Is Vegetarianism integral to a moral life.

[jashin]

Is there a god in partcular because woldn't he/she apose vilonce

 

[Azakel]

Humans have passed the animal stage of evolution. They are no longer like animals. They operate from a different dharma - human dharma. While it is OK for an animal to kill other animals for food, it is not OK for a human to do the same, because it goes against their dharma.

Fine, ok for you. I'm not a Hindu so I don't follow or worry about Dharma, sorry. It doesn't effect me, and don't try to say it does. Are ancestors understood what it meant to be one with nature, and to love it, and follow it. And they eat meat, and used the rest of the animal to live, it's what we did to live. Look at Ancient Pagans and the Native Americans and you'll see what I mean.

 

[want to be hindu]

Is there a god in partcular because woldn't he/she apose vilonce

Hi Jashin I dont believe that theres a God in heaven worried about if we eat meat or not. I am a vegetarian because I think It helps me to be a better man.Do you eat meat ?

 

[Not Bob]

Thats the problem. One acre of good farm land can produce 250 lbs of beef or 40,000 lbs of potatoes. Millions of people die from starvation all could be feed if people eat less meat.

I disagree. All could be fed if food was distributed where it needs to go. As an example, India is the second largest producer of food in the world (source: Food Industry,India,food processing industry,india,food and dairy processing,indian beverage industry,processed foods) and yet, as reported a mere two years ago, an estimated one in three children under 3 years old were underweight, a sign of malnutrition (source:Kids still starving in India's prosperity | Deseret News (Salt Lake City) | Find Articles at BNET)
So the problem isn't that there isn't enough food, it's that food isn't going where it needs to.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I don't preach vegetarianism either to my friends, though they do quiz me a lot about it. I recognise that everyone of us are on different levels of our spiritual evolution, and thus just as I cannot fault an animal that eats meat, likewise I cannot fault a human who is still closer in evolution to an animal. Perhaps this does sound like vegetarians are inherently better or at least more evolved, but that's the point of this thread isn't it?

There seems to be considerable irony in the fact that while many vegetarians have faith in the belief that it is religiously correct to not eat meat, there are equally many meat eaters who have faith that it is religiously correct to include meat in their diet, and each believe the other is the less evolved.

Suraj, compare your opinion and that of Paul from the New Testament.

Romans 14:2-4.

One person's faith allows them to eat anything, but the person who is weak in the faith eats only vegetables.
The person who will eat anything is not to despise the one who doesn't; while the one who only eats vegetables is not to pass judgment on the one who will eat anything; for God has accepted him.
Who are you to judge the servant off someone else?
It is his own master who will decide whether he succeeds or fails. And he will succeed because the Lord is able to make him succeed.

Since Paul was a Jew, he was being faithful to his religion.
Genesis 9:1-3.

God blessed Noah and his sons and said, "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth".
"And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered".
God told him, "I have placed them in yor power and they are yours to use for food, in addition to the grain and vegetables".

 

[Surya Deva]

Fine, ok for you. I'm not a Hindu so I don't follow or worry about Dharma, sorry. It doesn't effect me, and don't try to say it does. Are ancestors understood what it meant to be one with nature, and to love it, and follow it. And they eat meat, and used the rest of the animal to live, it's what we did to live. Look at Ancient Pagans and the Native Americans and you'll see what I mean.

Our ancestors also walked about naked, hunted animals, lived in mud huts, sacrificed humans and animals to nature gods, and had very short life spans because they either died in some tribal warfare or died of disease. I am sorry but I don't see how this lifestyle is something desirable. I would much prefer to live in a world that is civilised. The greatest sign of civility is when we extend care towards animals.

 

[Surya Deva]

There seems to be considerable irony in the fact that while many vegetarians have faith in the belief that it is religiously correct to not eat meat, there are equally many meat eaters who have faith that it is religiously correct to include meat in their diet, and each believe the other is the less evolved.

Suraj, compare your opinion and that of Paul from the New Testament.

Romans 14:2-4.
Since Paul was a Jew, he was being faithful to his religion.
Genesis 9:1-3.

Yes but which one is correct? I am not saying mine is an opinion. I am saying that it is based on an actual law of dharma that will make some of our choices have desirable outcomes and some not desirable. If one thinks devolution is undesirable, then eating meat is wrong. If it does not bother them, then fine go ahead and eat meat, but be prepared for the karmic effects.

 

[Azakel]

Our ancestors also walked about naked, hunted animals, lived in mud huts, sacrificed humans and animals to nature gods, and had very short life spans because they either died in some tribal warfare or died of disease. I am sorry but I don't see how this lifestyle is something desirable. I would much prefer to live in a world that is civilised. The greatest sign of civility is when we extend care towards animals.

Hey not all were like that thank you, so far you have nothing but put us done. First you call us less evolved, now uncivilized. What every go on and keep thinking you're so better then us. I don't care anymore.

And to add, animals were kill for more then just food. Clothing and tools were made from the skin and bones. And you go on about Karma and all this, my ancestor also no what it meant to ask nature before taking an animals life, and to show that animal respect of it had died, thank it, honoring it's spirit.

But I'm going to guess you don't really care to see it for that point of view at all.

 

[Surya Deva]

Azakel, I am not calling you anything. I am talking about a period in history which you mention, which was uncivilised and less evolved. If you consult any history book this will become very clear. In age where we construct tools from nanomaterials, compared to an age where we construct tools from animal bones, it wouldn't be inaccurate to say we are more evolved and civilised.

 

[Azakel]

Azakel, I am not calling you anything. I am talking about a period in history which you mention, which was uncivilised and less evolved. If you consult any history book this will become very clear. In age where we construct tools from nanomaterials, compared to an age where we construct tools from animal bones, it wouldn't be inaccurate to say we are more evolved and civilised.

There I can agree. It's when you said, the those of us that eat meat where more like animal and so less evolved then those who eat only meat. And then that because we who eat meat have to hurt other animal to live and so are less evolved.

I cannot fault a human who is still closer in evolution to an animal.

and then

The greatest sign of civility is when we extend care towards animals.

So yeah.....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes but which one is correct? I am not saying mine is an opinion. I am saying that it is based on an actual law of dharma that will make some of our choices have desirable outcomes and some not desirable. If one thinks devolution is undesirable, then eating meat is wrong. If it does not bother them, then fine go ahead and eat meat, but be prepared for the karmic effects.

Yes, who can say absolutely?

Perhaps what is most essential to a moral life is ultimately not concerned by what goes into it, but what comes out of it.

Though what follows does not make a judgment on morality based on the type of food one eats, it does make a good case for morality being a matter of 'inner' cleanliness rather than activity based on 'outer' ritual.

Jesus taught concerning eating ritually unclean food

Mark 7:18-20.

Jesus said to his disciples, "Don't you understand? Nothing that goes into the person from the outside really makes him unclean, because it does not go into his heart but into his stomach and then goes on out of the body."
And he went on to say, "It is what comes out of a person that makes him unclean. For from the inside, from a person's heart, comes the evil ideas which lead him to do immoral things, to rob, kill, lust, be greedy and do all sorts of evil things, deceit, indecency, jealousy, slander, pride, and folly - all these evil things comes from the inside, and it is this that makes him unclean."

 

[Surya Deva]

When you think of an enlightened and loving human, can you think of them killing animals at the same time? Can you imagine Buddha killing a horse and then gorging on its meat? It is a contradiction of loving and compassion, if your compassion is conditioned. You cannot say a Buddha is all loving and compassionate if they make exceptions for some.

Human dharma is not based on having some compassion, but having pure and unlimited compassion. This is why we have ideals, ideals are not limited, they are unlimited. Thus human compassion extends beyond ones family, beyond ones race, beyond ones gender, beyond ones caste, creed, sect and beyond ones species. Human compassion is all encompassing.
If you think civility and ones evolution is measured by the periphery of our love and compassion, then you will understand why somebody like a Buddha would be vegetarian.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

If you think civility and ones evolution is measured by the periphery of our love and compassion, then you will understand why somebody like a Buddha would be vegetarian.

Hey!, what happened to the wisdom of the warrior Arjuna, aka Suraj, and the battle of the Gita,....remember the advice from Krishna, ultimately it's an illusion?

 

[Azakel]

Okay, it seems like I'm an unevolved, uncivilized, unloving, uncompassionate, animal. Seem like I'm no more then a Wolf now(hell my birth name means Wolf).
*Howls*
^_^

 

[Surya Deva]

Though what follows does not make a judgment on morality based on the type of food one eats, it does make a good case for morality being a matter of 'inner' cleanliness rather than activity based on 'outer' ritual.

That belief is based on a very strict mind-body dualism that characterizes Western religious thought. However, in Western modern thought, mind-body dualism is outright rejected. It is rejected for good reason. If mind and body really are completely distinct, why is that affecting the body affects the mind? Why do drugs that are ingested alter ones mind? This dualism is no longer accepted in modern thought and we know in modern cognitive science, the mind and body are interacting all the time and affect each other. The food you eat indeed does have an affect on your mind.

In Ayurveda this knowledge is taken even further and food is categorized according to its essences with descriptions of what kind of effect each food has. Ayurveda explains most disease as just bad diets. The food we eat as per Ayurvedic science is nutrients not for our body for muscle growth and cell regeneration, but it also nutrients for our mind. In the Upanishad there is a description and an experimental account of how food affects our mind. A son, a great scholar in Vedic studies and with an excellent memory is instructed by his father(a sage) on the science of food and its effects on the mind. The father tells his son to do an experiment where he will not eat for several days and only subsist on water. The son does so, after a few days the son approaches his father and his fathers asks him to recite a section from the Vedas. The son is shocked when he cannot remember it and becomes worried that he's forgotten everything. The sage instructs him to have food, and then asks him for the recitation again, and yep you've guessed it, the son's memory had returned.

Ayurvedic sciences teaches that the food we eat is used by both the mind and the body. The gross portion(the nutrients) of the food we eat goes into our body, but the subtle essences of the food go into our mind. There is no mind-body dualism, the mind and the body are both materials, only the mind is a more subtle material. Thus Ayurveda is in complete agreement with Modern science.

So what one eats does indeed have an effect on the mind. Now non-vegetarians may not notice any effects on the mind, and thus say that meat is safe. However, the effects are subtle, and surely enough by eating meat one is obstructing their higher mind faculities. Hindus and Buddhists in the past did not eat meat, which is why they had vastly more sharper mental faculties. They had far longer attention spans. In contrast, those living in the West, were the opposite. Again there is a reason for this eating meat contributes to inertia in the mind, and thus why laziness, procrastination and depression are far more Western problems than Eastern problems.

 

[Surya Deva]

Hey!, what happened to the wisdom of the warrior Arjuna, aka Suraj, and the battle of the Gita,....remember the advice from Krishna, ultimately it's an illusion?

Nothing happened to that wisdom. Remember the Gita is anti-asceticism. It does say that everything is ultimately an illusion, but it still teaches that one needs to act and do their dharma, that even supreme godhead too has to act in the universe. This in fact was the whole point of the Gita to convince Arjuna to act.

 

[Surya Deva]

Okay, it seems like I'm an unevolved, uncivilized, unloving, uncompassionate, animal. Seem like I'm no more then a Wolf now(hell my birth name means Wolf).
*Howls*
^_^

If only you could ask the animal and gets its perspective. Most animals are endangered today because of peoples insatiable craving for meat of all kinds. No animals have been spared to satisfy their tastes. It does not affect them in the slightest when lobsters are boiled alive in front of it, or a gentle and humble animal like a cow is butchered. The barbaric things which are done to these animals do not affect the people. This includes(and I have had a personal account of this) ripping off the horns of a cow or marking them with hot irons. The human animal has far too much pride. But when its karma comes back on it, it cries foul. You will find that the reason there is so much war and killing on the planet is due to our treatment of the animals. As soon as we can extend our compassion to animals, you will find war too will come drastically down. There is reason why countries like India and Tibet have had a relatively peaceful history.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Hi i'm new,i'm a 10 year old boy.Is vegetarianism good?

Someone younger than me!! Oh my god!

Anyway, Jashin... Vegetarianism is a good practice, and works for many. If you were raised throughout life eating meat regurarly, then vegetarianism is not the BEST way to go. A lot of people find it very hard to adapt to a vege lifestyle after being omnivores their whole life. Vegetarianism brings down the chances of getting many cancers, heart attacks, heart failures etc. It also helps the environment too, meat production being the number one cause of global warming around the world. This is just what logic really says...

When it comes to human compassion, this is one of the main reasons people become/are vegetarians. Animals, just as humans can feel pain. I could not bring myself to being the reason an animal is butchered for its body. I do not think it is fair, or right. Man can get all the nutrients required to live a healthy life from a vegetarian lifestyle. The famous protein arguement it a myth. Vegetarians have many sources of getting sufficient protein for their body's needs. Such as dairy, soya etc.

(I am 13 by the way) Welcome to RF :yes:

 

[Surya Deva]

Even the notion, "If you meat all your life and become vegetarian, you will become ill" is a myth. I ate meat all my life, almost everday for 20 years, and I stopped eating meat in just one day. I've never looked back. Not even had any cravings or thoughts about meat. It is because my intention to stop eating meat was genuine, it was born out of my compassion.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Did not mean like that, Suraj. Many people who eat meat and stop suddenly and adopt a full vegetarian diet do beome ill. I think you may be special