting the causal nexus of one's action or inaction with suffering must of necessity lead to kamma, must it not, such as failing to render assistance in dire circumstances, or indeed, partaking of something that is brought about by killing, accepting monastery alms from a drug racketeer, etc.

There is a mental formation that is not based on compassion but rather self-seeking motives there, it seems to me, and this would sure lead to unfavourable consequences..?

_/|\_

User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 5020
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Jaroen Dhamma Cave, Mae Wang Huai Rin, Lamphun

Re: The "three rules" of eating meat

Post by Dhammanando » Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:20 am

D1W1 wrote:
Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:19 am
Thanks Bhante but what is the relation between "three requirements of eating meat" and nutrition?
Whether the meat be pure in three respects or whether it be not pure, if a monk eats it then he'll be nourished. If he doesn't then he won't. But if it's not pure in three respects and he eats it then he'll have committed a Vinaya offence.
D1W1 wrote:
Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:19 am
Can you share your thought for the question below?
As I've already said, the "meat pure in three respects" teaching is not part of the sīla of householders.
“Keep to your own pastures, bhikkhus, walk in the haunts where your fathers roamed.
If ye thus walk in them, Māra will find no lodgement, Māra will find no foothold.”
— Cakkavattisīhanāda Sutta

budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: The "three rules" of eating meat

Post by budo » Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:33 am

daniil wrote:
Tue Jan 29, 2019 10:34 pm
I believe this to be a misguided call based on judgment. Just as I am judging you based on this post. The topic of nutrition is frequently filled with partiality :')

I have studied nutrition intensively for the past 3 years, and would like to disagree on the inherent 'extreme unhealthiness' of a vegan diet.

B12, A, EPA/DHA, magnesium and K2 are often lacking in a vegan diet, that is correct. Just as a standard omnivore diet is often lacking in magnesium, K1, D3 and Iodine.Yet 'often' is key here

It is entirely possible to have a solid, nutritionally complete vegan diet, just as it is to have an omnivore diet. Not all vegans are 'extremely unhealthy', not all omnivores are 'extremely healthy'.

Be well!
Daniil
I have studied nutrition for over 10 years, and was a vegan as well, which harmed my health..

Your error is not knowing that the human body directly absorbs animal based vitamins the best (bio availability) whereas it needs to convert plant vitamins, but this is often hard due to anti-nutrients in plants used as defense mechanisms by plants. Plants are also living beings, and small and immobile living beings use poison to defend themselves, poison like phytic acid and caffiene and many many more. Big animals do not contain poison.

You wrote "magnesium, K1, D3 and Iodine",

Well like I said the animal form K2-mk4 is easily bioavailable in butter and liver. Vitamin D3 also in liver, especially cod liver. Iodine and magnesium are trace minerals, and it's better to let the body manage its own trace minerals, if you take magnesium that often leads to diarrhoea. Also you can't get D3 from sunlight if your skin lacks fat and cholesterol to absorb it, another thing vegetarians lack by eating a low cholesterol diet.

So without a doubt humans are carnivores first and foremost, and then resort to plants as a back up. Just like wolves sometimes eat berries.

In nature there are no omnivores, just prey and predators. Carnivores and herbavores, like wolves and deers.

Also go look at studies with giving venus fly traps beef steak. Even though venus fly traps don't hunt cows, and never adapted to hunting cows, when fed beef they grow much bigger and healthier.

Therefore all life is trying to punch up. To eat plants is to punch down.

Dogs are wolves, yet humans feed them processed grains which weaken them.

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 12831
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: The "three rules" of eating meat

Post by DNS » Wed Jan 30, 2019 4:46 pm

budo wrote:
Mon Jan 28, 2019 8:17 am
1) Yes we do need meat to survive, or at least eggs. Vegans are extremely unhealthy and need to take B12 shots.
I've never had a B12 shot in my life. And I feel fine, healthy. I also know plenty of other vegetarians and vegans who have never had a B12 shot. Some are in their 80s and 90s. Vegans can get B12 from miso or other fermented vegan foods, shiitake mushrooms, or from supplements (multi-vitamins, not shots). Lacto-ovo vegetarians get plenty of B12 from their diets. The amount of B12 we need is measured in micrograms, not even grams or milligrams.

If you look at some of the longevity studies, many always mention the success of the Adventists in Loma Linda and other Adventist communities. They are vegetarians.

You definitely don't need meat to survive. There are centenarians who are vegetarian, vegan, and omnivores.

budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: The "three rules" of eating meat

Post by budo » Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:39 pm

DNS wrote:
Wed Jan 30, 2019 4:46 pm
budo wrote:
Mon Jan 28, 2019 8:17 am
1) Yes we do need meat to survive, or at least eggs. Vegans are extremely unhealthy and need to take B12 shots.
I've never had a B12 shot in my life. And I feel fine, healthy. I also know plenty of other vegetarians and vegans who have never had a B12 shot. Some are in their 80s and 90s. Vegans can get B12 from miso or other fermented vegan foods, shiitake mushrooms, or from supplements (multi-vitamins, not shots). Lacto-ovo vegetarians get plenty of B12 from their diets. The amount of B12 we need is measured in micrograms, not even grams or milligrams.

If you look at some of the longevity studies, many always mention the success of the Adventists in Loma Linda and other Adventist communities. They are vegetarians.

You definitely don't need meat to survive. There are centenarians who are vegetarian, vegan, and omnivores.
Official mayoclinic and general stance is that vegans need to supplement with B12
Because your body is capable of storing several years' worth of vitamin B-12, deficiency is rare. However, if you follow a vegetarian or vegan diet, you might be prone to deficiency because plant foods don't contain vitamin B-12. Older adults and people with digestive tract conditions that affect absorption of nutrients also are susceptible to vitamin B-12 deficiency.

Left untreated, a vitamin B-12 deficiency can lead to anemia, fatigue, muscle weakness, intestinal problems, nerve damage and mood disturbances.
So there may be exceptions to the rule, but the general rule vegans needs B12 supplementation, and vegetarians who have weak digestion


As for the centenarian longetivity studies, there was a further specific study that showed it wasn't vegetarianism that led to their longetivity but living near the sea and sunny places. All these countries are either islands or near a coast.

The new term for this is "microcirculation"

You can read about microcirculation at http://www.ciaostudy.com/

In fact the two oldest women who are both 116 years old, eat eggs and bacon every day, one is a guiness world record holder

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... /73444660/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/peop ... 90441.html

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3436
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The "three rules" of eating meat

Post by robertk » Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:41 am

D1W1 wrote:
Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:19 am
t
hanks robertk for the reply.
I think it's related to three rules or should I create a new thread? If someone owns a restaurant business, he will need to order meat in relatively large quantity. In order to cope with that, meat seller needs to prepare more meat, does that count as indirectly asks the butcher to kill more animal? AFAIK, this doesn't count as "trading in flesh", therefore it's considered "right livelihood". But how "right" is this type of business, is this something worth considering
I think I remember ven. Dhammanado explaining a similar case, but forget what he said.

In past days meat sellers "butchers" would be closely invloved in the killing, either by doing it themselves., or asking a farmer.

These days the shop owner is usually buying meat that has already been killed, often imported, so it would be less clear that it is wrong livelihood.

budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: The "three rules" of eating meat

Post by budo » Fri Feb 01, 2019 10:27 am

robertk wrote:
Fri Feb 01, 2019 6:41 am
D1W1 wrote:
Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:19 am
t
hanks robertk for the reply.
I think it's related to three rules or should I create a new thread? If someone owns a restaurant business, he will need to order meat in relatively large quantity. In order to cope with that, meat seller needs to prepare more meat, does that count as indirectly asks the butcher to kill more animal? AFAIK, this doesn't count as "trading in flesh", therefore it's considered "right livelihood". But how "right" is this type of business, is this something worth considering
I think I remember ven. Dhammanado explaining a similar case, but forget what he said.

In past days meat sellers "butchers" would be closely invloved in the killing, either by doing it themselves., or asking a farmer.

These days the shop owner is usually buying meat that has already been killed, often imported, so it would be less clear that it is wrong livelihood.
It's not only in the past but also currently in 2nd world countries. There's a youtube channel I follow of a woman living a rural life in shichuan, China. All their clothes and food are home made. She has gooses, chicken, sheep, a fish pond. She kills a goose or chicken at least once a week. She has a silkworm garden where she collects the silk and makes blankets and clothes.

Basically people living in small rural towns are self-sufficient, they rarely go to stores.

Here's a video, notice how little electricity is used.


SarathW
Posts: 13323
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

MN 55 With Jivaka - re - meat eating

Post by SarathW » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:03 am

“Jīvaka, those who say this do not repeat what I have said. They misrepresent me with what is false and untrue. For three reasons I say ‘meat may not be eaten’: it’s seen, heard, or suspected. These are three reasons I say ‘meat may not be eaten’. For three reasons I say ‘meat may be eaten’: it’s not seen, heard, or suspected. These are three reasons I say ‘meat may be eaten’.
We have many discussion about meat eating. This is the sutta directly related to meat eating.

https://suttacentral.net/mn55/en/sujato
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

Srilankaputra
Posts: 847
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: MN 55 With Jivaka - re - meat eating

Post by Srilankaputra » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:32 am

Genaral Siha buys meat after becoming a sotapanna ;
Then the Blessed One gave Sīha the general a progressive discourse, that is, a talk on giving, virtuous behavior, and heaven; he revealed the danger, degradation, and defilement of sensual pleasures and the benefit of renunciation. When the Blessed One knew that Sīha’s mind was pliant, softened, rid of hindrances, uplifted, and confident, he revealed that Dhamma teaching special to the Buddhas: suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the path. Then, just as a clean cloth rid of dark spots would readily absorb dye, so too, while Sīha the general sat in that same seat, there arose in him the dust-free, stainless Dhamma-eye: ‘Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation.’ Sīha the general became one who had seen the Dhamma, attained the Dhamma, understood the Dhamma, fathomed the Dhamma, crossed over doubt, gotten rid of bewilderment, attained self-confidence, and become independent of others in the teaching of the Teacher. He then said to the Blessed One:

“Bhante, please let the Blessed One together with the Saṅgha of bhikkhus accept tomorrow’s meal from me.”

The Blessed One consented by silence. Having understood that the Blessed One had consented, Sīha rose from his seat, paid homage to the Blessed One, circumambulated him keeping the right side toward him, and departed. Then Sīha addressed a man: “Go, good man, find some meat ready for sale.”

Then, when the night had passed, Sīha the general had various kinds of excellent foods prepared in his own residence, after which he had the time announced to the Blessed One: “It is time, Bhante, the meal is ready.”

https://suttacentral.net/an8.12/en/bodhi
O seeing one,we for refuge go to thee!
O mighty sage do thou our teacher be!

Paccuppannañca yo dhammaṃ,
Tattha tattha vipassati

“Yato yato mano nivāraye,
Na dukkhameti naṃ tato tato;
Sa sabbato mano nivāraye,
Sa sabbato dukkhā pamuccatī”ti.

auto
Posts: 1372
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The "three rules" of eating meat

Post by auto » Mon Feb 25, 2019 4:40 pm

budo wrote:
Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:33 am
daniil wrote:
Tue Jan 29, 2019 10:34 pm
I believe this to be a misguided call based on judgment. Just as I am judging you based on this post. The topic of nutrition is frequently filled with partiality :')

I have studied nutrition intensively for the past 3 years, and would like to disagree on the inherent 'extreme unhealthiness' of a vegan diet.

B12, A, EPA/DHA, magnesium and K2 are often lacking in a vegan diet, that is correct. Just as a standard omnivore diet is often lacking in magnesium, K1, D3 and Iodine.Yet 'often' is key here

It is entirely possible to have a solid, nutritionally complete vegan diet, just as it is to have an omnivore diet. Not all vegans are 'extremely unhealthy', not all omnivores are 'extremely healthy'.

Be well!
Daniil
I have studied nutrition for over 10 years, and was a vegan as well, which harmed my health..

Your error is not knowing that the human body directly absorbs animal based vitamins the best (bio availability) whereas it needs to convert plant vitamins, but this is often hard due to anti-nutrients in plants used as defense mechanisms by plants. Plants are also living beings, and small and immobile living beings use poison to defend themselves, poison like phytic acid and caffiene and many many more. Big animals do not contain poison.

You wrote "magnesium, K1, D3 and Iodine",

Well like I said the animal form K2-mk4 is easily bioavailable in butter and liver. Vitamin D3 also in liver, especially cod liver. Iodine and magnesium are trace minerals, and it's better to let the body manage its own trace minerals, if you take magnesium that often leads to diarrhoea. Also you can't get D3 from sunlight if your skin lacks fat and cholesterol to absorb it, another thing vegetarians lack by eating a low cholesterol diet.

So without a doubt humans are carnivores first and foremost, and then resort to plants as a back up. Just like wolves sometimes eat berries.

In nature there are no omnivores, just prey and predators. Carnivores and herbavores, like wolves and deers.

Also go look at studies with giving venus fly traps beef steak. Even though venus fly traps don't hunt cows, and never adapted to hunting cows, when fed beef they grow much bigger and healthier.

Therefore all life is trying to punch up. To eat plants is to punch down.

Dogs are wolves, yet humans feed them processed grains which weaken them.
What antivegans do is they compare human to other primates, a mistake. Humans are not defined by species. Humans are defined by what they do.
The problem may lie in eating vegan food but acting like a meat eater. The food what you eat isn't the primary determinant who you are.

Vegans try to get away from the "something is missing feeling"(what is not fulfilled anymore since quit eating heavy food like meat) in stomach by eating so much food, while actually one little forest strawberry should give 1 minute of fulfillment feeling after swallowing(also already from picking up a strawberry it acts like a food). Fruits doesn't sink so low in stomach than meat will, to give a sensation of fulfillment and you need discernment to even notice it.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 187 guests