Doing our part we think adequate and in our capability as long as not unwholesome .
Just like many people prefer not to use plastic bag to minimise further environment pollution .
But to abstain from meat eating does carry a great meaning and merits . Indirectly we encourage people not to consume meat and killing animals for meat .
the great vegetarian debate
Re: Is it okey to buy Meat in a foodstore and eat?
You always gain by giving
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
- Location: United States
Re: Is it okey to buy Meat in a foodstore and eat?
^Yes good point. refraining from eating meat is probably comparable to the modern environmental movement. not using plastic bags, recycling, driving hybrids and getting solar panels etc. Not necessarily kamma upping but noble all the same and more out of a desire to improve society than spiritual practice/development
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama
"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
Re: Is it okey to buy Meat in a foodstore and eat?
I think when we consume anything we should use them with reflection.
If we eat meat we should reflect on the pain and suffering of the dying animal.
When we use cloths and other materials we should reflect on the people involved in the supply chain.
Puttamansa Sutta.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
If we eat meat we should reflect on the pain and suffering of the dying animal.
When we use cloths and other materials we should reflect on the people involved in the supply chain.
Puttamansa Sutta.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Is it okey to buy Meat in a foodstore and eat?
It is quite possible for there to be good reasons for doing something other than avoiding dark kamma. And there may be reasons something may be inexpedient, unskillful, "wrong," other than by generating dark kamma. There are ample "buddhist" reasons to be a vegetarian even if not being one, strictly speaking, is not morally wrong from a kammic perspective: (1) environmental protection (social responsibility is very much a buddhist teaching even if the effects of global warming were unknown during the time of the Buddha); (2) generating compassion and generosity towards suffering beings; (3) an exercise in renunciation (meat is a luxury in that the developed world consumes much more of it, generally speaking); etc. Of course, this is not to say one must be a vegetarian to be a good Buddhist, but it may be optimum, ideal, or beneficial for more people to adopt a vegetarian lifestyles.
Here is a thought: It is morally wrong from a Buddhist perspective to request, recommend, or even hint at that others should kill living beings. Essentially, by purchasing meat we are requesting others to kill more beings to supply our food preferences (I think most would find it a much different case for populations where meat consumption is virtually necessary, e.g., Tibet. And some may need to eat meat for health reasons). In my opinion, that reeks of selfishness.
Additionally, I suspect that that there is a much greater awareness nowadays of the suffering caused by purchasing meat and the degree of suffering is much greater nowadays with factory farming. In other words, the conditions during the time of the Buddha have changed.
I apologize for any pretentiousness in my post. I hope others find it helpful.
Here is a thought: It is morally wrong from a Buddhist perspective to request, recommend, or even hint at that others should kill living beings. Essentially, by purchasing meat we are requesting others to kill more beings to supply our food preferences (I think most would find it a much different case for populations where meat consumption is virtually necessary, e.g., Tibet. And some may need to eat meat for health reasons). In my opinion, that reeks of selfishness.
Additionally, I suspect that that there is a much greater awareness nowadays of the suffering caused by purchasing meat and the degree of suffering is much greater nowadays with factory farming. In other words, the conditions during the time of the Buddha have changed.
I apologize for any pretentiousness in my post. I hope others find it helpful.
Re: the great vegetarian debate
In the wild the infant mortality for large mammals (zebra, giraffe, etc.) is over 50 percent.
chownah
chownah
Re: the great vegetarian debate
I hadn't thought of that but thanks for pointing it out.
Lions are not vegan:
chownah
- one_awakening
- Posts: 281
- Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 6:04 am
Re: the great vegetarian debate
If she eats seafood, she's not a vegetarian
“You only lose what you cling to”
Re: the great vegetarian debate
Maybe as to seafood she just eats sea vegetables.
chownah
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17192
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: the great vegetarian debate
He said "sorta" veg, not completely veg. Anyway, just an FYI, jcsuperstar unfortunately passed away 8 years ago.
https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Dhamma_Wheel
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17192
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: the great vegetarian debate
What does that have to do with their diet? I imagine all wild animals have a high infant mortality rate. Apparently the mortality rate has more to do with infections after childbirth, see:
https://www.quora.com/Nature-Are-animal ... n-medicine
Re: the great vegetarian debate
I have no idea what diet has to do with the infant mortality rate of wild animals.
Does anyone know the infant mortality rate for angus cows?
chownah
Does anyone know the infant mortality rate for angus cows?
chownah
- one_awakening
- Posts: 281
- Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 6:04 am
Re: the great vegetarian debate
You're either vegetarian or you're not
“You only lose what you cling to”
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17192
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: the great vegetarian debate
What does infant mortality rate of wild animals have to do with the price of tea in China? i.e., this topic?
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17192
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: the great vegetarian debate
Yes, I suppose you're right. There are many people who call themselves veg but actually eat meat occasionally. That is not really being vegetarian according to the strict definition. Same with being vegan. I sometimes have called myself "mostly vegan" but if I make exceptions now and then, it's not really being vegan, it's more accurate to say vegetarian who only rarely eats some animal products.