Page 306 of 359

Re: Gym and Buddhism

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 6:01 pm
by rolling_boulder
DNS wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 5:21 pm
In general, if you're not obese and at or fairly close to your ideal weight, then you are doing fine in regard to eating in moderation.
Yeah, I think this is good advice. In my experience it's better not to dwell so much on the eating thing, as long as you aren't having serious problems.

Re: Gym and Buddhism

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:39 am
by D1W1
Thanks guys for the prompt reply.
DNS wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 5:21 pm

Unless you are a world class athlete, you don't need that much more food, even if you do vigorous exercise. You might need to increase your food amount just a little, which is fine, imo.

In general, if you're not obese and at or fairly close to your ideal weight, then you are doing fine in regard to eating in moderation.
Say you are eating 2-3 eggs per day, that is 60-90 eggs per month or 1080 eggs per year. That means more eggs from eggs industry and more killing of male chicks.
I fail to see "moderation" in this eating habit. Do I miss something? Thank you.

Re: Gym and Buddhism

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:30 pm
by bodom
I was a bodybuilder for a long time. Yes it's true that if you are lifting weights 4-5 times a week you will need a lot of protein. I would usually aim for a gram of protein per pound of body weight. So I would easily be taking in over 200-250 grams of protein a day through multiple sources. If you don't want to eat meat then get yourself a good quality protein powder to meet your body's needs. Also oatmeal, peanut butter, milk, beans are all good sources of protein. It is possible.

:namaste:

Re: Gym and Buddhism

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:54 pm
by DNS
D1W1 wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:39 am
Say you are eating 2-3 eggs per day, that is 60-90 eggs per month or 1080 eggs per year. That means more eggs from eggs industry and more killing of male chicks.
I fail to see "moderation" in this eating habit. Do I miss something? Thank you.
That is a different topic than moderation in food. You are talking about the type of food, if one should eat eggs or not due to ethical reasons. That is probably more appropriate for the great vegetarian debate. Vegans do not eat eggs for that reason and other reasons too. I heard on the news that some egg farms are stopping the process of grinding the male chicks up and are now saving them to be reared, although most likely will still end up in the slaughter house one day.

One of the arguments in favor of eating eggs (from ethical consideration) is that one is choosing to eat eggs, not the meat and that it was not your intention for them to grind up the male chicks, it just happens to be the custom at some egg farms, where your intention is simply to eat an unfertilized egg.

Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:09 am
by D1W1
Hi guys,

Is there bad karma from eating meat, is eating meat breaking the first precept?
Sorry if the question sounds silly. Thanks.

Re: Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:41 am
by Stephen18
I don't think it's either yet I'm vegetarian soon to go vegan. Why? I just don't want to participate in such a vicious cycle. Even though you may be a passive user, you are still a participant in that cycle of immense harm to animals.

No, thanks. I feel my conscience is somewhat clearer. But I don't judge omnivores and I don't think it's bad kamma or breaking the first precept because you are not killing the animals yourself - you are only consuming them. Still, by consuming them, I believe you are increasing demand for meat and thus the cruel culling and merciless slaughter of innocent creatures.

Re: Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:34 am
by pilgrim
D1W1 wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:09 am
Hi guys,

Is there bad karma from eating meat, is eating meat breaking the first precept?
Sorry if the question sounds silly. Thanks.
Brief answer- No. One normally eats meat from dead animals. Thus whatever killing is already done.

"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."
~ Amagandha sutta, sN 2.2

Re: Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:47 am
by Spiny Norman
D1W1 wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:09 am
Is is eating meat breaking the first precept?
Only if we have killed the animal ourselves. If we buy meat then presumably we are content for somebody else to do the killing.

Re: Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 10:25 am
by D1W1
Wow, thanks for your prompt reply guys!
Stiphan wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:41 am
No, thanks. I feel my conscience is somewhat clearer. But I don't judge omnivores and I don't think it's bad kamma or breaking the first precept because you are not killing the animals yourself - you are only consuming them. Still, by consuming them, I believe you are increasing demand for meat and thus the cruel culling and merciless slaughter of innocent creatures.
But maybe the demand increases or decreases by 0.0001%, I don't think that is significant enough compare to the fast growing of human population in the world.
Dinsdale wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:47 am
Only if we have killed the animal ourselves.
pilgrim wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 8:34 am
One normally eats meat from dead animals. Thus whatever killing is already done.
Stiphan wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 7:41 am
But I don't judge omnivores and I don't think it's bad kamma
It's not breaking the first precept because the killing is already done but does eating meat create bad kamma, if not why?

Re: Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:27 pm
by Nicolas
Kamma is intention-based. It’s possible to eat meat with a pure mind, with no negative intention. See the Jivaka Sutta, MN 55.

Re: Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:23 pm
by D1W1
How about cooking meat*? Someone told me cooking meat creates (a certain amount of) bad kamma.

Edit: *Cooking and buying meat.

Re: Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:30 pm
by Stephen18
D1W1 wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:23 pm
How about cooking meat? Someone told me cooking meat creates (a certain amount of) bad kamma.
That's an interesting question. Back in January, I had to dissect a chicken with a knife. While I was doing that, deep inside I "felt" as if I was hurting it, as if part of it was still in some way alive. I felt really while cutting it.

The answer to your question depends on whether you believe the animal is completely dead or still has some trace of life force in it left. I watched a video where a fish was literally beheaded in a sink, yet the rest of its body was throbbing and quivering.

Whether that chicken that I was dissecting had some life force left, I don't know, but it certainly felt that way at the time.

Re: Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:59 am
by D1W1
Nicolas wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:27 pm
Kamma is intention-based. It’s possible to eat meat with a pure mind, with no negative intention. See the Jivaka Sutta, MN 55.
What if someone likes meat and prefers to eat meat dishes over non-meat dishes. Greed is unwholesome, right? Thanks.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 1:21 pm
by Nicolas
D1W1 wrote:
Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:59 am
What if someone likes meat and prefers to eat meat dishes over non-meat dishes. Greed is unwholesome, right? Thanks.
Greed is greed. Greed for meat or greed for sugar, both are greed for food, gluttony. I would think that the meat aspect is irrelevant in that scenario.

Re: Meat consumption and first precept

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 1:28 pm
by Spiny Norman
Nicolas wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:27 pm
Kamma is intention-based. It’s possible to eat meat with a pure mind, with no negative intention. See the Jivaka Sutta, MN 55.
I think it's less clear when buying meat, particularly bearing in mind that the intention of harmlessness is an aspect of Right Intention.

“And what, bhikkhus, is right intention? Intention of renunciation, intention of non-ill will, intention of harmlessness: this is called right intention."
https://suttacentral.net/en/sn45.8