Vegetarian Buddhist.

[sky]

When did Buddhist start to feel uncomfortable about eating meat ?


From my understanding the Buddha and his Disciples did eat meat as long as the animals were not killed on their behalf.

[knightofalbion]

Buddha gave many teachings on compassion and non-violence.

There is one case where Buddha is said to have eaten meat, out of deference to the man who had worked so hard to prepare the meal. But that seems to be it.

His final meal was mistranslated as being pork. Though Buddhist scholars suggest in reality it was 'food of the pigs' i.e. mushrooms.
(Cunda the blacksmith who provided the meal was of the third caste and they would not have eaten or prepared pig meat)

Buddhist monks are meant to accept whatever food is giving in alms, even meat - provided the animal has not been specifically killed to feed them.

There was a great deal of poverty back then. Many families were dirt poor, so sharing a proportion of their meagre rations with a monk represented a considerable sacrifice. To have had them turn round and say 'No, I don't want this' or 'I'd rather have ...' So grateful acceptance for whatever was lovingly given became the norm.

[Baile]

Originally Posted by sky123

When did Buddha start to feel uncomfortable about eating meat ?

When he became enlightened. Enlightened people don't eat meat.

That was easy! Next question, something harder this time...

[sky]

Before and after his enlightenment he had experimented with various diets including a meatless diet, but he eventually abandoned them believing that they did not contribute to spiritual development.




QUOTE=Baile]When he became enlightened. Enlightened people don't eat meat.

That was easy! Next question, something harder this time...[/quote]

[RyanWind]

It is kinda gross when you are aware of the fact you are eating the muscles/insides of some animal that was killed. The smell of meat can strike some as gross as well. Then lobster.... they put them into boiling water while alive and they make this screaming like noise. I even think looking at some picture of a guy holding a fish he just ripped out of the water with a hook and is going to eat is troubling... you can look into the fishes eyes... that's a conscious being. It's actually amazing humans can kill all of these other animals and have zero guilt or bad feelings about it.

[RedFall]

Originally Posted by RyanWind

It is kinda gross when you are aware of the fact you are eating the muscles/insides of some animal that was killed. The smell of meat can strike some as gross as well. Then lobster.... they put them into boiling water while alive and they make this screaming like noise. I even think looking at some picture of a guy holding a fish he just ripped out of the water with a hook and is going to eat is troubling... you can look into the fishes eyes... that's a conscious being. It's actually amazing humans can kill all of these other animals and have zero guilt or bad feelings about it.

Well your reading too much into it. Many fishers and hunters don't go out to inflict the maximum amount of pain, or necessarily to take life. They do it for the thrill of the activity and the hunt.

As Miyamoto Musashi (Legendary Swordsman who never lost a fight/Attained a level of Enlightenment) once said when asked if he felt guilty for taking life [In self defense typically, or when challenged to duels].
"When I fight and take life, it is in the same way a Volcano kills people."

Its not murder unless its intention based on reason. Somethings just happen. Lions kill zebra, Cats kill mice. You wouldn't say 'that cat murdered the mouse!' or 'that tsunami murdered those people!'

When things are done in nothingness, they can be based on life only and not some morbid interest or hobby. Though preparing animals alive like lobsters and Traditional Chinese/Philipinos is out of line, simply fishing or hunting for deer is hardly and probably never counts as a 'negative activity' unless your doing it solely to kill or to see animals suffer.

[sky]

Originally Posted by knightofalbion

Buddha gave many teachings on compassion and non-violence.

There is one case where Buddha is said to have eaten meat, out of deference to the man who had worked so hard to prepare the meal. But that seems to be it.

His final meal was mistranslated as being pork. Though Buddhist scholars suggest in reality it was 'food of the pigs' i.e. mushrooms.
(Cunda the blacksmith who provided the meal was of the third caste and they would not have eaten or prepared pig meat)

Buddhist monks are meant to accept whatever food is giving in alms, even meat - provided the animal has not been specifically killed to feed them.

There was a great deal of poverty back then. Many families were dirt poor, so sharing a proportion of their meagre rations with a monk represented a considerable sacrifice. To have had them turn round and say 'No, I don't want this' or 'I'd rather have ...' So grateful acceptance for whatever was lovingly given became the norm.

The Nipata Sutra states that it is immorality that makes one impure not the eating of meat.

Pali Tipitaka also speaks of allowing his Disciples to eat meat.

Buddha is stated to have recommended beef broth for certain illnesses.

Different schools seem to have different rules but according to some sutras, meat eating was allowed as long as the animal was not killed just for the sake of eating.

HHDL eats meat so it seems to depend on individual choice, although most Buddhist nowadays are vegetarian and I was wondering when they first started to make these choices, earlier Buddhist did not practice vegetarianism.

[RyanWind]

Another odd thing about meat eaters.

Some freak out when thinking about cultures that eat cats, dogs, monkeys, or horses, yet they happily eat all kinds of things that live in the ocean and eat birds, cows etc. Really what's the difference? Why is it ok to kill one type of animal and not another?

I think some people reason, well a dog is intelligent, a cow is not... so it's ok to kill it and eat it. Their morality about killing animals is based on how smart the animal is? Smart or not most animals feel emotions and pain.

Recent research has also stated that lobsters, for example, have a high degree of intelligence. There was also a case in the news of some crabs that were working as a team snagging the bait off fishermens hooks. One crab would hold the line with a rock under the water while the other removed the bait.

Many animals feel the same things humans do. That movie "blackfish" pointed out killer whales had larger portions of their brains where emotions are processed. So killer whales actually have more emotional feelings/processes than humans. That one mother whale in the movie that had her baby removed "cried" for a really long time.

[RedFall]

Originally Posted by RyanWind

Another odd thing about meat eaters.

Some freak out when thinking about cultures that eat cats, dogs, monkeys, or horses, yet they happily eat all kinds of things that live in the ocean and eat birds, cows etc. Really what's the difference? Why is it ok to kill one type of animal and not another?

I think some people reason, well a dog is intelligent, a cow is not... so it's ok to kill it and eat it. Their morality about killing animals is based on how smart the animal is? Smart or not most animals feel emotions and pain.

Recent research has also stated that lobsters, for example, have a high degree of intelligence. There was also a case in the news of some crabs that were working as a team snagging the bait off fishermens hooks. One crab would hold the line with a rock under the water while the other removed the bait.

Many animals feel the same things humans do. That movie "blackfish" pointed out killer whales had larger portions of their brains where emotions are processed. So killer whales actually have more emotional feelings/processes than humans. That one mother whale in the movie that had her baby removed "cried" for a really long time.

sad stuff :(

Though eating meat is ok, i do think there is a limit on the amount of animal 'farming' that is allowed before it becomes consequential to the environment and to our conscious development

[knightofalbion]

Originally Posted by sky123

The Nipata Sutra states that it is immorality that makes one impure not the eating of meat.

Pali Tipitaka also speaks of allowing his Disciples to eat meat.

Buddha is stated to have recommended beef broth for certain illnesses.

Different schools seem to have different rules but according to some sutras, meat eating was allowed as long as the animal was not killed just for the sake of eating.

HHDL eats meat so it seems to depend on individual choice, although most Buddhist nowadays are vegetarian and I was wondering when they first started to make these choices, earlier Buddhist did not practice vegetarianism.

I would suggest that is a blind spot on the DL's part.
Not advocating veganism to the Tibetan people I can understand. I doubt one could live year round on the Tibetan Plateau on a vegan diet.
But he has the choice and the wherewithal to be vegan, but chooses not to. He likes the taste of animal flesh. I think he has made that clear enough over the years.