the great vegetarian debate

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
chownah
Posts: 7332
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by chownah » Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:11 pm

seeker242 wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:35 pm
Any attachment of any kind is harmful behavior.
chownah
Yet simply making a particular choice preference does not = harmful attachment. For example, I prefer to choose to not steal things. Does that mean I'm attached to the choice of not stealing? And that this is harmful? Of course not!
So, you are agreeing with me then.
chownah

chownah
Posts: 7332
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by chownah » Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:12 pm

lyndon taylor wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:34 pm
Not true, there are plenty of examples of attachments that are positive, such as attachment to the dhamma.
Plenty.
chownah

chownah
Posts: 7332
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by chownah » Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:15 pm

lyndon taylor wrote:
Fri Dec 22, 2017 3:06 pm
so attachment to not harming animals is a harmful behaviour, I don't think so!!
Yes, it is.
chownah

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 » Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:35 pm

Its not enough that you don't consider animals lives important enough not to eat them, you have the nerve to claim vegetarians are bad Buddhists because they are attached to not harming 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
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 11657
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 » Sat Dec 23, 2017 4:00 pm

Calling the other side "attached to their view" sounds likes an ad hominem that could be used by either side in this debate or virtually any other one. An omnivore could say vegetarians are attached to their view. And vegetarians could say omnivores are attached to their views and their taste of meat. Attachment is not the issue. The issue (in this thread) is whether eating meat violates the First Precept and in general, the consensus is that it does not. However, there are plenty of points the vegetarians make about how it does contribute to the killing of animals and the meat industry from supply and demand and then other issues related animal welfare with factory farming, etc. In the end, we each decide for ourselves (although, I doubt this will be the final word on the matter). :tongue:

And then back on the subject of attachment, there is a Pali term for wholesome desire and that is chanda.
https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Chanda

It is not tanha (unwholesome desire) to keep precepts and follow the Dhamma.

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 » Sat Dec 23, 2017 4:18 pm

DNS wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 4:00 pm
Calling the other side "attached to their view" sounds likes an ad hominem that could be used by either side in this debate or virtually any other one. An omnivore could say vegetarians are attached to their view. And vegetarians could say omnivores are attached to their views and their taste of meat. Attachment is not the issue. The issue (in this thread) is whether eating meat violates the First Precept and in general, the consensus is that it does not. However, there are plenty of points the vegetarians make about how it does contribute to the killing of animals and the meat industry from supply and demand and then other issues related animal welfare with factory farming, etc. In the end, we each decide for ourselves (although, I doubt this will be the final word on the matter). :tongue:

And then back on the subject of attachment, there is a Pali term for wholesome desire and that is chanda.
https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Chanda

It is not tanha (unwholesome desire) to keep precepts and follow the Dhamma.
Sorry but we haven't established that buying meat and paying the butcher does not violate the first precept, maybe you interpret it that way but that's just one person's interpretation.
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
seeker242
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by seeker242 » Sat Dec 23, 2017 4:32 pm

chownah wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:11 pm
seeker242 wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:35 pm
Any attachment of any kind is harmful behavior.
chownah
Yet simply making a particular choice preference does not = harmful attachment. For example, I prefer to choose to not steal things. Does that mean I'm attached to the choice of not stealing? And that this is harmful? Of course not!
So, you are agreeing with me then.
chownah
Not with the implication that vegetarianism = harmful attachment.

chownah
Posts: 7332
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by chownah » Sun Dec 24, 2017 2:04 am

seeker242 wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 4:32 pm
chownah wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:11 pm
seeker242 wrote:
Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:35 pm


Yet simply making a particular choice preference does not = harmful attachment. For example, I prefer to choose to not steal things. Does that mean I'm attached to the choice of not stealing? And that this is harmful? Of course not!
So, you are agreeing with me then.
chownah
Not with the implication that vegetarianism = harmful attachment.
Did I say that?....I think not.
Slander?
chownah

User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by seeker242 » Sun Dec 24, 2017 2:47 pm

chownah wrote:
Sun Dec 24, 2017 2:04 am
Did I say that?....I think not.
Slander?
chownah
I didn't say you said that. I said that's the implication of what you said.

chownah
Posts: 7332
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by chownah » Sun Dec 24, 2017 3:15 pm

seeker242 wrote:
Sun Dec 24, 2017 2:47 pm
chownah wrote:
Sun Dec 24, 2017 2:04 am
Did I say that?....I think not.
Slander?
chownah
I didn't say you said that. I said that's the implication of what you said.
I did not intend to imply that....and I don't think the implication is explicitly in what I said. What I said was:
chownah said: Any attachment to any dietary choice is harmful behavior.
and then to clarify the meaning I said:
to clarify his point chownah said: Any attachment of any kind is harmful behavior.
Then I asked, and I am asking again: Do you agree with the statement "Any attachment of any kind is harmful behaviour."?
chownah

User avatar
Stiphan
Posts: 1522
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 2:53 pm
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Stiphan » Tue Dec 26, 2017 4:51 pm

Must-read article by Bhante Sujato:

Why Buddhists Should be Vegetarian

ieee23
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 12:40 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by ieee23 » Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:19 pm

cappuccino wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 1:05 pm
Since it's already there & not for you in particular.
The Buddha stated there are 5 kinds of wrong liveliehood, with one of them being "business in meat". There is no such thing as a business without customers. If you buy meat, you encourage more meat to be produced. Anyone who knows anything about economics will tell you that a supply will be created to meet demand. If you buy meat, then the meat is for you.
Whatever a bhikkhu frequently thinks and ponders upon, that will become the inclination of his mind. - MN 19

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:52 am

buddha kassapa already said meat eating isnt a problem. not sure why this debate exists. should have like 2 posts
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

chownah
Posts: 7332
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Post by chownah » Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:40 am

ieee23 wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:19 pm
cappuccino wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 1:05 pm
Since it's already there & not for you in particular.
The Buddha stated there are 5 kinds of wrong liveliehood, with one of them being "business in meat". There is no such thing as a business without customers. If you buy meat, you encourage more meat to be produced. Anyone who knows anything about economics will tell you that a supply will be created to meet demand. If you buy meat, then the meat is for you.
If this is your view on it then you should certainly be eating no meat.....also....the same logic applies to the multitudes of animals destroyed with the typical commercial and chemical dependent agriculture. If you buy their products then you are creating the demand for them.....if you buy their products then those animals were killed for you.
Grow your own and buy organic.
If you buy organic then be sure to stay away from farmers who use manure. The manure comes from the production of animals for meat. If you buy produce from farmers who use manure then you are creating a demand for animals to be grown which are killed for meat...if you eat their products then the animals were killed for you.
chownah

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 » Wed Dec 27, 2017 2:03 am

yeah right, meat eaters want to tell us we can't eat plants, and yet they eat everything, plants and animals, and have no problem with it, sounds like hypocrisy to me.
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/

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 88 guests