Attn: Vegetarians and Vegans

[SalixIncendium]

This thread is inspired by a comment by a member in another thread that replied to a spammy post.

How far are you willing to take your moral standard with regard to not consuming animals or animal products?

In such an scenario that the only thing left to eat was hermetically sealed or canned foods that contains meat or meat products, what would you do? Would you set aside these moral standards and eat meat or meat products? Would you slowly die of starvation?

As for me, being vegetarian, I don't have a definite answer as I have not given it much thought. I'll ponder this and reply later in the thread.

 

[Spirit of Light]

This thread is inspired by a comment by a member in another thread that replied to a spammy post.

How far are you willing to take your moral standard with regard to not consuming animals or animal products?

In such an scenario that the only thing left to eat was hermetically sealed or canned foods that contains meat or meat products, what would you do? Would you set aside these moral standards and eat meat or meat products? Would you slowly die of starvation?

As for me, being vegetarian, I don't have a definite answer as I have not given it much thought. I'll ponder this and reply later in the thread.

That is a very tricky question to answer, but since it does not involve killing animals, the meat is just , that, it is meat. And even i would try to eat what is not meat, if the only option to survive was to eat the canned food I would eat it. But we should know that this is put on the very extreme of survival

 

[SalixIncendium]

That is a very tricky question to answer, but since it does not involve killing animals, the meat is just , that, it is meat.

Doesn't consumption of any meat involve killing animals?

 

[Vinayaka]

This thread is inspired by a comment by a member in another thread that replied to a spammy post.

How far are you willing to take your moral standard with regard to not consuming animals or animal products?

In such an scenario that the only thing left to eat was hermetically sealed or canned foods that contains meat or meat products, what would you do? Would you set aside these moral standards and eat meat or meat products? Would you slowly die of starvation?

As for me, being vegetarian, I don't have a definite answer as I have not given it much thought. I'll ponder this and reply later in the thread.

I couldn't answer until it happened. The circumstance, in that present moment, will affect the mind. Often a very different decision happens when hypothetical turns to real.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Doesn't consumption of any meat involve killing animals?

Yes but if the animals are not killed directly for us or we kill it our self, then it is our attachments to it that hold us back. Buddha to my knowledge did eat meat too. But of course, he did not kill animals. But in my understanding, if we can free us from the attachments that is a right way to do it. But i do not eat meat on a normal day. But in the last effort to survive, I think meat would be ok to eat.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I couldn't answer until it happened. The circumstance, in that present moment, will affect the mind. Often a very different decision happens when hypothetical turns to real.

I'm inclined to agree with this. Ahimsa involves no doing harm, and one who adheres to such a principle would have to weigh out the karma involved in doing harm to another to survive and doing harm to oneself through starvation.

I think a consideration for me would be the possibility of replenishment. Would another animal be killed to replenish the supply of that I would consume?

 

[Vinayaka]

I'm inclined to agree with this. Ahimsa involves no doing harm, and one who adheres to such a principle would have to weigh out the karma involved in doing harm to another to survive and doing harm to oneself through starvation.

I think a consideration for me would be the possibility of replenishment. Would another animal be killed to replenish the supply of that I would consume?

Ethical decisions, ideally, ask the question: "What does the greater harm?" If I was a father of 5 young children who needed me, I'd eat it for sure. OTOH, if I was 85 years old, and practically on my death bed already, I'd more likely not eat it.

I've never bought into the 'but I didn't kill it' argument. You're supporting the killing by eating it, part of the process.

 

[Samana Johann]

Doesn't consumption of any meat involve killing animals?

There is no such as aversion involved by just consuming meet which is given, not even greed is necessary. The matter is more in regard of how to come to food and if one is actually involved. The safe walk here is, when ever see, heard or suspected, that one has has killed for ones personal food, good to reject, Brahman SalixIncendium.
Aside of killing by oneself, telling others, giving signs for such, and to approve such mental, bears the same kind of kamma.

If getting astray with the speculation of involved, there is no food that does not require death. Till seeing that clear, and wishing to pull out ones card from the play, it's good to focus on what is given and near and see food just as a means to cross the desert, without to much hypocrisy and what makes one good observed ones intentions free from remorse. Wishing for sense-pleasure always kills.

The Four Nutriments of Life: An Anthology of Buddhist Texts

 

[ajay0]

This thread is inspired by a comment by a member in another thread that replied to a spammy post.

How far are you willing to take your moral standard with regard to not consuming animals or animal products?

In such an scenario that the only thing left to eat was hermetically sealed or canned foods that contains meat or meat products, what would you do? Would you set aside these moral standards and eat meat or meat products? Would you slowly die of starvation?

As for me, being vegetarian, I don't have a definite answer as I have not given it much thought. I'll ponder this and reply later in the thread.

"A person who employs the force of logic and reasoning in the light of the wisdom presented in genuine scriptures attains the highest truth. " ~ Sage Dattatreya

Keeping the body alive and healthy is a must for enlightenment. In terms of survival issues being alive is important.

In such scenarios, there is nothing wrong with intake of non-vegetarian food, and not doing so would create karma for the person involved. If a person starves to death without taking non-vegetarian food to survive, he is obviously losing his life and the chance for enlightenment in the present lifetime.

There is a interesting case study of a egyptian couple and child who were trapped under debris after an earthquake for a couple of days. The husband survived by drinking his own urine. However his wife and child refused to do the same though the husband exhorted them to emulate his example. When they were finally brought to the open by rescue teams, only the husband survived to tell the tale.

 

[Lyndon]

Yes but if the animals are not killed directly for us or we kill it our self, then it is our attachments to it that hold us back. Buddha to my knowledge did eat meat too. But of course, he did not kill animals. But in my understanding, if we can free us from the attachments that is a right way to do it. But i do not eat meat on a normal day. But in the last effort to survive, I think meat would be ok to eat.

This Therevada argument is a fundamentally bankrupt logic IMHO

 

[Spirit of Light]

This Therevada argument is a fundamentally bankrupt logic IMHO

If you feel so it is ok, no harm done

 

[Lyndon]

if you eat the meat, you killed the animal, that's the karma of it.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Yes but if the animals are not killed directly for us or we kill it our self, then it is our attachments to it that hold us back. Buddha to my knowledge did eat meat too. But of course, he did not kill animals. But in my understanding, if we can free us from the attachments that is a right way to do it. But i do not eat meat on a normal day. But in the last effort to survive, I think meat would be ok to eat.

As I see it, if one eats meat, one supports animal husbandry, and thus, the killing of animals for food.

If I eat meat, I've taken from the static supply of meat, which means that meat has to be replenished. So in eating meat, I just partook in the killing of another animal for my own nourishment.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

This thread is inspired by a comment by a member in another thread that replied to a spammy post.

How far are you willing to take your moral standard with regard to not consuming animals or animal products?

In such an scenario that the only thing left to eat was hermetically sealed or canned foods that contains meat or meat products, what would you do? Would you set aside these moral standards and eat meat or meat products? Would you slowly die of starvation?

As for me, being vegetarian, I don't have a definite answer as I have not given it much thought. I'll ponder this and reply later in the thread.

I pretty staunchly believe that vegetarianism/veganism is the moral choice for a healthy body and planet... but in a case of survival, all that crap is out the window. Seriously... you need to survive? You do what you have to do. Period. I could easily hunt, kill and consume animals if it was one of the only options I had to sustain myself. The principles extend only so far as being vegan/vegetarian doesn't, itself, encroach upon an individual's survival.

 

[Samana Johann]

Spoiler: Graphic Image

 

[SalixIncendium]

"A person who employs the force of logic and reasoning in the light of the wisdom presented in genuine scriptures attains the highest truth. " ~ Sage Dattatreya

Keeping the body alive and healthy is a must for enlightenment. In terms of survival issues being alive is important.

In such scenarios, there is nothing wrong with intake of non-vegetarian food, and not doing so would create karma for the person involved. If a person starves to death without taking non-vegetarian food to survive, he is obviously losing his life and the chance for enlightenment in the present lifetime.

There is a interesting case study of a egyptian couple and child who were trapped under debris after an earthquake for a couple of days. The husband survived by drinking his own urine. However his wife and child refused to do the same though the husband exhorted them to emulate his example. When they were finally brought to the open by rescue teams, only the husband survived to tell the tale.

What if karma carries over several lifetimes and it was the husband's dharma to drink the urine, while it was the wife and child's dharma to not drink it? How can we judge if it was if either action was adharmic from our own perspective? How do we determine if any of them decided that it was not in their karma to become enlightened in that lifetime; that they were to continue to experience maya in another lifetime?

 

[Samana Johann]

Spoiler: Graphic Image

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

View attachment 29825

And? You proud of yourself or something?

 

[Samana Johann]

Spoiler: Graphic Image

 

[Samana Johann]

Spoiler: Graphic Image