the great vegetarian debate

No holds barred discussion on the Buddhadharma. Argue about rebirth, karma, commentarial interpretations etc. Be nice to each other.

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Mr. G » Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:21 am

Nemo wrote:Must be nice to be more Buddhist than the Buddha.



Actually, this reminds me of Devadatta:

Devadatta next plots discord among the monks by proposing that the Buddha mandate five austere disciplines for all recluses. These five are as follows:

1. forest dwelling
2. alms begging
3. the wearing of only refuse-rag robes
4. living at the foot of a tree
5. not eating meat or fish

All of these disciplines, Devadatta suggests, should be followed “for as long as
life lasts.”

The Buddha’s response is again sharp:

Enough, Devadatta. . . . Whoever wishes, let him be a forest-dweller;
whoever wishes, let him stay in the neighbourhood of a village; whoever
wishes, let him be a beggar for alms; whoever wishes, let him accept an invitation;
whoever wishes, let him be a rag-robe wearer; whoever wishes,
let him accept a householder’s robes. For eight months, Devadatta, lodging
at the root of a tree is permitted by me. Fish and flesh are pure in respect
of three points: if they are not seen, heard or suspected (to have
been killed on purpose for him
)

- Daniel Boucher - Bodhisattvas of the Forest and the Formation of the Mahâyâna
    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby gad rgyangs » Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:36 am

since you bozos are apparently immune to logic or common sense, and would rather play the "my sutra quote trumps your sutra quote game", here's some for you:

On Meat Eating
by
Chatral Rinpoche
Meat, the sinful food, is not permitted according to the three vows: the vows of individual
liberation, the Bodhisattva vows and the tantric vows. Thus Buddha stated: “I have never
approved, do not approve, and will never approve of a meat diet.” He declared: “my
followers must never eat meat.”
i
In general, both the butcher and the buyer of meat will suffer in such realms as the burning
and boiling hells.
ii
As Buddha said, “Killing animals for profit and buying meat are both evil
deeds; these kinds of actions will result in a rebirth in the horrifying realms of hell.”
iii
Intentionally eating meat is a violation of Buddhist principals.
iv
The Buddha said [in the Lankavatara-sutra],
No meat can be regarded as pure if it was premeditated, asked for or desired; therefore
refrain from eating meat. Both myself and other Buddhas forbid adepts from eating
meat. Those sentient beings who feed on one another will be reborn as carnivorous
animals. The meat-eater is ill-smelling, contemptuous and born deprived of intelligence.
He belongs to the lowest class of men. Since the Buddhas, Bodhisattvas and sravakas
have all condemned meat-eating, one who still eats meat without shame will always be
devoid of sense. Those who give up eating meat will be reborn as wise and wealthy
Brahmans. Meat that one has seen, heard, or suspected to have come from an animal
slaughtered for meat is to be condemned. Theorizers who are born as meat-eaters will
not understand this. These people will make foolish remarks about meat-eating, saying,
“Meat is proper to eat, unobjectionable and permitted by the Buddha.” An adept enjoys
vegetarian food in appropriate quantity and views meat as unfit to eat as the flesh of
one’s own son. For those who are abiding in compassion, I forbid meat at all times and
in all circumstances. Eating meat is a horrifying site and prevents progress towards
Nirvana. Refraining from eating meat is the mark of the wise.

In the Parinirvana Sutra, Buddha spoke to Kasyapa, saying,
Blessed son, those who have the mindfulness of the sravakas are not allowed to eat meat
from now on. Even if one is offered meat with genuine faith, one should see it as the
flesh of one’s own son.
Bodhisattva Kasyapa asked Buddha, “Lord, why do you not allow the eating of meat?”
Buddha replied,
Blessed son, eating meat hinders the development of compassion; therefore, all who
follow the way of the Buddha should not eat meat from now on. Kasyapa, wherever a
meat eater lies, sits, or walks other sentient beings become fearful upon smelling him.
Blessed son, just as when a man eats garlic others will keep away because of his bad
smell, likewise, when animals smell the meat eater, they fear death…
Kasyapa asked Buddha, “Lord, as monks, nuns and novice monks are dependent on other
people for their food, what should they do when they are offered food with meat?” Buddha
replied to Kasyapa,
Separate the food and meat, wash the food, and then eat. You may use your begging
bowl if it does not have the smell or taste of meat; otherwise you should wash the bowl.
If the food has too much meat, one should not accept it. Do not eat food if you see that
there is meat in it; if you do you will accumulate demerit. There will be no end if I speak
thoroughly about the reasons I do not allow meat eating. I have given a brief reply
because the time has come for my parinirvana.

Buddha has further elucidated the faults of meat eating in the Angulimala Sutra as well as in
the Siksasammucaya Compendium of Precepts. Furthermore, the terma teaching of
Padmasambhava called Rinchin Dronme clearly condemns the eating of meat for both lay
and ordained people: “All the followers of Buddha—monks or nuns, novice or lay—have
seven main principals to follow. These are ‘the four root principles’
and abstinence from
alcohol, meat and evening food.”
Those who argue that Buddha’s condemnation of meat applies only to the seven classes of
Theravadayana vows
and is not related to the Mahayana and Vajrayana are clearly
indicating their lack of proper knowledge. They have not seen the following Mahayana
sutra passage:
Meat-eating is a diet that convolutes the three realms [of Samara]. It is a sword that
severs the potential for liberation. It is a fire that burns the seed of Buddhahood. It is a
shaft of lightning that ends rebirth in the higher realms or a precious human rebirth.
Since meat eating is not approved for anyone—not for monks, nuns or lay people—those
who are committed Buddhist practitioners should never eat meat. One who has taken the
Bodhisattva Vow will incur great sin in eating the flesh of sentient beings who were one’s
parents in past lives. Even in Vajrayana meat is forbidden until one attains the ultimate
view of pure perception.

Trulshig Pema Dudul, speaking of a pure vision, said:
The Great Compassionate One [Avalokiteshvara] appeared in the sky in front of me and
spoke, “You have made some progress on the path and acquired some knowledge, yet
you are lacking in love and compassion. Compassion is the root of the Dharma and
with compassion it is impossible to eat meat. A person who eats meat will experience
much suffering and illness. Look at the miserable ones! Every one is experiencing
suffering according to their deeds…One who gives up meat will not experience this
suffering. Instead, the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, the guru, deities and dakinis will
rejoice and protect you.”
Having heard this, he gave up meat forever.
Many more renowned adepts have condemned meat as a poisonous food. Machig Labdrön,
a legendary female practitioner of chöd,
said, "For me eating meat is out of the question. I
feel great compassion when I see helpless animals looking up with fearful eyes."
Rigzin Jigme Lingpa, a great yogi of the Nyingma tradition stated,
Just as in the story of Arya Katayana going to beg for food,
I see that the animal that
this meat came from was our mother in previous lives. If so, can we eat the flesh of our
own mother who was slaughtered by butchers? Imagine how much concern would
arise! Therefore, if we reflect honestly, there is no way we won't feel compassion for the
animal.
Some people who claim to be practitioners say, "at least some meat and alcohol is necessary
to keep healthy, otherwise weakness or death might come about." This is not true. However,
even if death should follow from engaging in the Dharma practice of abstaining from meat
and alcohol, then it is worth it. As the great adept Tsele Rigzin said,

From the bottom of my heart I pray
Never to be with carnivores and drinkers.
In this and lives coming
May an ordained never be born where meat
And alcohol are used without morality.
Even if I should die
Due to the absence of meat and alcohol,
I will be living in accordance with the Buddha’s precepts.
Thus I will be a genuine practitioner!

Bodhisattva Jigme Chökyi Wangpo [Patrul Rinpoche] said,
As Buddhists we have taken the triple refuge [the Buddha, the Dharma and the
Sangha]. To take refuge in the Dharma, one must practice non-violence to sentient
beings. Thus, if we continue to eat meat—which has come from the slaughtering of
innocent animals—then is this not a contradiction of our Buddhist commitments?
Knowing all of the faults of meat and alcohol, I have made a commitment to give them up
in front of the great Bodhi tree in Bodhgaya with the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of the ten
directions as my witnesses. I have also declared this moral to all my monasteries. Therefore,
anyone who listens to me is requested not to transgress this crucial aspect of Buddhist
ethical conduct.
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
User avatar
gad rgyangs
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Malcolm » Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:58 am

gad rgyangs wrote:this seems to be the crux of what you are saying, all I can do is remind you that this theory is far from being accepted in buddhism in general. is it true? i certainly have no way of knowing. does my teacher ChNNR teach this? yup. do I buy it? not really.


Well, that's your problem.

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10165
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby gad rgyangs » Fri Dec 30, 2011 2:09 am

Namdrol wrote:
gad rgyangs wrote:this seems to be the crux of what you are saying, all I can do is remind you that this theory is far from being accepted in buddhism in general. is it true? i certainly have no way of knowing. does my teacher ChNNR teach this? yup. do I buy it? not really.


Well, that's your problem.

N


i got 99 problems but eatin' meat aint one.
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
User avatar
gad rgyangs
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Malcolm » Fri Dec 30, 2011 2:13 am

gad rgyangs wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
gad rgyangs wrote:this seems to be the crux of what you are saying, all I can do is remind you that this theory is far from being accepted in buddhism in general. is it true? i certainly have no way of knowing. does my teacher ChNNR teach this? yup. do I buy it? not really.


Well, that's your problem.

N


i got 99 problems but eatin' meat aint one.


That is not the problem to which I was referring, this was:


"does my teacher ChNNR teach this? yup. do I buy it? not really."


But of course, you are free. But instructing people to be vegetarians in direct contradiction to what your teacher teaches...

?

And then piling another teachers POV on top of that?

?

Next you will be telling us we schould eschew meat in the ganapuja...
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10165
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby gad rgyangs » Fri Dec 30, 2011 2:27 am

Namdrol wrote:
That is not the problem to which I was referring, this was:

"does my teacher ChNNR teach this? yup. do I buy it? not really."


But of course, you are free. But instructing people to be vegetarians in direct contradiction to what your teacher teachers...

?

And then piling another teachers POV on top of that?

?


are you claiming you agree with everything he says, no questions asked? do you believe he is omniscient?

besides, two of the lamas i also consider my teachers are students of Chatral Rinpoche.
Last edited by gad rgyangs on Fri Dec 30, 2011 2:43 am, edited 2 times in total.
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
User avatar
gad rgyangs
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby gad rgyangs » Fri Dec 30, 2011 2:35 am

Namdrol wrote:Next you will be telling us we schould eschew meat in the ganapuja...


no, i would just suggest that if one wants to play "more antinomian than thou" then one should consume feces urine menstrual blood and semen too. isn't it interesting that the only trangressive substances that "tantrikas" consume nowadays are the pleasant ones? the whole thing is kind of a farce. i mean, either do it right and bring out the nubile sixteen year old girls, or abstract it all away and just do it in imagination, but then imagine the substances too. but no, meat and alcohol are too tasty to just imagine. all the ganpujas ive ever been to were painfully reminiscent of old ladies tea parties.
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
User avatar
gad rgyangs
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Mr. G » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:04 am

gad rgyangs wrote:since you bozos are apparently immune to logic or common sense, and would rather play the "my sutra quote trumps your sutra quote game", here's some for you:


:lol: You seem quite passionate about it. However, there really is no issue at all, and I'm not playing the "sutra quote game". There are some East Asian Buddhists that don't eat meat in accordance with the sutras their teachers emphasize. Tibetan Buddhists take the advice of their Guru's first and foremost. For me, the words of Shakyamuni Buddha and Chogyal Namkhai Norbu suffice. Chatral Rinpoche is a great teacher...but he's not my teacher.
    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Mr. G » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:08 am

gad rgyangs wrote:
the whole thing is kind of a farce.


Then why do you study Vajrayana/Dzogchen? Perhaps you have a greater connection to Chan, Pure Land, etc.

all the ganpujas ive ever been to were painfully reminiscent of old ladies tea parties.


You've been to old lady's tea parties? I weep for you. :D
    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby gad rgyangs » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:16 am

Mr. G wrote:
Then why do you study Vajrayana/Dzogchen? Perhaps you have a greater connection to Chan, Pure Land, etc.


ive never come across an historical tradition that was not a mixture of truth and bullshit. the trick is to practice enough discernment to tell which parts are which.

You've been to old lady's tea parties? I weep for you. :D


once you get past a certain age, the surviving members of one's parent's generation are pretty much just the ladies. then you will know very well what I'm talking about. :tongue:
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
User avatar
gad rgyangs
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Dechen Norbu » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:42 am

gad rgyangs wrote:this seems to be the crux of what you are saying, all I can do is remind you that this theory is far from being accepted in buddhism in general. is it true? i certainly have no way of knowing. does my teacher ChNNR teach this? yup. do I buy it? not really. furthermore, i suspect its used as a justification for self-indulgence far more often than as an actual practice. when someone who is disgusted by the thought of tasting meat does this, i might believe their motivation. but when someone sits down to enjoy a big steak and uses this as an excuse, i cannot take it seriously.

The lack of trust you show in your teacher is far worse than all the meat you could eat in several lifetimes.
This is the point were you stop being a serious Vajrayana practitioner and become a food fanatic.

i like gandhi's saying "be the change you want to see in the world". personally, i want to see a world where there are no slaughterhouses, and all i can do towards that is refuse to participate in meat-eating. each person who does that is one step closer to making it a reality. each person who says, "whats the point, people in general are never going to stop eating meat, so i might as well keep eating it too" is part of the problem, not the solution.

I guess not buying the advice of our teachers is the right way to start "being the change you want to see in the world". It's better to cling to a certain diet while ignoring our Vajra Guru. Sure... temporal benefit is a great tool to end suffering.


there was some clown on a yahoo dzogchen list years ago whose business was actually raising fish or crustaceans or something in outdoor ponds in hawaii for use as food. he actually attempted to justify this as "right livelihood" by saying that these beings were entering "his mandala" and they were lucky because he was a vajrayana practioner, etc etc.

The fact that there are vegetarian clowns is not a motive for me to generalize it to every vegetarian.

I think Nemo summed it up pretty well. It must be really nice to be more Buddhist than the Buddha. Devadatta tried that one and it didn't end well for him.
User avatar
Dechen Norbu
 
Posts: 2798
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:50 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby gad rgyangs » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:46 am

Dechen Norbu wrote:
gad rgyangs wrote:this seems to be the crux of what you are saying, all I can do is remind you that this theory is far from being accepted in buddhism in general. is it true? i certainly have no way of knowing. does my teacher ChNNR teach this? yup. do I buy it? not really. furthermore, i suspect its used as a justification for self-indulgence far more often than as an actual practice. when someone who is disgusted by the thought of tasting meat does this, i might believe their motivation. but when someone sits down to enjoy a big steak and uses this as an excuse, i cannot take it seriously.

The lack of trust you show in your teacher is far worse than all the meat you could eat in several lifetimes.
This is the point were you stop being a serious Vajrayana practitioner and become a food fanatic.

i like gandhi's saying "be the change you want to see in the world". personally, i want to see a world where there are no slaughterhouses, and all i can do towards that is refuse to participate in meat-eating. each person who does that is one step closer to making it a reality. each person who says, "whats the point, people in general are never going to stop eating meat, so i might as well keep eating it too" is part of the problem, not the solution.

I guess not buying the advice of our teachers is the right way to start "being the change you want to see in the world". It's better to cling to a certain diet while ignoring our Vajra Guru. Sure... temporal benefit is a great tool to end suffering.


there was some clown on a yahoo dzogchen list years ago whose business was actually raising fish or crustaceans or something in outdoor ponds in hawaii for use as food. he actually attempted to justify this as "right livelihood" by saying that these beings were entering "his mandala" and they were lucky because he was a vajrayana practioner, etc etc.

The fact that there are vegetarian clowns is not a motive for me to generalize it to every vegetarian.

I think Nemo summed it up pretty well. It must be really nice to be more Buddhist than the Buddha. Devadatta tried that one and it didn't end well for him.


sounds like a lot of cult talk 2 me.
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
User avatar
gad rgyangs
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Mr. G » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:51 am

gad rgyangs wrote:
ive never come across an historical tradition that was not a mixture of truth and bullshit. the trick is to practice enough discernment to tell which parts are which.


Yet, you've discerned quite easily that not being a vegetarian/vegan is bullsh1t. Not bad.
    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Dechen Norbu » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:52 am

Your words? Indeed. The cult of vegetarianism.
The parts of your lama's advice that don't agree with your pre-established ideas about diets are thrown away as bullshit. First and foremost: diet! Then Dzogchen and your master. You'll go far with that attitude.
User avatar
Dechen Norbu
 
Posts: 2798
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:50 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby gad rgyangs » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:53 am

Mr. G wrote:
gad rgyangs wrote:
ive never come across an historical tradition that was not a mixture of truth and bullshit. the trick is to practice enough discernment to tell which parts are which.


Yet, you've discerned quite easily that not being a vegetarian/vegan is bullsh1t. Not bad.


its an easy one.
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
User avatar
gad rgyangs
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby gad rgyangs » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:56 am

Dechen Norbu wrote:Your words? Indeed. The cult of vegetarianism.
The parts of your lama's advice that don't agree with your pre-established ideas about diets are thrown away as bullshit. First and foremost: diet! Then Dzogchen and your master. You'll go far with that attitude.


its not a cult its called morality 101: non-killing. you've heard of it perhaps?
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
User avatar
gad rgyangs
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Mr. G » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:56 am

gad rgyangs wrote:its an easy one.


An easy one for me too.
    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Malcolm » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:56 am

gad rgyangs wrote:are you claiming you agree with everything he says, no questions asked? do you believe he is omniscient?



ChNN is an awakened person, one of the few in the world and he is my root Guru.

If he is not your root Guru, it is ok.

Everyone is free. Your are free not to eat meat, I am free to eat meat.

I have argued both sides of this issue extensively. In the end, however, I just follow my teacher's advice since he is an awakened person, and I am not.

As far as antinomian goes, that was not my point -- my point was to what extent you were taking your convictions. Certainly there are many now who beleive that meat as well as alchohol is not really needed in a ganapuja.

They can think that if they like. I have never agreed with this point of view. AFAIC, these two things are somewhat indispensible for various reasons.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10165
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Dechen Norbu » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:57 am

its not a cult its called morality 101: non-killing. you've heard of it perhaps?

So all the lamas who eat meat are foolish teachers incapable of getting such an easy thing? Lamas like Kalu Rinpoche, Chagdud Rinpoche, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, the Dalai Lama and so on and so forth? You know better than them and surely are more compassionate than them all together!
If you had any idea how pathetic you look on the top of your imaginary moral high horse you would put your head in a bag, dude.
User avatar
Dechen Norbu
 
Posts: 2798
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:50 pm

Re: the great vegetarian debate

Postby Mr. G » Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:57 am

gad rgyangs wrote:
its not a cult its called morality 101: non-killing. you've heard of it perhaps?


The meat eater at a ganapuja is not killing anything.
    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dharma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: deff, Nemo, Norwegian, smcj, theanarchist, Thrasymachus, tobes and 25 guests

>