Is buying meat compatible with Buddhist ethics?

[Aupmanyav]

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

Eating beef and other non-vegetarian food endangers environment and even human health (I am a non-vegetarian but the facts cannot be denied).

 

[Machavelle]

Eating beef and other non-vegetarian food endangers environment and even human health (I am a non-vegetarian but the facts cannot be denied).

How exactly does eating meat endanger the environment, don't cows produce methane.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I think that is the problem. Also we are pushing many sea and lang animals to extinction.
Giving up beef will reduce carbon footprint more than cars, says expert
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...p-beef-reduce-carbon-footprint-more-than-cars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_meat_production

 

[Machavelle]

I think that is the problem. Also we are pushing many sea and lang animals to extinction.
Giving up beef will reduce carbon footprint more than cars, says expert
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/21/giving-up-beef-reduce-carbon
-footprint-more-than-cars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_meat_production

The problem is for every so called expert, there are two more saying something else.

 

[Machavelle]

Perhaps if we all stop eating meat, our world wide need for fruit and vegetables would became such that we would completely destroy the animals habitats to put in enough farms to feed the masses.

Leaving the animals we tried to help screwed.

 

[Machavelle]

I've studied some anthropology and human evolution. It is nowhere near this straightforward. We know that a high level of protein is required by a human, but this is now available from vegetarian sources.

Also, it is known for fact that consumption of meat places a far greater tax on the environment and on farmland by dint of it pushing us up one level in the food chain.

Hence contributing to climate change and global food shortages (i.e. the malnourishment and starvation of billions), and pushing many species towards extinction directly and indirectly.

This is before we get into deforestation, human health, animal welfare, antibiotic overuse and water shortages.

So if we give up meat, all will be rosey.
Give poor people in villages money, first thing they will buy is meat.

 

[Machavelle]

It is fanciful and unproductive to think people will give up meat.

Concentrate on the possible, not the impossible.

 

[Machavelle]

Many vegans look like they could use a good steak, why is that.

 

[Machavelle]

I'd appreciate it if you could address the pointsI bring up more directly.

As for this: if by this you mean they look undernourished, there are varying reasons. It certainly is not inevitable.

Ok, what benefits will less meat bring,

 

[crossfire]

A diminishment of the problems exacerbated by its consumption. I raised those problems previously.

What does this have to do with Buddhist ethics of buying meat?

 

[Machavelle]

And this will help stop poverty how

 

[Kirran]

What does this have to do with Buddhist ethics of buying meat?

Yes, it is drifting a bit. I apologise. I'll delete my comments.

 

[Chakra]

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

Not trying to argue, but I recently stumbled upon this and I think you should give it a look.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/682587

 

[Chakra]

Ok, what benefits will less meat bring,

We could...
End world hunger (gradually)!
Slow down climate change!
Slow down deforestation!
Prevent habitat loss!
Allow animals to live happy lives!
Improve our health!

The possibilities are shocking...

Anyway, although I'm not a Buddhist, is there even a consensus on what "Buddhist ethics" are? Where could someone like me learn more about this, preferably a text from an authoritative source (not modern-day enthusiasts). Thanks!

 

[Aupmanyav]

Buddha died after eating pork/pigeon (I am not able to parse the words. Perhaps Buddhists can clarify) meat, obviously given to him in bhiksha. That is what tradition says. So, it was not prohibited. An authoritative source could only be a video recording of Buddha speaking to his disciples (Sāriputta, Moggallāna, Mahākassapa, Subhūti, Puṇṇa Mantānīputta, Mahākaccāna, Anuruddha, Upāli, Rāhula, Ānanda, sitting in the first row).

 

[crossfire]

<...>
Anyway, although I'm not a Buddhist, is there even a consensus on what "Buddhist ethics" are? Where could someone like me learn more about this, preferably a text from an authoritative source (not modern-day enthusiasts). Thanks!

The ones referenced in the OP:

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.

The threefold rule applies to monks and nuns (from Majjhima Nakaya 55)

The passage reads as follows: "I say that there are three instances in which meat should not be eaten: when it is seen, heard, or suspected that the living being has been slaughtered for the bhikkhu. I say that meat should not be eaten in these three instances. I say that there are three instances in which meat may be eaten: when it is not seen, not heard, and not suspected, that the living being has been slaughtered for the bhikkhu."​

Right Intention (or Right Resolve) and Right Livelihood are 2 parts of the Eightfold Path. A Sutta analyzing the Eightfold Path can be found here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html

The First Precept: (link: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/pancasila.html )
1. Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami
I undertake the precept to refrain from destroying living creatures.

 

[crossfire]

Right Intention (or Right Resolve) and Right Livelihood are 2 parts of the Eightfold Path. A Sutta analyzing the Eightfold Path can be found here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html

This sutta does not describe wrong livelihood. My apologies. Here is a source for wrong livelihood:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.177.than.html
"Monks, a lay follower should not engage in five types of business. Which five? Business in weapons, business in human beings, business in meat, business in intoxicants, and business in poison.

"These are the five types of business that a lay follower should not engage in."​

More detail regarding Right Resolve can be found here:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-sankappo/

 

[LuisDantas]

Buddha died after eating pork/pigeon (I am not able to parse the words. Perhaps Buddhists can clarify) meat, obviously given to him in bhiksha. That is what tradition says. So, it was not prohibited. An authoritative source could only be a video recording of Buddha speaking to his disciples (Sāriputta, Moggallāna, Mahākassapa, Subhūti, Puṇṇa Mantānīputta, Mahākaccāna, Anuruddha, Upāli, Rāhula, Ānanda, sitting in the first row).

It is my understanding that the authenticity of that claim has been put in doubt.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Many vegans look like they could use a good steak, why is that.

Have you done a survey?

I have a friend who is vegan, he is the fittest and healthiest person I know.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

It is fanciful and unproductive to think people will give up meat.

That isn't what the thread is about. It's a discussion about the ethics of buying meat in a Buddhist context. Have you given this any serious thought? Have you actually read the thread?