Talk:Buddhist vegetarianism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Buddhism This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. Please participate by editing the article Buddhist vegetarianism, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

I removed this


According to a blog post at SuperVegan.com - http://supervegan.com/blog/entry.php?id=186 , Buddhist scriptures contain the following statements relating to vegetarianism:


from The Dedication of Merit—8th century

Let the animals be free from the fear of being devoured…
Let the bodhisattvas' wishes for the well-being of the world become reality. May everything that these protectors intend be realized for all sentient beings…
Let all the sufferings of the world come to an end in me…


from Against Animal Sacrifice—Dated Between Year 964 to 1032

What need to destroy so many lives in quest of rich and exotic flavors? People gorge themselves from cup and tray to the music of reed pipe and song, as butchered animals scream on the chopping block. Alas! Could anyone with a human heart be so insensitive as this? That the whole world engages in this without realizing its error, surely this is [an] example of something so painful that one weeps endlessly with grief?
When you know that the creatures on your tray come, struggling and squealing, from the chopping block, then you are making their extreme anguish your greatest delight. You would never be able to get them down, even if you tried to eat them. Is it not the height of insensitivity?
It is not appropriate to take life in order to make one's living. In the quest for food and clothing, some people may take up hunting, others fishing, others the slaughtering of oxen, sheep, pigs, dogs in order to make food and clothing, all with the thought of obtaining a regular livelihood. And yet, I find that persons who do not engage in such professions still have clothing and still have food to eat. By no means are they fated to die of exposure or starvation. To make one's living by taking life is something that in principle is condemned by the gods...There is no more certain means than this when it comes to planting the seeds for rebirth in the hells and evil retribution in lives to come. How could you face such pain and not seek a different livelihood?
I tell you people that, if you have no other means to make a living, it is far better to beg for your meals. To live by killing is no match for bearing your hunger and dying of starvation. How could you not restrain yourself?
I pray that all will refrain from taking life, and that household after household will observe vegetarian fasts. The buddhas will be filled with joy, and the myriad gods and spirits will extend their protection to you. Armed conflict will for ever cease; punishments may never need be applied; the hells will be emptied; and people will for ever depart from the causes that produce the ocean of miseries.

It could be integrated in the article, but this was not the proper way to do it. --67.68.29.55 17:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] "The Mahayana Buddha"?

I hate to just remove this, because I'm sure the author must have meant something, but "the Mahayana buddha" doesn't make any sense. I'd love to know what they meant originally. --- Charlie (Colorado) 03:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, in point of fact, I believe that phrasing originates with Tony Page who is a published author on this subject. So, I wouldn't agree that it doesn't make any sense. I don't have any strong opinion on whether this is the best wording we can come up with.—Nat Krause(Talk!) 03:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Hallo Charlie and Nat (thanks, Nat, for the support!). Well, I know what you mean, in a way, about the phrase "the Mahayana Buddha" - it is not very elegant; it is a bit clumsy. The problem is that there are people on Wikipedia who object if one simply says "the Buddha" when speaking of the Buddha in the Mahayana sutras, because they think that only the Buddha as presented in the Pali scriptures is the "real" Buddha - and that the Buddha found in the Mahayana sutras is bogus. So I coined the phrase, "the Mahayana Buddha", to try to satisfy this segment of Wiki editors. But of course the fact is that nobody knows for sure what the Buddha taught in detail - this ultimately rests on faith and one's own convictions - so I would prefer simply to say in all cases, "the Buddha". "The Mahayana Buddha" certainly has a meaning - which could also be expressed as "the Buddha in the Mahayana sutras" - but I can understand some people's not finding it very pleasing to the ear! I'll perhaps change it to "the Buddha in the Mahayana sutras" or something similar. All the best to you both. From Tony. TonyMPNS 19:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Some Questions with the Term and information

"Chinese Mahayanists often do not accept the Pali suttas as definitive when they conflict with the Mahayana sutras and consequently do not accept that Gautama Buddha, being a Boddhisattva Buddha, ever ate meat."

From my knowledge, Boddhisattva is different from Buddha, and hence, the merging of two terms seem to be an error. Furthermore, from my knowledge, Mahayana does accept that Buddha eat meat, though i am unable to cite any evidence for that. I did not edit the page due to my lack of reliable sources and supporting evidence. However, i hope that someone can clear this article up, thanks.

116.14.11.134 16:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Lim Suang

  • Hallo! I agree with you that the term Bodhisattva Buddha is odd: I've never heard it before. It seems superfluous, because every full, complete Buddha was at one time a Bodhisattva!

On the other point: what Mahayana Buddhists believe is one thing; what the Mahayana sutras teach - is another. There are a number of major Mahayana sutras that expressly portray the Buddha as saying meat consumption is wrong. I don't know of any Mahayana sutras in which the Buddha says that it is good to eat meat - or that he himself is a meat-eater. Of course, there may be such sutras - but I have never encountered them! Best wishes. From Tony. TonyMPNS 16:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Western Buddhists?

I know we're few in number, but should a note about buddhist practitioners in the west be added, since a very high number of us are vegetarian? This is english language wikipedia after all. Rupa zero 15:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Hallo Rupa zero. Thank you for your interesting comments. I have some sympathy with what you say. I think the difficulty is that Western Buddhists include lots of meat-eaters as well as vegetarians! Unless we have statistics that show that "most" Western Buddhists are vegetarians - it might just add to the general confusion! But of course you may well be right that a good many Western Buddhists are in fact vegetarian. Best wishes to you. From Tony. TonyMPNS 19:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Majority of Buddhists in the West are immigrants from Asia. Very small number of Westerners convert to Chinese Buddhism, which is the only sect which explicitly endorse vegetarianism.
  • Whoever wrote the above (dubious) comments, beginning, "the majority of Buddhists ...": would you please sign and date your posting here. Thanks! TonyMPNS 16:18, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Structure of the article

The present structure of this article is very unsatisfactory. The first section, "Views of different schools", and the second one, "Eating meat versus killing", do not deal with different aspects of the topic. There is no real difference between their contents, so the structure looks arbitrary and is not helpful. There is no good reason to keep them as separate sections. Instead I suggest four sections for this article: The first one on the Buddha's own diet as seen by neutral historians, and the other three on Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana diet rules and teachings, respectively. 89.59.29.90 16:56, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV/Citations

For a change, I came to a Wikipedia article as a consumer, rather than a producer. I didn't get much. This article is repetitive, insufficiently cited, and seems NPOV, and to have an axe to grind *against* vegetarianism.

I am not myself vegetarian, but was having a conversation with a friend who considers herself Buddhist, and asserts that Buddhism requires vegetarianism.

This article doesn't add as much to that discussion as I'd like to see.
--Baylink 22:53, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Hallo Baylink. Ha ha!! I agree with you! I sense that certain Buddhists have a bad conscience about eating murdered animals and are desperate to make people believe that even Mahayana Buddhism does not require vegetarianism (whereas the Buddha in certain key Mahayana scriptures insists that vegetarianism is in fact necessary). So I think your instincts about this article are right. Others will, of course, disagree with us! Best wishes to you. From Tony. TonyMPNS 23:54, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
  • What about discussing Dzogchen in the article? My impression is that Dzogchen practitioners are positively encouraged to eat meat! 90.205.92.47 (talk) 06:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Korean monks

All Korean monks and nuns who observe the Vinaya, that is to say, all those monks who are not part of such sects as the Cheon Tae Jong, will have received their Bodhisattva vows as will which strictly forbids the consumption of meat and the five pungent vegetables. It is wrong to say that most eat meat when outside of their monasteries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmlee369 (talk • contribs) 07:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)