See, I told ya we would not agree on this.
There are scholars and respected teachers on both sides of this debate. So there could be some merit in both positions. Neither view can be called or labeled as not being objective or as misrepresentation. Such a label would border on or be an ad hominem
. So therefore, there are two primary views on this and as I stated we are not going to agree on this.
I was writing on the last meal in my posts in this thread, not on the Threefold Rule, lay people choosing to eat meat, or any of the other issues related to the vegetarian-meat debates.
If you see my article, I openly admit that I have found one reference and apparently there is only this one reference in the entire Pali Canon where the Buddha eats mamsa
(out of pity, to accept the meal), which is clearly flesh / meat. However, there are numerous other references to simple vegetarian / vegan foods, around what appears to be 95 percent of his diet.