the great vegetarian debate

[sangyey]

Hmm, i'm not sure if i would be able to tell from the supermarket brands. For lunch today I used 'Chunky Ragu Garden Combination' with ingredients: Tomato Puree (Water, Tomato Paste), Diced Tomatoes in Puree, Onions, Sugar, Mushrooms, Soybean Oil, Celery, Green Bell Peppers, Carrots, Zucchini, Salt, Spices, Garlic Powder, Natural Flavors.

Would you be able to tell from that?

Thanks for pointing out about the Whey.

[ronnewmexico]

I would wonder about the natural flavors.

I once called a company that was using a natural food additive as a colorant in their salsa....turned out the additive was derived from a particular sort of bug which can be used in that fashion legally.

The big companies except if they have speciality organic or vegetarian brands I would stay away from.

Natural flavors probably includes meat or cheese flavoring. But to be absolutely sure you must call the company, they may tell you or may not.

If it had all that without the natural flavors you'd be allright.

To add..I've done this for 20 plus years so I've seen or researched most of it at some time or other. Some ways of includeing meat and dairy can be quite subtle, and in a unsuspecting fashion. Natural flavors is a very common way. And who would expect dairy in chips....but there it is.

[sangyey]

Will Organic always mean vegetarian?

[Indrajala]

you can use vegetarian kimchi for spaghetti sauce instead of tomato sauce...

[ronnewmexico]

Husang has good advice especially if you live not in the west and want to replicate a western diet.

Organic does not equal vegetarian. But if a major company markets a organic product they are not going to go through the time and effort to determine if a natural flavor is containing organic ingredients(many buy these from flavorant companies). They will use the same flavorant in many many products, and it is hardly if ever organic. A organic flavorant could be manufactured but it is not cost fesible to do so for large companies. So you will generally not find the term natural flavor on a organic product. Of course if you find it you again have to call the company or just not buy it.

But very very rarely do organic products marketed by large companies contain things such as natural flavors.

YOu still have to check the label of a organic product to see if it contains whey, cheese or dairy creams, butter, and some such. But natural flavor you rarely find. Natural flavor you have to assume contains meat or dairy.

[sangyey]

Thank you very much for the information and help.

[palchi]

Hi sangyey,

you could also just take a tin of whole tomatoes (ingredients: tomatoes, tomato juice and nothing else!), chop them a bit in the tin while you heat a bit of olive oil and a chopped onion, then throw in the tomatoes and add some salt, pepper, and whatever spices or herbs you like (basil, chili, sweet pepper..) - this will take you about two minutes longer than heating up ready made sauce.....

enjoy
palchi

[sangyey]

I also wanted to ask about bread and if there is anything I need to watch out for there?

[KeithBC]

Unfortunately, bread is one of the few grocery items that typically does not have an ingredients list. If it is packaged bread from a factory 1000 miles away, it might list the ingredients on the package, but local bakeries often do not. However, if you ask the bakery staff, they will usually be able to give you the list of ingredients.

As always, the thing to watch out for is milk ingredients: whey or casein or butter. There is no reason why they need to be in bread - one can make perfectly good bread without them, but most commercial bread contains at least one of them. Many vegans use bread machines so that they can avoid the milk in commercial breads.

Om mani padme hum
Keith

[ronnewmexico]

Just to add to the comments about bread. To my knowledge bread's shine may be, as perhaps with french bread or things of that sort.... be a shine produced by coating with egg white.

Bread in supermarkets is a very rough deal for a vegan to my opinion. I gave up years ago and get it only in health food stores, whole foods, places like that. Perhaps it's improved, I last tried about 10 years ago and basically failed to find suitable things.

Supermarkets were actually at one time when fiber was the craze marketing "bread" with wood pulp in it to up the fiber content. I forget how they called it but it certainly was not called sawdust..though that is what it certainly was. Like sugar water sold for years and called apple juice by one large baby food producer(caught and fined a very small amount I think)....there seems no limit to the depths this group will go to reap profit.

[Will]

The wheel of life has birth & death as two spokes of the wheel. But it is a wheel, a circle. Conscious life is a continuum, a stream. The body, whether embryo, fetus, baby, child or adult is only one visible effect of a conscious being that is not visible and not physical. Abortion frustrates the free flowing of the stream of life just as completely as murder of an adult body.

Quoting Narada Mahathera: "We are born from the matrix of action (kammayoni). Parents merely provide us with a material layer. Therefore being precedes being. At the moment of conception, it is Kamma that conditions the initial consciousness that vitalizes the foetus." The Mahatanhasamkhaya Sutta mentions three factors are needed for conception: The father & mother, the mother's fertile period & the being-to-be-born.

But how "human" is this being-to-be-born? The Elucidation of Consciousness Sutra says: "When the consciousness leaves the [previous] body it carries all the body's attributes with it. It assumes an [ethereal] form as its body... Because it has the senses, it has feelings and subtle memory and can tell good from evil... Feeling, memory, and good & evil [karmas] go wherever the consciousness-seed goes... It knows that it has left one body to receive another one, knows the good and evil karmas [it has performed], knows that it is accompanied by the karmas, and knows that it will be reincarnated together with the karmas to undergo due karmic results..."

The present Dalai Lama said plainly: "Consciousness enters at the time of conception itself. To murder a human means to kill either a human or something forming as a human, the latter referring to the period from right after conception until birth."

[ronnewmexico]

So then...

"When the consciousness leaves the [previous] body it carries all the body's attributes with it. It assumes an [ethereal] form as its body... Because it has the senses, it has feelings and subtle memory and can tell good from evil... Feeling, memory, and good & evil [karmas] go wherever the consciousness-seed goes... It knows that it has left one body to receive another one, knows the good and evil karmas [it has performed], knows that it is accompanied by the karmas, and knows that it will be reincarnated together with the karmas to undergo due karmic results..."

Animals, prettas, gods demons and all the rest.....do not have this happen?
What form of buddhism is this that distinguishes this thusly?
If this is so such a human only distinction after death by what means does rebirth as other form occur?
Is it then never possible for human to birth as animal nor animal as human or other form?

Or is this distinction...a completely false distinction. And thusly the killing of any sentient being carries negative consequence.

And has HHDL stated abortion must never be performed or is it only a interpretation of what he has stated that is considered to infer other things? Do then there exist no buddhist soldiers, or police or people of those sort that may occasionally have to kill others....well it seems there are.
And has HHDL then as statement infers considers such occupations of necessity unbuddhist...well I find no statements to that effect.
In fact it seems Tibet itself had soldiers of a sort to protect its borders back in the day. Such soldiers were then murders, and the police as well? Why then did they have them in historic Tibet, if all killing of human is considered murder? Certain prohibitions in ancient Tibet did indeed one find....no butchers and several other occupations perhaps....soldiers police....we will not find amongst them.

Interpretations is what I find..... personal interpretations only.

Killing of any sort is of couse certainly a negative thing that will cause negative karmic effect. It is to be greatly avoided. To call all such killings human murder, abortion as well.....inaccurate in all senses of the word.
.

[Will]

Sutras, suttas & shastras represent accurately what Buddha taught.

The Elucidation Sutra is from the Yogacara school of Buddhism.

The Mahatanhasamkhaya Sutta is from the Theravada school of Buddhism.

The Dalai Lama is of the Madhyamaka/Vajrayana school of Buddhism.

[ronnewmexico]

Well it seems you answer none of my questions...

I can only assume you hold no answers to any of my questions. As you answered none of my earlier questions posed such as how a rule of law against abortion may be enforced.

So, you claim again abortion is murder, by your interpretation of what constitutes murder and what constitutes your version or interpretation of Buddhism. I say it does not constitute murder as murder is defined legally and buddhism by core tenant holds is some schools such a connotation but in other schools does not. So thusly it cannot be said to be a universal buddhist core belief to consider abortion a act of murder.

So...? ...I have just invalidated your proofs presented in your prior post, invalidate my counter, or show other proof,(with the conclusion I have presented a sucessful counter)....and I will again refute.

Or as in the past....state over and over...abortion is murder, to apparently no purpose.

To put this very very simply....in my last counter I did in no manner shape nor form question the authenticity of the various points of reference you have mentioned (though I still could).
I addressed your interpretations of those points of reference. Thusly your counter, stateing the authenticity of those points of reference, is irrelevent and does not protect point as it was not the focus of challenge.

To counter challenge and protect point, you must address challenge, not some hypothetical challenge or one you may care to have challenged. That's basic debate 101, really simple stuff.

[enjitsu]

Occasionally the topic of Abortion comes up and some people may wonder what is Buddhism's view on this topic.

In Buddhism, any form of killing is considered a violation/breaking of the Precept of No Killing and is not supported. The term Abortion may confuse some people. So to speak plainly and clearly, Abortion is when a women Kills her child which has not been birthed yet. Buddhism teaches that life begins from the moment of conception. Additionally the karmic consequences of killing your own child are very heavy. It creates a lot of bad karma.

This is the same Buddhaic Logic that is behind the rule against eating Eggs, because Egg's are baby animals and to eat them is a form of Killing.

[Pema Rigdzin]

I really can't fathom why the point that abortion is always a negative karma is up for debate for some Buddhists.

Seriously, one can argue for or against the wisdom/lack of wisdom of abortion legislation and the enforcement of it, and that has some merit. It is definitely worth considering what actions/inactions may best lead to the effect of less abortions taking place. It may be that making it illegal would not have the desired effect and that it may in fact lead to other harms we've not considered. There is plenty of room for debate on that point and it's very worthwhile to consider what means would be most skillful. One might also debate whether abortion truly belongs to the category of "actions leading one immediately to the hell realms after death," though I've never seen it included in that category myself, or if it's just a "garden variety negative karma" that will eventually ripen as some sort of unfortunate rebirth.

But what should very obviously not be up for debate among Buddhists is whether or not abortion is a negative karma. Karma is impersonal insofar as it's not inflicted on one by some outside force that should be expected to take pity on one because of one's circumstances; it's simply that wholesome causes lead to wholesome results, harmful causes to unfortunate results, mixed causes to mixed results, and so on. Unfortunately it doesn't matter one iota what one's excuse for committing a negative karma is, how tragic one's own personal circumstances are, a negative karma is a negative karma. The canonical teachings do all say that the karmic results of any harmful act differ based on one's motivation and the strength of the afflictive emotion when one commits the negative act, plus some other conditions, but those teachings are quite clear in stating it's still going to be a negative result regardless. The inclination to use one's perceived inability to handle parenting, or one's own horrible misfortune (i.e. rape, incest, etc) as justification for visiting death on another being may be understandable - at least it is for me in the case of victims of the latter. We all feel for them immensely and I don't know if I'd have the strength to avoid abortion if I were in such a woman's shoes. But such a course of action, even while understandable, is clearly not well thought out and it's destined for unfortunate consequences. Besides, if one creates negative karmas in this life as a way to deal with ripening of negative karmas from a past life, or to avoid unwanted circumstances now, when is it ever going to stop? That only leads to more and more lower rebirth in the future and then unfortunate circumstances once reborn as a human after who knows how long.

Nevertheless, it's obviously very true that none of the above means one should villify and have contempt or disgust for women intent on getting abortions, whether for conventionally understandable reasons or to "remedy" their own irresponsibility. Mental negativities are negative karmas too. We've all created many unspeakable karmas in the past and surely have created some not so beautiful ones in this life, so we're in no position to judge. But it's not the time to make excuses or use hazy thinking in recognizing what actions to avoid and which one's to embrace.

[ronnewmexico]

What I find hard to fathom is this, if this is meant in reference to this discussion.....

"I really can't fathom why the point that abortion is always a negative karma is up for debate for some Buddhists"

I have not noticed that anyone here has taken that view. Where are these peoples, or are they but straw men ripe for knocking down, so we may then simplify a very complex issue.

No one says abortion is not a negative karmic event. REason for or less karmic negative cause then some other events such as a unbalanced unemployed south carolina woman, who recently killed several of her already born children...yes it is less negative then that action I can firmly state.

All killing is certainly wrong. If you live in the US at this very moment soldiers are killing peoples at your behest. If you have not taken action against such thing and think just because you do not personally do such you also do not bear karmic fault related to killing as result you are quite mistaken I can firmly state that as well. Yes all killing is negative, we as buddhists all know that. It goes without saying.

Yes....the lowest abortion rates globally seem to be certainly where it is allowed not disallowed, WHO affirms that. Certainly also protections for woman health are always greater where such is allowed not disallowed by law. It will happen whether it is illegal or not.

The choice is clear, and not difficult nor in need of some hypothetical study...educate the young to family planning sex education, provide condems and other birth control measures for free, and education on how to use them, provide abortion when all this fails....and the result is less abortions then in any other circumstance, and best protections for women health.

So the solution is clear..the rest the killing and such...nonsense no one states such things. Abortion is never a preferred thing.

What I find hard to fathom is how people can go on and on about this issue when the solution is before us in the country/countries with the lowest rates.

Show me one singular person(buddhist or not) who does not kill in some manner daily by eating moving about or other thing and I will accept killing solely as being substantiation for disallowance of this thing.
KIlling is always a choice...but we all do it every single day. Negative always...certainly more with human killing. Certainly more already born human than fetal human, as more pain and suffering is undoubtably present with born than unborn. The cognitive functions of a human are simply not as well developed.

So take exception to the death penalty, to war to murder to a thousand other circumstances which are by nature more suffeing producing than this thing. Take exception to this thing certainly but be advised the less presence of this thing and less suffering to women as result is where it is not disallowed by law.

Throwing it in with the automatic hell producing circumstances as some buddhist apparently do...well that is not all buddhists, not the majority by any extant.

[Pema Rigdzin]

What I find hard to fathom is this, if this is meant in reference to this discussion.....

"I really can't fathom why the point that abortion is always a negative karma is up for debate for some Buddhists"

I have not noticed that anyone here has taken that view. Where are these peoples, or are they but straw men ripe for knocking down, so we may then simplify a very complex issue.

Ron, maybe I misunderstood many of your posts, but at some points you seemed to me to be questioning the idea of unambiguously asserting that the Buddha's teachings say that abortion is unequivocally non-virtuous. If I've misunderstood you and you in fact feel that it is always negative karma, no matter the circumstance, then I guess it was just my misinterpretation.

And as an aside, yes, I do also take issue with the death penalty, war, factory farming, you name it. Wish I could stop those, but unfortunately not enough people in the country or world feel the same way as I do about these things, so they continue. I say prayers for all the beings I undoubtedly kill accidentally as I'm driving, riding my bike, walking, etc. Same for those killed in the process of farming the vegetables I eat, and all the killing that takes place at every step from there to the food arriving in my possession. I try to avoid killing as best I can, try to save life whenever I can, and never engage in intentional killing.

I have to say though, your assertion that many different kinds of killing are so much more negative than fetal killing because the fetus has less developed mental consciousness and sense organs, etc, does not hold water to me. It's undoubtedly true that at the time of having its life taken, during that moment, that experience is less vivid and painful for a fetus than a fully cognitively developed adult human. But we can never know what state of existence a being has just left when they've been conceived as a human, or where they're headed when their present life ends. The fetus might have spent an incalculable span of time in the avici hell and/or some other horribly miserable state of agony or suffering and then finally had the fortune to be reborn in the human realm but then it's life is snuffed out. Who knows where it's going from there and who knows how vivid it's experience is in the intermediate state between death and rebirth? Who knows what emotional states arise for it and where they catapult it to at that time? Hardly seems to make sense to try to categorize whose suffering is greater from that POV, or which killing or harm is more negative.

[Ngawang Drolma]

Mental negativities are negative karmas too. We've all created many unspeakable karmas in the past and surely have created some not so beautiful ones in this life, so we're in no position to judge. But it's not the time to make excuses or use hazy thinking in recognizing what actions to avoid and which one's to embrace.

Deep bows

[ronnewmexico]

Yes.. show me where I state this.."Ron, maybe I misunderstood many of your posts, but at some points you seemed to me to be questioning the idea of unambiguously asserting that the Buddha's teachings say that abortion is unequivocally non-virtuous. If I've misunderstood you and you in fact feel that it is always negative karma, no matter the circumstance, then I guess it was just my misinterpretation."

It is easily done... copy cut and paste..
NO you cannot...you present a straw man, which is a argument stated a opponant in debate is holding a position though they do not, as that position is easily defeated, logically.
I present no argument as you describe....so take it away. That suffices only in grade school debate or in some very baser places on the internet or talk radio.

Now what exactly at what point will we then say the fetus life is equal to a born human? Is it when it is a sperm or egg?. Should we then perform powah if we have a nocturnal emmision?
Should we then consider birth control measures which create a inhospitable environment in a womb then to be weapons of murder....equal perhaps to guns and such things. Should they then be prohibited by law?
As the leader of one religion states.... if such is the case...should not condums be outlawed.?
If it is after the joining it is equal should then not a woman who miscarries which results in the death of fetus be equal to one guilty of simple manslaughter which is similiarily killing of a human by accident?Should not such woman then be guilty of a legal offense and subject then to penalty to include jail? If she falls and is deemed not careful enough is this not involuntary manslaughter through carelessness?Should then such fetus have rights equal to those born? Property rights rights, rights to self determination, and such things as provided by law in certain governments? Well then if equal why not?

And Karma...what karma is this that has no action by such fetus yet has bad result of action of another then causeing such fetus to have a more unfortunate rebirth?
What type of karma is that that does such a thing? No buddhist karma that I know of allows such things. Karma....is action results upon us who perform the action not others who perform actions and then we hold responsibility. Not unless we have them do such at our behest, which a fetus can certainly never do.
So what sort of karma is this that does such things? How could fetus reap karmic effect it has not seeded? Is this exceptional karmic event then particular only to fetus's? Can all then suffer karmic effect from others actions with no action of ours in such determinations as a fetus may take no action?(this we know). What shall we name this new form of karma? Fetus karma?

Bardo? How can a fetus have a bad bardo experience since such is self created? On what basis could such occur? No singular birth has occured so on what basis could a fetus have self created bardo based on such singular notion? Since singular notion has not yet come to frutition how could this happen?

Well I know the answer to such questions...it lies here.

Fetus's are not equal to born humans deaths in equality of suffering. Never have been and never will.
Bad effect from causeing such death certainly(once again I state that).
Equal effect to causeing a human born death...no. It cannot logically be.

The argument presented...faulted as exemplified.

Abortions are not murder. Never have been never will be. YOu feel that way fine. Expecting others to feel that way....they may or they may not, most do not. Including Buddhists.
Your statement... stateing we cannot rationally discriminate karmic effects of differing sorts of deaths such as fetus's and born human's equalizing both..... ....abortion then becomes murder. So say clearly what you state. You consider abortion murder.Then abortion can never be performed for any reason. Incest rape by father or brother, as act of hate by enemy by jailer or jailed, to protect from death by medical complication....if murder... never can abortion be performed for any reason. If fetus is as you state equal to born human. What then the consequence of such birth to woman so abused? What effect that....perhaps as south carolina woman recently has done..... eventually to murder three born children... is that expected effect of bearing and taking care of a rape caused birth? Perhaps the constant memory causeing one to become insane? Could we not expect that? What then the better karmic choice knowing such would cause one to go insane? Adoption...suppose the adoption stigmatizes one as having such a rape occur..then to live with that result. Suppose where you live there is not a chance for adoption but only child living in group home for all its young life in misery? How clear then the choice? Then if medical complication women so pregnant should die first then as fetus cannot be murdered both being equal. Who then should be killed the woman? If it is known such going to full term will due to condition such as toxic eclampsia cause womans death.....then woman must die? Fetus killing is murder. If fetus dies for any reason is then not such death a legal issue of investigation?

Always it is unwanted and negative. Sometimes for some women it is the only choice. To be unable to see that speaks to that and only that.... a lack of seeing that. Abortion is simply not murder for reasons stated. Thusly it is allowed in the majority of the world legally. If most considered it so...it could not be.

Mostly it is not considered to be murder as it is readily observable and known the cognitive ability and thusly the ability of a fetus to suffer equally to a born human is not considered fact.
If one wants to believe that....go right ahead. Nothing suggests it is fact...but go ahead. No law against that.
There is also no law anywhere compelling others to have abortions. AS a buddhist should we then make determinations for others that they have to live our way...of course not... that would be nonbuddhist.
Considered as a grave error like killing a father or mother...no most buddhists do not have it in that catagory. Not in the least.

If you don't want a abortion.....as they say..don't have one. Many buddhists have and are still buddhists and not automatically will they go to hell realm upon death. That I feel safe to say is how most buddhists feel.