Is buying meat compatible with Buddhist ethics?

[ratikala]

namaskaram Chakra ji

@Kartari and @Spiny Norman , thanks for the responses. So basically, the Buddhist will eat the meat if the person who the meat was intended for doesn't want to eat it (as a way of honoring the animal). In our modern and western society, would a Buddhist be allowed to eat the meat off a supermarket? The meat wasn't technically made for him or anyone else in mind; just for animal-eaters in general.

excuse me adding my two penny worth , ...

amongst Tibetan Buddhists that l practiced with here in the west , ...none except a few visiting meditators ate meat and never at any temple gathering , some ate eggs but not meat at home , ...meat was generaly discouraged on compassionate grounds .

 

[Rick O'Shez]

What about human meat? I just want to know how far this justification can go. Thanks.

Killing a human would presumably have more negative karmic consequence than killing say a cow, though the first precept ( not killing ) applies to living creatures generally, not just humans.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel282.html#prec2

I haven't heard of any Buddhist cannibals though.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

amongst Tibetan Buddhists that l practiced with here in the west , ...none except a few visiting meditators ate meat and never at any temple gathering , some ate eggs but not meat at home , ...meat was generaly discouraged on compassionate grounds .

There are a number of different schools in Tibetan Buddhism, so it seems they have different attitudes.

 

[ratikala]

Yes, some people make that argument, though buying meat in a supermarket does lead indirectly to more animals being killed because the shelves have to be restocked. You can argue that this isn't a technical breach of the 3-fold rule, but it looks counter to the principles underlying the 3-fold rule. And I would suggest that ethics is all about principles.

Imagine this scenario. Two people buy a turkey for Christmas or whatever. The first person orders a turkey from a local butcher, the second person goes to the local turkey farm and picks a turkey out to be killed. Meanwhile the butcher adds one more turkey to his order with the same turkey farm, so he can meet the first person's turkey order......
You can argue that a turkey wasn't killed specifically for the first customer, though it was for the second. Though in both cases a turkey was killed. It's tricky.

what on earth is tricky about practicing 'fewness of wishes' .....if there is any likelyhood of suffering , ...Avoid it ! ...EAT SOMETHING ELSE !.....

all this worrying about who killed it and for who ??? ....it is desire which fuels demand so farmers breed turkeys , buttchers sell them , people eat them , ...all are equaly involved in death ! .....no question about it it is simple

limit ones desires to that which causes less harm ....practice 'fewness of wishes' ...be content with grains and vegetables

 

[ratikala]

There are a number of different schools in Tibetan Buddhism, so it seems they have different attitudes.

of course , .....some may justify meat eating , ...just as some monks ate like pigs , others took just what they needed ,

 

[Rick O'Shez]

limit ones desires to that which causes less harm ....practice 'fewness of wishes' ...be content with grains and vegetables

Right Intention certainly seems to support that approach since it includes developing harmlessness or non-harm.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-sankappo/

 

[Rick O'Shez]

of course , .....some may justify meat eating , ...just as some monks ate like pigs , others took just what they needed ,

We all tend to rationalise our behaviour.

 

[ratikala]

Right Intention certainly seems to support that approach

exactly !

 

[ratikala]

We all tend to rationalise our behaviour.

Hmm, ....that is called deluding oneself , ....

 

[ratikala]

allso what comes to mind is ''that makes one no Bodhisattva''

 

[ratikala]

BODHISATTVAS VOW
First Ten , ...

1. Not to kill or encourage others to kill.
2. Not to steal or encourage others to steal.
3. Not to engage in licentious acts or encourage others to do so. A monk is expected to abstain from sexual conduct entirely.
4. Not to use false words and speech, or encourage others to do so.
5. Not to trade or sell alcoholic beverages or encourage others to do so.
6. Not to broadcast the misdeeds or faults of the Buddhist assembly, nor encourage others to do so.
7. Not to praise oneself and speak ill of others, or encourage others to do so.
8. Not to be stingy, or encourage others to do so.
9. Not to harbor anger or encourage others to be angry.
10. Not to speak ill of the Buddha, the Dharma or the Sangha (lit. the Triple Jewel)) or encourage others to do so.

''Breaking any of these precepts is described as a major offense''

then secular Buddhists got in there and tweeked it a bit left it alittle open to personal inturpretation, ....

The Three Treasures (or Refuges)
1. Being one with the Buddha
2. Being one with the Dharma
3. Being one with the Sangha

The Three Pure Precepts
1. Ceasing from evil
2. Doing good
3. Doing good for others

The Ten Grave Precepts
1. Non-killing
2. Non-stealing
3. Not misusing sex
4. Not telling lies
5. Not deluding the mind
6. Not talking about others errors or faults
7. Not elevating oneself and blaming others
8. Not being stingy
9. Not being angry
10. Not speaking ill of the Three Treasures

by the way what is this being one with Buddha???

it is Buddham saranam gacchami !!!......what happened to refuge ?

 

[aoji]

Forget all about religious reasons. Take a more pragmatic view: "If" you are a spiritually sensitive person then eating meat will probably dull your sensitivity. If the animal dies under stress then it will probably release chemicals into the blood stream, which get absorbed by the body, and which are stored in the fat of the animal if the stress has been going on for a long time.

If you don't want to be a sensitive, then it doesn't matter. But what we eat does affect us: it affects our bodies, it affects our brains, it affects our minds, it affects our consciousnesses. What we eat when young will affect us when we are old. For example, http://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/new...t-may-make-the-brain-vulnerable-to-alzheimers Eat a steak everyday and chances are you will probably only notice that one day you will need a heart bypass, but what about how it affects you every day in the interim?

If you do not know what it means to be a sensitive, then chances are you aren't a sensitive. To know what it feels like to be a sensitive you will have to become a sensitive, which means more meditation. Eat enough meat and we become dull. On average I have to eat meat every 15 days, or when I start to feel weak. That is most assuredly my own fault as it just means that I am not eating enough plant protein. http://gentleworld.org/10-protein-packed-plants/

Buddha said that it was okay to eat meat that died a natural death. It was just an appeasement for those that needed time to get weaned off meat. "Compassion" was just a created ulterior motive since most were too dull to feel, not sensitive, to another reality.

Range bred meat tastes different than meat that has been cooped up, murdered inhumanely, been given anti-biotics and steroids. Can you taste the difference? If you can't then you are not sensitive enough. Same goes for wine. And cheese. If you can't tell the difference between a sun ripened orange and a green orange that has ripened on your table, you may be a "dull".

 

[Twilight Hue]

The question is really about the ethics of our own dietary choices. Do we decide to buy meat when non-meat alternatives are available? If we do buy meat are we just driven by our attachment to meat, or do we consider the consequences of our choices?

I suppose in that light the issue really reflects upon the person him or herself.

I typically don't think of attachment or consequences as I purchase and consume meat. I just think hamburger or chicken and how good it tastes for lunch or dinner.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

...then secular Buddhists got in there

They are very naughty, always fiddling with things.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Animals are killed in vast numbers so that people can have some meat on their plate.

Many are. All not by humans either. I think of predators a lot and take that we are counted as being one, we of course are also prey as well, depending on how consumption of each and every living organisms are killed and consumed.

 

[crossfire]

Bearing in mind the focus on compassion towards sentient beings. Bearing in mind the 3-fold rule, Right Intention, Right Livelihood and the first precept.

Please note the question is about buying meat, not eating it.

What about the new lab-grown meat? (Not that I'd ever buy it.)

 

[Rick O'Shez]

What about the new lab-grown meat? (Not that I'd ever buy it.)

I can't see a problem with that. Alternatively you can get quorn which tastes a bit chicken.

 

[crossfire]

I can't see a problem with that. Alternatively you can get quorn which tastes a bit chicken.

Wouldn't it be like eating something torn away from a living creature?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Wouldn't it be like eating something torn away from a living creature?

I think the fact that it isn't actually torn away from a living creature is what makes the difference.

 

[Machavelle]

Forget all about religious reasons. Take a more pragmatic view: "If" you are a spiritually sensitive person then eating meat will probably dull your sensitivity. If the animal dies under stress then it will probably release chemicals into the blood stream, which get absorbed by the body, and which are stored in the fat of the animal if the stress has been going on for a long time.

If you don't want to be a sensitive, then it doesn't matter. But what we eat does affect us: it affects our bodies, it affects our brains, it affects our minds, it affects our consciousnesses. What we eat when young will affect us when we are old. For example, http://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/new...t-may-make-the-brain-vulnerable-to-alzheimers Eat a steak everyday and chances are you will probably only notice that one day you will need a heart bypass, but what about how it affects you every day in the interim?

If you do not know what it means to be a sensitive, then chances are you aren't a sensitive. To know what it feels like to be a sensitive you will have to become a sensitive, which means more meditation. Eat enough meat and we become dull. On average I have to eat meat every 15 days, or when I start to feel weak. That is most assuredly my own fault as it just means that I am not eating enough plant protein. http://gentleworld.org/10-protein-packed-plants/

Buddha said that it was okay to eat meat that died a natural death. It was just an appeasement for those that needed time to get weaned off meat. "Compassion" was just a created ulterior motive since most were too dull to feel, not sensitive, to another reality.

Range bred meat tastes different than meat that has been cooped up, murdered inhumanely, been given anti-biotics and steroids. Can you taste the difference? If you can't then you are not sensitive enough. Same goes for wine. And cheese. If you can't tell the difference between a sun ripened orange and a green orange that has ripened on your table, you may be a "dull".

It was the eating of cooked meat that enabled the Human Brain to evolve beyond other primates