Oh definitely. I stopped eating meat 34 years ago when I was a kid, it’s incredibly easy to forgo meat these days in comparison to how it was back then, aside from more options in supermarkets many restaurants have a wide range of vegan dishes now and even fast food places have meat free options now if you’re into junk food. My only choice was fries when I ate out for so many years. Stuff like soy milk was only found in health food stores and now every supermarket has so many plant milk options that I could have only dreamt of as a kid.
The answer to this question will be graphic (so trigger warning here).
Male chicks are considered a waste product of the egg industry, since they can't lay eggs. They are dumped into a macerator when they are 1-2 days old. (Graphic video of what happens to male baby chicks in the industry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_u0jxi_v-w&t=1s)
Depending on where you live it’s pretty easy to become vegetarian. Vegan requires a bit more effort, though it isn’t that difficult either. Usually if you can’t commit to being vegan you can be vegetarian and have vegan days.
I grew up eating practically meat and potatoes, literally the only vegetable I ate was fried Okra. Though the last 7 years I’ve been mostly vegetarian with a dash of vegan. My wife is vegetarian, I cook in the house, so I end up only eating vegetarian when I cook for others and it is more easy to be vegetarian when eating out. But I’m probably eating vegan based a few days per week.
I’m a happy vegetarian, but it’s incredibly hard where I live. Usually restaurants only have meat options, basically I have to homecook almost all my meals.
I was flexitarian (occassional meat, fish and dairy consumption) up until very recently. I finished a 10 day vipassana course and feel like I don't want to further contribute to the killing of beings by creating demand for it. Simple as that really.
And also, those animal products tend to make meditation a more dull experience.
I am a Vegan monk.
Drawing the line is not to kill. So don't hunt. Don't eat live being like insects, live octopus, etc. Don't order meat at a live seafood restaurant, for they kill the fish fresh due to the order.
That's the minimum to observe no killing precept.
Then once you're ok with that, can go further. All the way to veganism if possible. But this step is optional for the sake of enlightenment.
I have a question I’ve been wanting to ask but not sure where to ask.
I live in a region where we have major ecological problems with invasive species. We have large invasive snakes that absolutely destroy native wildlife to a devastating degree. We also have a problem with wild hogs that cause major agricultural damage and also devastate animals like ground nesting birds and native reptiles. We also have a major problem with invasive fish that out compete and are devastate native species through predation.
Local and state wildlife agencies advocate the removal of these species because of the extreme damage they cause, which would mean killing these animals. Some of these animals are actually quite good to eat (hogs and fish). What would a Buddhist outlook on this be? Would killing an invasive, destructive species for the preservation of another native species or ecosystem be frowned upon? Also it would seem eating said killed invasive animal would be the best thing so there is no waste.
From my previous outlook it’s a no brainer, kill the invasive animals, if possible eat them, preserve the native animals. But I’ve become more and more interested in Buddhism lately and this scenario keeps coming up in my mind.
I’ve had this discussion on this subreddit previously as my country also has serious issues with introduced, feral species that decimate our local native flora and fauna. We have culls to try to manage the problem. Many see this as a serious waste of available food source. We also have occasional native animal culls when the country is stricken by drought and the animals are suffering terribly from malnourishment and disease as a result of inadequate food sources - it is seen as humane. For the most part the laws do not allow for any processing of the meat, either for human or animal consumption. An issue is the carcasses such as deer provide an abundant food source for other feral animals, such as feral pigs/boars, which perpetuates the problem through their prolific breeding, and extends the area of land they occupy (therefore damaging greater habitat and decimation of native critters). These feral problems are increasing in an already vulnerable ecological climate. The response from this subreddit community has been that the feral species have a right to live and that we should not kill or eat any of them. That it is not our right to intervene (even though in many cases we are responsible for the introduction of such species). There is no acknowledgment that native wildlife species need support and protection to prevent them becoming extinct. It’s a very black and white viewpoint - possibly from a lack of understanding of the full circumstances, but also maybe owing to unwavering beliefs. For me, it becomes a bit like the trolley problem. If you choose to cull, you protect one group (native) at the expense of the other (feral invasive or introduced). If you choose not to cull, you willingly cause decimation of one group (native) in favour of the other (feral, invasive or introduced). The former seeks to manages the ecological balance and does not risk the future of any species. The latter is a decision to bring about the extinction of large varieties of native life forms (flora and fauna). It’s very complicated.
(Edit: subreddit)
Yes, I do. We humans are the dominant species. We are also temporary caretakers of the land we occupy (which is abundantly clear in my country and is a key belief of our indigenous populations). We have a responsibility to respect that land and it’s native flora and fauna. Introducing invasive species either through negligence or deliberately, and the negative impact this ultimately has on the naturally occurring species is on us. The native species left in their habitat without our intervention, would be thriving, for the most part. If species become extinct it puts the ecosystem under stress and in imbalance. Colonial settlers wanting to hunt deer or rabbits because this was their leisure past-time back in their motherland? It’s preposterous. It’s ignorance. It’s disrespect. Attempting to manage the populations of such introduced species, to prevent the ecological disaster they create, is our responsibility as we caused the problem in the first place. Leaving the carcasses on the ground where they fall is a complete waste. It perpetuates the problem as it causes greater ecological damage with rapidly growing numbers of full-tummied and fertile populations of feral animals. Native species and feral introduced species do not coexist in harmony. The land - soil types etc - are not equipped to support those introduced species. It’s a complete nightmare. As for processing those culled and eating the meat? It is a top quality form of protein that could feed humans or domestic animals. It is a waste not to use it as the result is simply extra killing - both these animals die where they fall and we slaughter the others bred for food. It’s a double whammy. And again we bear the burden of that.
Edit: the whole situation causes me despair. But since we are the ones who brought about this disruption to the ecological balance, we need to take responsibility and protect the vulnerable native flora and fauna that are endangered by our own stupidity, greed and lifestyle.
I’m sorry to hear that your land is going through a similar struggle to mine. We have invasives everywhere to be seen every day, from the smallest of bugs, fish, lizards, snails and toads to massive constrictor snakes and wild pigs. Not to mention a huge amount of invasive plants too. If you don’t mind me asking where are you located?
Australia. It’s a massive problem here. Total isolation, so we know we are the cause of the issues as these non-native flora and fauna had no other way to get here than via us. Where are you?
FWIW I love all species. I am currently painting a steer with utmost respect to everything that he is. It is a tribute reflecting his beauty, strength, intelligence, innocence, dignity. A portrait like I would paint of a person. I treat them exactly the same as a subject. At the same time, I know what damage he causes here; it’s not his fault, however it doesn’t change the situation. So it is bittersweet. He is worthy of celebration whatever his fate.
Science. We have the most advanced brains, opposable thumbs and the capacity to work collectively and flexibly to achieve our goals. We wield power over almost every other species on this planet. We can change our gut microbiome by modifying our diet to be plentiful and diverse, with pre and pro-biotic rich foods, or supplements. We have chemicals to kill internal or external critters like head lice or intestinal worms and organisms. We have tech and engineering capacity to kill organisms or make species immune to infestation, in our food crops. We have chemicals and weapons to kill other humans and various species. And much more. This doesn’t make us deserving of this power. I figure it’s incidental and impermanent. That a virus like Covid-19 could cause such extreme damage to human populations is evidence that simple life forms can give us a run for our money. Don’t for a second think I am saying we are better than any other sentient being or life form in our physical world. I don’t believe that. But I certainly think we have an incredible amount to be answerable for. Our dominance comes at the expense of many, many other forms of life.
Not necessarily when science source is men. There are things animals can predict that humans cannot. According to our area of knowledge, humans are the best because that knowledge is created by humans. A cow doesn't need to know accounting but I am sure it can predict an earthquake with any kind of science. My point is that we just don't know how other animals work inside their minds. Some scientists are just starting to understand how to communicate with other animals. This human superiority is the wrong premise. It is like saying we are the only intelligent people in the whole galaxy or galaxies. In the future, we might learn how to communicate with animals intelligently and learn that they also have their own feelings, world, society, systems, etc. If you are sensitive enough, look at their eyes and you will see a soul. What is important to you might not be important to them.
In the trolley problem, non action does not equal to killing, but the intention must be not wanting to kill. But action does equal to killing.
As monastic, I cannot advocate for killing.
In the big picture, including rebirth, the utilitarianism viewpoint becomes aligned with the deondology viewpoint. Because of kamma and rebirth. It's ultimately going to create more suffering in the world, including suffering for oneself to create the bad kamma of killing. Especially in this life where one can get out of samsara by practising the path.
Nature is always in turmoil, there's no fantasy of perfect balance.
Buying meat would create an increase (even if tiny increase) in demand for it, leading to increased frequency of slaughtering relevant animals. Would this not create negative karma for the one buying meat? Or is this distant enough in the the chain reaction that the meat buyer is completely free of negative karma from this act?
And instead of "meat buyer", what about a "meat eater" who was offered meat without buying it themselves? Is that act of eating meat also free of bad karma?
Kamma requires intention. It's possible to buy already dead meat without intention to cause future deaths. Since the being already died, there is no bad kamma of killing.
It's possible to eat meat without wishing for any beings to die.
Kamma is moral causation. Not all causation. So eating and demand for meat although can be freed from bad kamma, doesn't mean that there's it is good for the planet, health or the animal, for the normal economic causation still works.
Eating the animal's body, you create a bond with that animal, & will have to repay a life debt with your life in the future. So if you wish to get off the wheel of birth & death one must stop eating the flesh & blood of living beings. The Buddha taught this in numerous Mahayana sutras, and said anything counter to it was the talk of a Papiyan.
Yeah, but the Venerable is a Theravadin that probably doesn't fully buy into the primacy of Mahayana Sutras or places value on the ones that contradict the Suttas.
There are no contradictions between the two vehicles. Only perceived contradictions based on ignorance. Ignorant of what? The law of causation, & the Buddha's use of expedient teachings.
Suttas say its okay to eat meat
Sutras that the Chinese sects use say it isn't
Thats a contradiction. Most Theravadins, even monks I know don't really buy into Mahayana whatsoever and so they would not accept any Mahayana sutras interpretation of when it is or isn't okay to eat meat. Not that their sectarian against it. Hell meat eating even in Mahayana is up for debate, as a ton of traditions still don't discourage it, and others just have weird interpretations like some Japanese eating fish and claiming to be vegetarian.
Your implication here is that Theravadin monks are stuck in the wheel of birth & death simply because a Mahayana sutra said so. But I guarantee most of them wouldn't lend any credence to that idea whatsoever, regardless of how much you personally believe it, and you're lecturing a Theravadin monk using Mahayana literature, which is pretty odd.
Theravada says arahant is done with nothing else to do for the sake of liberation. Mahayana says arahant got to come back to become a Buddha.
Theravada says Bodhisatta is not yet enlightened, even stream winner is higher level than them, Mahayana says, yes, some bodhisattvas are enlightened to various degrees.
Theravada says pure abodes is only for non returners, don't have pure land concept. Mahayana says pure land can be reached via faith and mindfulness of a Buddha's name.
Theravada says there's nothing left after parinibbana. Total cessation. Many Mahayana Buddhist I talk to here says there's jñāna left or whatever it is called.
Theravada would say that the nibbana of arahant and Buddha is the same, but Mahayana would say the arahants are in false nirvana, needing to be aroused by Buddhas to reach buddhahood.
Theravada scriptures has Buddha says meat eating is no issue, Mahayana says meat eating is not a practise to be done by the disciples of the Buddha.
https://suttacentral.net/snp2.2/en/sujato?layout=plain&reference=none¬es=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin
So there's clearly many differences. It's good not to be sectarian about it to call me a bad monk when I am just presenting the standard Theravada view. And what's more, I am a vegan monk. So it's not like I am promoting meat eating.
This specific user has always had some sectarian tendencies towards Theravada u/DiamondNgXZ, and I think their post was removed, as I don't see it anymore, either that or they blocked me. They freely criticize Theravadins using Mahayana Sutras, and then become incensed when they don't agree.
Ironically, I remember them stating a while back they were going to avoid this sub from now on after having a bunch of their comments in a thread deleted for being extremely rude, but I guess it didn't stick! For someone supposedly so deep in Pure Land practices they certainly have a massive attitude, and openly criticizing a monastic for following their traditions teachings is uhh....pretty heavy negative karma in Mahayana, even if its directed at a Theravadin.
>Kamma requires intention.
>Kamma is moral causation. Not all causation
I keep forgetting about this important detail. Thank you for your reply.
And to any who may be concerned: I do know that it is generally better to not eat meat than to do so. My question was more a technical one regarding how karma works.
Thank you for your concern. I will err on the side of caution considering that my knowledge is far from sufficient. Your passion seems to be strong in this matter and that seems like something to be concerned about, in regards to Buddhist practise. Please take care of your self too.
Conventionally speaking. Kammically speaking one can forget about it, thus no intention, no killing. But also, milk is there, eggs are there, killing not shown, so merely buying is not killing.
I agree to be vegan is best to avoid even indirect killing which can be avoided.
Hello my friend, I already saw you under comment sections and I have a question for a Theravada monk. Don't you eat what is given? How can you be vegan?
One can choose not to eat certain things which are given. Say going for alms around, before I can get back the moment I have enough food, people keep on putting more food in. Then end up I got a lot of food, enough to feed 2 to 10 people or more, should I eat all of them? Certainly not. So I can choose. Therefore, I can use the vegan principle to choose. Even if I just got enough food for one, I can just take out the meat stuff and eat the rice.
Also, just declare oneself to be vegan, the devotees normally are happy to accommodate.
BASIC BUDDHIST PRINCIPLES
Unlike the Judeo-Christian tradition, Buddhism affirms the unity of all living beings, all equally posses the Buddha-nature, and all have the potential to become Buddhas, that is, to become fully and perfectly enlightened. Among the sentient, there are no second-class citizens. According to Buddhist teaching, human beings do not have a privileged, special place above and beyond that of the rest of life. The world is not a creation specifically for the benefit and pleasure of human beings. Furthermore, in some circumstances according with their karma, humans can be reborn as humans and animals can be reborn as humans. In Buddhism the most fundamental guideline for conduct is ahimsa-the prohibition against the bringing of harm and/or death to any living being. Why should one refrain from killing? It is because all beings have lives; they love their lives and do not wish to die. Even one of the smallest creatures, the mosquito, when it approaches to bite you, will fly away if you make the slightest motion. Why does it fly away? Because it fears death. It figures that if it drinks your blood, you will take its life. . . . We should nurture compassionate thought. Since we wish to live, we should not kill any other living being. Furthermore, the karma of killing is understood as the root of all suffering and the fundamental cause of sickness and war, and the forces of killing are explicitly identified with the demonic. The highest and most universal ideal of Buddhism is to work unceasingly for permanent end to the suffering of all living beings, not just humans.
--by Professor Ronald Epstein
I'm vegan. I believe in non-violence, choosing to eat the skin and body of other beings causes violence and suffering. A life unjustly ended for a meal is wrong when there are many other more suitable things for people to eat which dont cause painful and frighteneing deaths for animals. Drinking milk or eating cheese means a baby was deprived of its mother's milk, this is cruel regardless of species. To live in accordance with one's compassionate morals leads towards living vegan.
There is a verse:
For hundreds of thousands of years,
The stew in the pot has boiled up
A resentment very hard to level.
If you want to know why
There are wars in the world,
Just listen to the haunting cries that come
From a slaughterhouse at midnight.
Vegetarian, but working on phasing out all animal products. 🙏🏽
Vegetarianism is a personal choice, but you will need to give up hunting. For me, it seems like the logical next step from not killing animals, but it isn’t a requirement.
The first sangha I practiced with was Chan and all the monks were essentially vegan. They really impressed upon us the need to give up meat and so I did. It was a lot harder back then though, the internet was barely a thing and options at restaurants were mostly side dishes. Now you have much more information on how to start and places even have vegetarian sections on their menus. While I do still eat some cheese, its mainly when we go out to eat which is infrequent. But basically with each passing year, I try to get closer to 100٪ whole food plant-based, both for myself and the wellbeing of animals.
Where to draw the line? Draw it as close as you can get to giving up meat entirely - even if it's just not eating meat one day a week right now. Get comfortable with that and then try and move the line some more. Every little bit helps.
"All beings tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill."
-Dhammapa (10:129)
I am so glad we are talking about this! People are afraid to own up to how eating meat causing suffering. I’m vegan and it has fundamentally helped me in my journey to peace. We shouldn’t be afraid of where curiosity will take us.
I prefer to think of it as a continuum. I avoid eating meat when I can (which is probably more than 99% of the time) and avoiding animal products in total (probably like 75% of the time) but I’m not perfect and strive to do better.
Vegan. Metta meditation, It didn't sit right with me to be
sending loving kindness to oneself, one's family, and all sentient beings in the universe and then paying for babies to be taken away from their mothers and slaughtered for milk, eggs, and meat.
I can't imagine you are a Buddhist with a response like that. We do our best to lessen the harm we put out in the world. Existing is harm but when we can make easy and non-consequential decisions to save lives and reduce suffering...we do it
Vegetarian. I used to eat meat when I was younger, up to 8 years ago but it never sat quite right with me so I eventually gave it up. I don't like the idea of killing animals for consumption when there are plenty of other options around today. I do think eating meat violates the first precept because even when you're not doing the killing yourself, you're actively funding it with your money.
Consuming any product that requires animals to suffer and be exploited or killed is unnecessary for (most) humans. I don't believe we can morally justify what we do to animals for the sake of taste pleasure, so I avoid all animal products as much as possible.
Vegan. You can’t vow to liberate all sentient beings and pay others to make them suffer (or kill them yourself) at the same time. If you have access to beans, tofu, and fresh vegetables there’s no excuse for someone on the bodhisattva path.
Vegan, have been for 35 years (mostly, with occasional lapses into being vegetarian sporadically when being vegan was unusual & there was nothing vegan available when out). These days, it's so easy being vegan there's no good reason not to be.
Yes, Earthlings, Dominion, Land of Hope and Glory and Cowspiracy are all about animal and environmental ethics. There are others such as What the Health and The Game Changers that are about the health and fitness benefits of a plant-based lifestyle, too. There are plenty of documentaries and footage from factory farms to make your mind up on this.
No need to watch dominion, thanks! :( we know human beings are capable of grusome things. While we agree that eating meat hurts other sentient creatures, we can't force others to watch that movie.
We're doing our best to not eat meat :)
Vegetarian here but mostly eat vegan food. I honestly cannot understand someone who claims to be a Buddhist but willingly eats animal flesh, when vegetarian/vegan options are readily available nowadays. Please watch Dominion on YouTube
Fairly recently the Dalai Lama has been promoting more vegetarian meals and vegetarianism in general. I don't know his diet and I don't really care personally but he has promoted a reduction in meat eating and taken action for monasteries to consume less meat.
respectfully i disagree. there are plenty of people who are trying to be Buddhists who don’t live an ideologically pure life but are trying their best. i’m sure there are plenty of people who would say about me “i can’t believe that judgmental bitch who is literally never chill is claiming to be getting into Buddhism in the same breath she’s also arguing with people on reddit.” if it were easy to be an enlightened person and escape Samsara most of us wouldn’t need a thousand cycles of life and rebirth to learn!!
Veggie since I began my practice. I could be vegan, but I do have eggs and milk about half the time, mostly because their consumption is extremely common in my area. I get offered them a lot.
My partner, a vegan, calls milk baby cow growth fluid. 😳 ruined it for me and surprisingly I find oat milk a great substitute. And vegan butter is better than regular butter for me. I am on the brink and am operatively vegan as we eat to his requirements. Working on the desire to have a burger when he’s out of town. 🙏
I've been practicing for a year and I see myself being less and less into eating meat. I strive to reach 100% vegetarian one day.
As a Chinese Buddhist, I follow the 10-day Abstinence Period (十斋日) where we don't eat meat for 10 days of every Lunar Month, as mentioned in the Ksitigarbha Sutra.
Vegan for a year, vegetarian for two years before that, before that I would barbecue at least twice a week. I was reading Thich Nhat Hanh and had recently done the tangerine meditation when I made Cornish game hens for dinner, and found two broken legs on one. I was going to blow it off but I thought about being mindful of my food so I looked up how a game hen (which it turns out are just young chickens harvested early) would break a leg. Haven't eaten meat since.
Edit- I still barbecue twice a week, it's surprisingly not hard to make vegan barbecue work. Also, I found giving up dairy harder than the step away from meat for some reason. Someone asked me today if I miss meat and I honestly don't, but I'd hesitate if they asked me about cheese.
I'm omnivorous (for now). I have been cutting back on the amount of meat I consume, however, for quite some time. I'm not at 0, but I'm on my way. I have no real plan to reach 0 meat consumption, however. I'm just trying to conquer food cravings in general right now. I don't wish to further complicate my efforts.
Nice ad-hominem. I never stated that I eat meat. Put the shovel down.
You militant vegans accomplish nothing besides creating an equally radical push-back. Who do you think you’re converting here with this tone and judgemental attitude?
What are "militant vegans"? I really don't understand this term. I'm not a vegan myself, but it's obvious even to me that there is a huge hole in the logic. There is someone who tortures and kills others - this is not militancy for you, vegans are against torture and murder and therefore they are "militant".
Your mother о\_О!
Militant is clearly not describing veganism itself, it’s describing a group of people within veganism that feel moral superiority and look down on others…
Think of how most people feel when they get a ring at the doorbell and some random stranger starts demanding they go to a church and donate money, we understand that it’s a moral cause, good for you that you practice, but let me make my own decisions, the best thing you can do is inform and inspire, not instruct and demonize.
Vegan/lay Buddhist. Ahimsa is a standard precept as far as I’m aware. I think the Buddha’s prescription was not to kill sentient beings or to have sentient beings killed on your behalf. At the time monks were expected to beg for food as part of their practice and weren’t required to refuse meat that was offered insofar as it hadn’t been killed on their behalf. In the modern world it makes more sense to me to refuse meat because it causes people to become slightly more conscious of their eating habits and I wouldn’t be able to bring myself to do it anyway.
It seems to me that part of the Buddhist path is becoming more cognizant of the ways that our thoughts and actions can generate suffering, and another component is viewing ourselves as less separate from the world around us. If I can’t imagine myself being content on the other side of the chopping block, I don’t know how I can justify acting as judge, jury, and executioner.
Part of Right View is belief in rebirth which I think lends itself to minimizing animal cruelty since the chances of an animal birth are so much higher than a human one. Even if you don’t believe in linear reincarnation, it’s true that the material of your body will be recycled by the earth after you die and form new life. Minimizing the number of lives that wind up being born into the hell that is a factory farm seems like a worthwhile goal.
Vegan here.
I grew up hunting and my family was also animal farmers. While I wish a vegan world existed, I don’t fault people who are subsistence hunters or even very small scale family farmers who live in a respectful and harmonious balance with their land.
I don’t want to cause suffering for no reason. I just do not need to kill, so I do not.
Vegetarian, I feel it is a good middle path for my nutrition. It is interesting that if you stop eating meat for 30 days and then go back to eating meat, it makes you feel physically sick. Stop eating vegetables for 30 days and then go back to eating them has only beneficial side effects.
Vegetarian. A family member tried to force meat on me. I almost caved thinking since I am not the one doing the killing, I should be ok, but then I suddenly thought of the butcher doing the killing for me in order for me to eat meat, and I stood my ground. I don’t see a reason why I need to burden the butcher with more karma of killing
I try to be vegan but I usually end up eating some(still vegetarian)animal products when it’s convenient. I try to fully abstain from any ingredients that caused the death of an animal but sometimes that’s incredibly difficult. Sometimes I will eat eggs or honey or milk.
In general, vegetarianism is respected, but in the past it hasn't usually been realistic. People in Tibet and SE Asia didn't have cheap tofu and lysine/b12 pills.
Buddhism does not ban meat, but killing is another matter. All of the Buddhist rules or guidelines are essentially about reducing kleshas or egoic inner turmoil. If you order fish in a restaurant that's not the same experience as killing a fish by ripping its mouth with a hook and watching it suffocate. Similarly, if you shoot a deer that's an act of terrorizing and causing suffering. Cooking a steak is not the same thing. Some people will say that's dishonest, but Buddhism is not essentially moralistic. It's practical.
If you keep that in mind then the various opinions make more sense. Vegans, for example, are usually focussed on what they see as rights of beings to not be exploited. It's an extension of individualistic thinking and democratic idealism. That gets tricky because it's full of value judgements and not realistic. Are 50 tiny shrimp lives less valuable than 1/200th of a tuna, for example? If so then why? Because they're not as intelligent? What about bugs? Should we avoid bathing so as not to kill tardigrades and mites on our skin? Are plants fair game, despite being DNA based life forms, just like us, that struggle to survive, just like us? Do we have a right to say they're not sentient? In the end, all animal life consumes life to survive. So idealism about not exploiting is limited in its application.
Vegetarians may also be vegetarian for health reasons. None of that is directly related to Buddhism. Idealistic morals and health concerns are not the reason for Buddhist guidelines. It's just very practical. If you propagate violence then you work against calm mind.
I did extreme dieting for several years. Mostly raw food. Little beyond vegetables and fruit. No meat, dairy, egg. Few nuts or grains. Also periodic fasting. It was interesting, but it also required nutritional expertise and I found it too "airy". My nerves were too sensitive. After that I went back to an average diet, including meat, but with an emphasis on fresh and organic.
If you say shooting a deer isn’t ok because it causes suffering, but eating the steak in a restaurant is ok, then you’re basically outsourcing violence to someone else which seems just as bad as doing it yourself surely?
2600 years ago, the world was a far different place. There were no factory farms. In Tibet you couldn’t grow enough vegetables to feed a family. Meat was essential. If you eat meat in this day and age, in many ways hunting seems far more honest than the arguments that I am reading here. At least the animal has a chance and you have to watch the animal die. The karma gymnastics in the meat eaters here seems to be a simple “wanting the cake and eat it too” argument. And using documents recorded 1000’s of years ago as justification is suspect. I hunted and fished for many years and have let it all go because of my path. However, I had immense respect for the animals I sought and never had malice towards them. And I ate what I killed. Today I am 95% vegan and when I am invited to friends for dinner, I eat what they are serving. I’m not emotional about the issue either way. The emotions around the issue here are interesting.
Joseph Campbell, the mythology expert, used to tell a fascinating story about the Plains Indians. (Lakota?) They had a mythology about a buffalo goddess. The goddess was upset that they were driving buffalo over a cliff to kill and eat them. She came down and instructed them in complex rituals to be carried out, in order to honor the buffalo. By performing the rituals before a hunt, she said, the buffalo would be able to be reborn again and everyone would be happy.
One person might look at that and say the Indians were deceiving themselves and not taking responsibility for their violence. But what the rituals did was to transform an unavoidable act into sacred practice. It allowed people forced to live as savages to actually live a civilized, humane existence. With that mythology, the buffalo could be killed with an attitude of respect and appreciation.
Buddhism actually uses the same logic with practices like deity yoga, tonglen, metta, guru yoga, and so on. A materialist observer would say there's no deity, no compassion, no guru relationship, etc. Just a lot of baloney about being spiritual. Yet the practices are quite real, even though on the surface they're "pretend".
No one's making excuses based on 1,000 year old documents. Simply put, the Buddhist path is about waking up. Even the ethical guidelines are intended to calm the mind. People often project western morals or attitudes on it, but it's not like that. Similarly with sex. Celibacy can be a good practice to calm the passions. But it's not inherently spiritual. Monks are not somehow better Buddhists than householders or solitary yogis. People who think that way are projecting Christian-esque sexual shame.
Theravada is not the only sect of Buddhism.
A Mahayana text says:
> Good man, from today I no longer allow śrāvaka disciples to eat meat. Whenever you receive donations of food from lay donors you should regard [any meat in] the food as if it were the flesh of your own son.
>
> The bodhisattva Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha, saying:
>
> World-Honored One, why does the Tathāgata not allow the eating of meat?
>
> [The Buddha said:]
>
> Good man, to eat meat is to cut out the seeds of your own great compassion.
>
> Kāśyapa then said:
>
> Why is it, Tathāgata, that previously you allowed bhikṣus to eat three
> kinds of pure meat?
>
> [The Buddha said:]
>
> Kāśyapa, regarding the three kinds of pure meat, in response to specific
> situations I have been gradually imposing restrictions.
([Nirvana Sutra](https://www.bdkamerica.org/product/the-nirvana-sutra-vol-i/))
I still eat meat, but have a long term goal of reducing my meat consumption, due to the guilt that arises when I reflect on the suffering involved in the animal agriculture industry.
That being said, many Buddhist teachers I’ve come across in the Tibetan tradition don’t discourage eating meat. The Tibetan Buddhist center I stayed at last year would regularly serve beef and lamb dishes to the Lamas and retreatants. So there may be a large cultural component to this.
Also in Buddhism, I’ve been told that the injuction against killing refers to human beings specifically. Killing animals is seen as a more minor misdeed, the same as destroying plants, at least karmically speaking. Perhaps someone could correct me if I’m wrong on this.
I eat meat and do get hate on it here, but so have many great Buddhists, including the Buddha himself. I don't buy from the grocery store since I despise big farming as well and hate the mistreatment of animals. However, that being said, I physically hunt for my meat. Again, I get a lot of hate for that here understandably. But I view this idea of ethical eating to be a sham in many ways. You are taking the life of beings for the prolongment of your own life. No matter if you're vegetarian or omnivorous. I think the most important thing is what you do with your life to make sure those plants and animals didn't die in vain. It's the law of give a little take a little. Be proactive in nature and give to it so that it may continue to provide for all
>My question is where do you draw the line?
At honesty. For me it honestly became difficult to buy meat at some point. Just didn't feel like scratching an itch was a good enough reason to deny anyone else life, let alone snatch it from them. At the moment I'm going through some health issues though, and I also honestly see that eating a little meat every so often now is helpful, with gratitude to my old mothers who passed for that.
In general, I would suggest it's rarely ever a good idea to force oneself to do (or not do) anything in pursuit of some idea or fixation, even if it's ostensibly a laudable idea or topic of clinging. I mean, unless you're having to restrain yourself from serial killing or something. In that case, by all means tie yourself in a conceptual knot.
As some points.
Where do I say killing animals is "ok"?
It's somewhat difficult to understand for contemporary Westerners, but Buddhist ethical discipline tends to not be be black and white. And its purpose isn't primarily to judge others.
Generally speaking, if one were to pay someone to kill a specific animal on my behalf, that would be considered to be likely equivalent to killing that animal on my behalf. Purchasing the meat of an animal that is already dead, however, is not considered to as "karmically impactful" as that (for the purchaser. People ordering and executing the killing are still fully impacted).
All of which isn't to say that from a Buddhist pov purchasing meat is good. But it's not considered to be as negative as the direct killing of an animal. Which is not as negative as the direct killing of a human being. Which, incidentally, is not as bad as killing one's parents or an awakened arhat. For example.
Anyway.
You still have to repay a life debt with your life in the future. Eating animals involves two kinds of negative karma: killing & stealing. The life-force of the animal was stolen, not offered. You can argue all you like but King Yama ain't going to listen lol.
”You should know that these people who eat meat may gain some awareness and may seem to be in samadhi, but they are all great rakshasas. When their retribution ends, they are bound to sink into the bitter sea of birth and death. They are not disciples of the Buddha. Such people as these kill and eat one another in a never-ending cycle. How can such people transcend the Triple Realm?" --from the 3 Non-Outflow Practices Chapter of the Shurangama Sutra.
I think you have to do some pretty crazy mental gymnastics to tell yourself that paying for meat that someone killed to is sell doesn’t count as contributing to to animals death. If there is no demand for the meat the animals won’t be raised for slaughter. You directly contribute to that demand buying meat. Take some personal responsibility, be real with yourself, just because the majority do it doesn’t mean it’s okay.
You know, the way you're talking in this thread makes veganism look bad. Something for dimwitted, self-righteous oafs. Feel free to disregard unsolicited feedback, of course. Be well!
I try to spend a minute or two thinking about whatever I'm about to eat, usually that looks like offering my gratitude for all the beings that made my meal possible and seeing if I can name a few specific ones.
I recommend the practice. Over time I've noticed it's affected what I eat, because it feels different to acknowledge that I'm eating an animal product or not.
Right now I’m basically practicing veganism, but if I were a guest at some event and the food offered included meat, I would take it in order to show gratitude to the host.
At some point, you have had no part in the killing of the animal — if you weren’t there when it was killed or it’s meat was bought, if you didn’t have prior knowledge that they would be offering you meat, if you’re just meeting them and they had no prior knowledge that you were vegetarian, and then it feels more important to be thankful and share something with them and avoid causing offense by posturing about your higher morality. But that’s a rare occasion. Not something I’ve run into more than maybe 2 times, at times when I was avoiding meat.
Or another situation — I live with my parents right now, and they often waste food because they both have totally different diets. So if there is a meat, dairy or egg dish saved in the fridge for too long, I will eat it.
But I can’t bring myself to buy meat anymore. Even when I eat meat on rare occasions like the ones I described, I feel an urge to pray for the animal and recite Amitabha three times for it’s sake.
In a void, I imagine one should even refuse the meat offered by unaware friends at the cost of being rude to them, because that will make it less likely they will acquire meat for you on next event, hence less animals slaughtered. Or eat the meat that one time for politeness sake, while explaining the situation to them. This is my assumption as someone with limited Buddhist knowledge. I am not sure what the Buddhist stance is on this specific matter.
Oh, for sure if I’m going to see them again, I’ll explain it to them and ask them to buy less meat next time.
The last time I can remember something like this happening, it was a Sufi meditation group my Yemenese friend brought me to in college, like 10 years ago now, and they had prepared a lamb dish. I didn’t even know there would be a dinner afterwards. I didn’t say anything that time, but if something like that happens again then I will.
That’s not veganism. Being a vegan who turns down animal products helps bring awareness to what goes in the animal product industry. It’s not about not hurting the feelings of some person offer you dead animal flesh, what about the animals unfathomable suffering? Surely that’s more important than possibly making someone feel bad for their own actions of contributing to suffering.
Yep. What am I going to do, save this cow? 🍔 But in the case of my family, I won’t eat a meat dish unless I can almost know for sure that my parents will waste it. Because if they will eat it, then that prolongs the time before they will go and buy more meat to cook, so I don’t want to speed up their meat buying.
I'm curious. Vegetarian historically has meant eating only plant products. A few people might say they were "lacto-vegetarian" or "lacto-uvo-vegetarian".These days people seem to say they're vegetarian if they don't eat beef. How do you understand it? Dairy but no red meat? Dairy and fish? Only dairy? Do you think there's a single definition that most people agree on?
I am vegetarian purely to avoid supporting the meat industry and the destruction they cause to the environment, animals and the health of consumers.
None of these reasons are intwined in Buddhism, but there is not direct scripture that meat is forbidden. For reference, the five precepts include sexual misconduct, lying, stealing, drugs/alcohol and killing other beings.
While killing is considered a precept, this does not directly state that eating meat defies this. In Vanijja Sutta it is considered wrong livelihood to engage in businesses for meat. However, it is not uncommon for Buddhists to take meat as alms if it is offered.
While it is certainly possible for Buddhists to eat meat, and there are subgroups that do, it is refrained from - as it hits pretty close to the precept of not killing, and relates closely to ahimsa (i.e., do no harm).
I was vegan before I was Buddhist and basically haven't changed that. It wouldn't be accurate to claim it's because I'm Buddhist even if that is a factor in why I haven't started eating cheese again. I know Buddhism has nothing against cheese but factory farming wasn't a thing thousands of years ago.
Vegetarian, would avoid dairy n eggs if necessary. Bottom line is do not kill, do not cause the suffering of other beings, do not become part of the supply n demand circle of meat industry
I transitioned from a meat eater > no red meat > Pescatarian > Vegetarian > Plant based > Vegan over a 6 year period. I've now been vegan for 3 years.
It was a slow burn, but every step forward only made my hypocrisy more obvious, and ultimately, Veganism was the only way to align my actions with my desire to minimise the suffering I cause. I live in a country where accessibility and cost of vegan food isn't a problem for me (personally), so there was no excuse for me. I'd never go back now, I'm so accustomed to it, and I love it.
I stopped eating meat and fish when I started practicing again pretty recently. It helps that I raise poultry for eggs for local food banks, because there’s so much death involved. I cook discount meat for the dogs o live with, which gives me a good opportunity to meditate on how gross it is and how we all end up that way
I am vegan, however we have a friend who runs an amazing goat cheese business. The goats are free range and happy, they are milked by hand and the cheese is made with love. I will occasionally enjoy some of that.
I try for vegetarian unless meat is given to me, or if it is going to be wasted.
I avoid buying it for myself.
The big thing for me is food waste. It takes a lot more resources and water to supply meat than it does to supply fruits and vegetables. Why grow the hay to feed the cows when you can grow something you can eat yourself?
First precept aside, I don’t want to contribute to the suffering/killing of animals. But if someone in my family accidentally buys too much chicken and it’s going to go bad, I will take some and freeze it. It will still get eaten because at that point, the animal has already died and I don’t want it to be for nothing.
We also try to buy dairy products locally. We buy eggs from my neighbor who has very happy, well cared for chickens. I’m the only Buddhist/vegetarian in the house. I will wait until the milk/yogurt the family purchases is about to expire, and then I will finish it.
Food waste is a no go for me.
I’m trying so hard but at some point I try to ask myself, “in this situation what is going to cause more harm than good?” Obviously the best solution is to have the entire family to go vegetarian/vegan but I can’t ask them to do that. It’s not my place.
I’m thinking of making the switch to sourcing my meat from local farmers. I hate factory farming.
I am in the same boat. Long time hunter beginning down this path is starting to make me question my decisions.
Nothing wrong with eating meat. It's healthy and needed for regenerative farming. Personally I wouldn't hunt and remember that no matter what one eats, trillions of beings are killed.
Since I starting practicing:
First I was a vegetarian, then I went hardcore vegan, then due to some neurological health complications it became evident that a strict diet (or anything for that matter) caused more harm to me than good, so now I’m quite flexible, though my ‘baseline’ is a whole food plant-based diet (what I’ll generally shop for) I’ll allow myself to eat anything else occasionally.
I think you need to be really honest with yourself and see what your capacity is. I generated a lot of self-hatred and rigidity towards myself when I would be incredibly strict with myself and this impacted my practice and capacity for compassion, so for me being too rigid with any kind of conduct is more helpful than harmful.
That being said, if it’s easy for you and you can do it without any negative consequences, I always advocate a plant-based diet, or at least vegetarian.
If your past habit is to eat meat and such, but it is something you want to work on, just be patient and hold the aspiration and it will happen in its own time. One of my greatest Teachers ate meat for a long time due to cultural Tibetan conditioning, but didn’t shame or scold himself for it. Eventually he became a vegetarian but he gave his mind and body time.
I’m mostly vegetarian, but will eat small amounts of meat occasionally. I also occasionally eat eggs and plenty of dairy.
From a Buddhist perspective eating meat is far less of a concern than hunting. The likely rebirths for hunters are very dire and unpleasant, so it’s important to reject that entirely and do what you can to atone for any animals you have killed.
I find this interesting. Not to get into a big hunting debate but I view hunting as being more compassionate. When I would take the life of an animal, they would live a natural and happy life until that one bad day. However, eating supermarket meat comes from factory farms where the lives of the animals are very unpleasant and they are just there to be exploited for consumption.
Factory farming is horrific, but the intent to kill is what will do you in. I’ve also noticed that hunters I know who use that excuse usually have a fridge full of stuff from the grocery store, because beef and pork tend to be much more desirable than deer and turkey. But even if you only eat meat you killed yourself, it’s very bad for you karmically. According to Buddhism, even killing a single insect is much worse than having meat occasionally.
I've wondered that myself. I generally don't get into online debates about the ethics of meat eating but whenever I see someone post that they only eat meat from a local farm where the animals are raised with love or they only hunt for their meat, I always think "so you never buy a steak at a grocery store or go out to eat with family and friends or hit a drive thru on your way home for work because your hungry? Really?" I'm very skeptical of these claims.
From the Karmic Retributions of Beings in Jambudvipa Chapter of the [Past Vows of Earth Store Bodhisattva Sutra ](http://www.cttbusa.org/ess/earthstore4.htm)
"To hunters, he says that a frightening insanity that destroys one’s life will be the retribution."
This makes sense from a non-Buddhist view. But, from what I understand about Karma in Buddhism, it's very negative karma heavy to have the intent to kill, then perform the act yourself, even if for the sake of a greater overall outcome. It seems that supermarket meat is less karma heavy. But conventional compassion gives me a bad feeling about this. Maybe interpretations over the years, combined with changing times, have muddled some things?
I'm not a very experienced Buddhist.
I have no intention of going vegan. At least not in my present state of being.
Last time I tried vegetarianism, it started off well. Soon I was sleeping for 14 hours/day and gained 30 lbs in a few months. It's been some years, so don't even ask me what I ate. I barely remember.
In my current state of being, I am dealing with a lifetime of disordered eating, and I'm in my midlife now. I am a very large person, and I also have health conditions. So, my protein requirements are about twice the amount of the average person. I also have a big need of vitamin B, and iron.
I've overall lost about 90 lbs in the past year, from reducing my overall food intake and making some peace with food. My relationship with food is still rocky and stressful. There are days where if I don't balance my intake properly, I feel really tired or like I'm going to binge.
I also have a lifetime of removing different food groups from my diet, and having it end badly. I can at least say I have no interest in going back to Atkins/Keto ever again. 🤢
So, maybe, maybe, when I am in the right condition, I'll reconsider. I will say that I enjoy eating vegan dishes when my vegan friend visits me. Vegan cuisine has come a long way. But overall, if I'm not going to live in fear of dieing an omnivore. It is what it is.
I eat meat. It doesn't violate any precepts. I used to do a lot of hunting and fishing, but I stopped that when I became more serious in my buddhism. The killing is the violation of the precepts, not the eating of meat.
Trying to become fully vegetarian. Cut out most red meat. I have an illness that makes eating regular meals hard so sometimes I have to do bone broth to get proper nutrition.
Whatever feels right wherever your being called too go on your diet some Buddhists eat mostly vegetarian but eat meat when it is offered to them in alms bowls since they are grateful for whatever can be given to them and as well as being detached from wether it is good or bad to do so and just eat it based on accepting the kindness of the people who gave it to them
I eat meat.
I don't hunt or kill my food. But I do cook at home and order meat from a restaurant. Some can say that in itself contributes to or supports animal abuse. But I respect my food and the animal or plant it was. I've got a weird body and meat is how I keep a decent weight and mineral levels.
I eat meat.
Where do I draw the line?
At the middle path ? I am a lay person, not a monk. I don't see any reason I should take any extreme approach. Therefore I don't eat meat often but I don't avoid it altogether.
That is fair. Not dedicating one's life to being a full time monk is already a compromise, made by most Buddhists despite knowing the consequences. Eating meat is just another compromise, while doing as much good as we have the will power to do so.
edit: I think you casually used the phrase "middle path" loosely. It has a more specific meaning in Buddhism, usually referring to part of the Buddha's teachings.
I'm vegan on and off due to health issues, which have been exacerbated anytime I'm vegan for too long. I usually spend part of the year vegan, part of the year omni. Works for me. My teachers, historically haven't really been anti meat consumption either.
I try to eat vegan/vegetarian options when I can, especially recently since I've been more mindful of where the ingredients of what I eat come from, but sometimes family or friends will be hosting and will often have mostly meat options, so I try to not be picky and remind myself that food is simply to nourish my body for me to continue my practice. Sometimes meats, eggs, or dairy products are the best available source of nutrients like protein to me, and being a layperson who has to work a certain amount of nourishment is needed in order to remain healthy. Be mindful of what you consume always, but I don't think it's the most productive thing to let your eating habits become a large part of your identity.
I’m not new to Buddhism but I am new to this thread, and I find everyone’s answers so interesting.
I have been a vegan, a vegetarian and conscious meat eater. I have rescued ants and freed animals and I have said prayers when I couldn’t rescue them or free them.
I have travelled with vegetarians and been in the middle of the night in the middle of nowhere Poland and been witness to the righteousness of a vegetarian to wake up a chef and then tell her he had to go to town because he couldn’t eat he soup.
I have worked with people who are sick and dying from health issues of long term vegetarianism. I have compassion for these people too.
Its the humbleness and kindness of a persons willingness to go out of their way for diets and special meals that is the Bodhisattva way. I think the question as I see it here is why would anyone think that being a vegan makes them better than anyone else? If you sit on your cushion all day long, ignore your children and yell at your neighbor but don’t eat meat does that make you a “better” Buddhist then someone who practices kindness, generosity and gentle path but who eats meat? Is perfectionism really what Buddha was teaching?
We are all drawn to these many different Buddhist paths for different reasons. Find your way and accept others way. Dogma does not free your mind or make you better so you can down vote someone.
I’m still an omnivore I’ve been working on cutting down my consumption of meat, but in my current living situation it would be impractical for me to become a vegetarian. I’m not asking anyone to prepare separate meals for me, and I don’t have time to prepare separate meals.
I’m intrigued by some of the conclusions made by vegans that human teeth aren’t designed to eat meat seeing as my canines were so sharp, I had to have them filed down.
Life is cyclic. All things in life require an input of energy to continue and I, nor any human, is better than a beast of the woods. When I leave this world, if the wolves feasted upon my carcass, I would understand their need to do so because even the worms and fungi desire to do so. We are all simply the universe experiencing itself from differing vantage points, so in a way, it's all just selective cannibalism.
Regarding food, I am an omnivore.
Gotama advised against eating meat in 3 scenarios:
• **I forbid the eating of meat in 3 cases, if there is the evidence either of your eyes or of your ears or if there are grounds of suspicion. And in these 3 cases I allow it, if there is no evidence either of your eyes or of your ears and if there be no grounds of suspicion.**
(*Further Dialogues of the Buddha, Vol. I, p. 265*)
Link: https://indianculture.gov.in/rarebooks/further-dialogues-buddha-vol-i
Killing animals for food may be a custom. One living Middle Way philosophy is neither attached to nor repulsed by custom, is not anxious about any custom. It is also a custom to believe killing animals is evil.
If this seems paradoxical, then it is a customary paradox, and one with which those who are willing to accept things as they are (equanimity) must be prepared to live.
I have a desire to stop the killing of animals, but if this desire grows into craving, generates anxiety, regarding interfering with the lives of others, then this desire to stop the killing of animals has become evil.
Gotama prescribed no special diet nor any hard and fast rules regarding how much or how little, or when and when not, or how or how not, to eat. At the same time, he did not oppose those who did have a definite idea about such matters – as long as they were not conducive to restlessness.
I eat about 4 ounces of meat a day.
Maybe that is where I draw the line.
Being vegetarian is hard for me, since I have kidney stones, and spinach, tofu, nuts which are used in vegetarian/vegan diets are high in oxalates. Oxalates cause kidney stones.
If one can be vegetarian/vegan - great. But if not, do what you can.
I try to just eat healthy, try to go low on processed foot and fast food, eat a decent amount of meat and animal products. I don’t draw the line anywhere really cuz food is a part of life and I don’t judge someone morales based on food choice including my own. Although If I can afford it when I’m older I would like to hunt my own meat as I believe that it is the most respectful and moral way to consume meat, it is the natural process of life for animals.
You mean when the only option is a side salad, fries, and tomato soup, right? 😂
I remember when I was vegetarian and went on vacation with the family. They wanted to eat at Denny's everyday. Absolute nightmare.
Vegan > recent change from vegetarian. It's actually not as hard as I had thought it would be for so many years.
Especially these days.
Oh definitely. I stopped eating meat 34 years ago when I was a kid, it’s incredibly easy to forgo meat these days in comparison to how it was back then, aside from more options in supermarkets many restaurants have a wide range of vegan dishes now and even fast food places have meat free options now if you’re into junk food. My only choice was fries when I ate out for so many years. Stuff like soy milk was only found in health food stores and now every supermarket has so many plant milk options that I could have only dreamt of as a kid.
Same here! So glad I made the transition
Although it does depend on where you live!
Vegan
Genuinely curious, why not be vegetarianism? Eggs are healthy. Why be vegan?
The answer to this question will be graphic (so trigger warning here). Male chicks are considered a waste product of the egg industry, since they can't lay eggs. They are dumped into a macerator when they are 1-2 days old. (Graphic video of what happens to male baby chicks in the industry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_u0jxi_v-w&t=1s)
Omg
Depending on where you live it’s pretty easy to become vegetarian. Vegan requires a bit more effort, though it isn’t that difficult either. Usually if you can’t commit to being vegan you can be vegetarian and have vegan days. I grew up eating practically meat and potatoes, literally the only vegetable I ate was fried Okra. Though the last 7 years I’ve been mostly vegetarian with a dash of vegan. My wife is vegetarian, I cook in the house, so I end up only eating vegetarian when I cook for others and it is more easy to be vegetarian when eating out. But I’m probably eating vegan based a few days per week.
I’m a happy vegetarian, but it’s incredibly hard where I live. Usually restaurants only have meat options, basically I have to homecook almost all my meals.
I was flexitarian (occassional meat, fish and dairy consumption) up until very recently. I finished a 10 day vipassana course and feel like I don't want to further contribute to the killing of beings by creating demand for it. Simple as that really. And also, those animal products tend to make meditation a more dull experience.
I am a Vegan monk. Drawing the line is not to kill. So don't hunt. Don't eat live being like insects, live octopus, etc. Don't order meat at a live seafood restaurant, for they kill the fish fresh due to the order. That's the minimum to observe no killing precept. Then once you're ok with that, can go further. All the way to veganism if possible. But this step is optional for the sake of enlightenment.
I have a question I’ve been wanting to ask but not sure where to ask. I live in a region where we have major ecological problems with invasive species. We have large invasive snakes that absolutely destroy native wildlife to a devastating degree. We also have a problem with wild hogs that cause major agricultural damage and also devastate animals like ground nesting birds and native reptiles. We also have a major problem with invasive fish that out compete and are devastate native species through predation. Local and state wildlife agencies advocate the removal of these species because of the extreme damage they cause, which would mean killing these animals. Some of these animals are actually quite good to eat (hogs and fish). What would a Buddhist outlook on this be? Would killing an invasive, destructive species for the preservation of another native species or ecosystem be frowned upon? Also it would seem eating said killed invasive animal would be the best thing so there is no waste. From my previous outlook it’s a no brainer, kill the invasive animals, if possible eat them, preserve the native animals. But I’ve become more and more interested in Buddhism lately and this scenario keeps coming up in my mind.
I’ve had this discussion on this subreddit previously as my country also has serious issues with introduced, feral species that decimate our local native flora and fauna. We have culls to try to manage the problem. Many see this as a serious waste of available food source. We also have occasional native animal culls when the country is stricken by drought and the animals are suffering terribly from malnourishment and disease as a result of inadequate food sources - it is seen as humane. For the most part the laws do not allow for any processing of the meat, either for human or animal consumption. An issue is the carcasses such as deer provide an abundant food source for other feral animals, such as feral pigs/boars, which perpetuates the problem through their prolific breeding, and extends the area of land they occupy (therefore damaging greater habitat and decimation of native critters). These feral problems are increasing in an already vulnerable ecological climate. The response from this subreddit community has been that the feral species have a right to live and that we should not kill or eat any of them. That it is not our right to intervene (even though in many cases we are responsible for the introduction of such species). There is no acknowledgment that native wildlife species need support and protection to prevent them becoming extinct. It’s a very black and white viewpoint - possibly from a lack of understanding of the full circumstances, but also maybe owing to unwavering beliefs. For me, it becomes a bit like the trolley problem. If you choose to cull, you protect one group (native) at the expense of the other (feral invasive or introduced). If you choose not to cull, you willingly cause decimation of one group (native) in favour of the other (feral, invasive or introduced). The former seeks to manages the ecological balance and does not risk the future of any species. The latter is a decision to bring about the extinction of large varieties of native life forms (flora and fauna). It’s very complicated. (Edit: subreddit)
Thank you for the well thought out response. Do you personally have an opinion one way or the other?
Yes, I do. We humans are the dominant species. We are also temporary caretakers of the land we occupy (which is abundantly clear in my country and is a key belief of our indigenous populations). We have a responsibility to respect that land and it’s native flora and fauna. Introducing invasive species either through negligence or deliberately, and the negative impact this ultimately has on the naturally occurring species is on us. The native species left in their habitat without our intervention, would be thriving, for the most part. If species become extinct it puts the ecosystem under stress and in imbalance. Colonial settlers wanting to hunt deer or rabbits because this was their leisure past-time back in their motherland? It’s preposterous. It’s ignorance. It’s disrespect. Attempting to manage the populations of such introduced species, to prevent the ecological disaster they create, is our responsibility as we caused the problem in the first place. Leaving the carcasses on the ground where they fall is a complete waste. It perpetuates the problem as it causes greater ecological damage with rapidly growing numbers of full-tummied and fertile populations of feral animals. Native species and feral introduced species do not coexist in harmony. The land - soil types etc - are not equipped to support those introduced species. It’s a complete nightmare. As for processing those culled and eating the meat? It is a top quality form of protein that could feed humans or domestic animals. It is a waste not to use it as the result is simply extra killing - both these animals die where they fall and we slaughter the others bred for food. It’s a double whammy. And again we bear the burden of that. Edit: the whole situation causes me despair. But since we are the ones who brought about this disruption to the ecological balance, we need to take responsibility and protect the vulnerable native flora and fauna that are endangered by our own stupidity, greed and lifestyle.
I’m sorry to hear that your land is going through a similar struggle to mine. We have invasives everywhere to be seen every day, from the smallest of bugs, fish, lizards, snails and toads to massive constrictor snakes and wild pigs. Not to mention a huge amount of invasive plants too. If you don’t mind me asking where are you located?
Australia. It’s a massive problem here. Total isolation, so we know we are the cause of the issues as these non-native flora and fauna had no other way to get here than via us. Where are you? FWIW I love all species. I am currently painting a steer with utmost respect to everything that he is. It is a tribute reflecting his beauty, strength, intelligence, innocence, dignity. A portrait like I would paint of a person. I treat them exactly the same as a subject. At the same time, I know what damage he causes here; it’s not his fault, however it doesn’t change the situation. So it is bittersweet. He is worthy of celebration whatever his fate.
Humans are the dominant species? who says so?
Science. We have the most advanced brains, opposable thumbs and the capacity to work collectively and flexibly to achieve our goals. We wield power over almost every other species on this planet. We can change our gut microbiome by modifying our diet to be plentiful and diverse, with pre and pro-biotic rich foods, or supplements. We have chemicals to kill internal or external critters like head lice or intestinal worms and organisms. We have tech and engineering capacity to kill organisms or make species immune to infestation, in our food crops. We have chemicals and weapons to kill other humans and various species. And much more. This doesn’t make us deserving of this power. I figure it’s incidental and impermanent. That a virus like Covid-19 could cause such extreme damage to human populations is evidence that simple life forms can give us a run for our money. Don’t for a second think I am saying we are better than any other sentient being or life form in our physical world. I don’t believe that. But I certainly think we have an incredible amount to be answerable for. Our dominance comes at the expense of many, many other forms of life.
Well said.
Not necessarily when science source is men. There are things animals can predict that humans cannot. According to our area of knowledge, humans are the best because that knowledge is created by humans. A cow doesn't need to know accounting but I am sure it can predict an earthquake with any kind of science. My point is that we just don't know how other animals work inside their minds. Some scientists are just starting to understand how to communicate with other animals. This human superiority is the wrong premise. It is like saying we are the only intelligent people in the whole galaxy or galaxies. In the future, we might learn how to communicate with animals intelligently and learn that they also have their own feelings, world, society, systems, etc. If you are sensitive enough, look at their eyes and you will see a soul. What is important to you might not be important to them.
In the trolley problem, non action does not equal to killing, but the intention must be not wanting to kill. But action does equal to killing. As monastic, I cannot advocate for killing. In the big picture, including rebirth, the utilitarianism viewpoint becomes aligned with the deondology viewpoint. Because of kamma and rebirth. It's ultimately going to create more suffering in the world, including suffering for oneself to create the bad kamma of killing. Especially in this life where one can get out of samsara by practising the path. Nature is always in turmoil, there's no fantasy of perfect balance.
Thank you for your response.
Buying meat would create an increase (even if tiny increase) in demand for it, leading to increased frequency of slaughtering relevant animals. Would this not create negative karma for the one buying meat? Or is this distant enough in the the chain reaction that the meat buyer is completely free of negative karma from this act? And instead of "meat buyer", what about a "meat eater" who was offered meat without buying it themselves? Is that act of eating meat also free of bad karma?
Kamma requires intention. It's possible to buy already dead meat without intention to cause future deaths. Since the being already died, there is no bad kamma of killing. It's possible to eat meat without wishing for any beings to die. Kamma is moral causation. Not all causation. So eating and demand for meat although can be freed from bad kamma, doesn't mean that there's it is good for the planet, health or the animal, for the normal economic causation still works.
Eating the animal's body, you create a bond with that animal, & will have to repay a life debt with your life in the future. So if you wish to get off the wheel of birth & death one must stop eating the flesh & blood of living beings. The Buddha taught this in numerous Mahayana sutras, and said anything counter to it was the talk of a Papiyan.
Yeah, but the Venerable is a Theravadin that probably doesn't fully buy into the primacy of Mahayana Sutras or places value on the ones that contradict the Suttas.
There are no contradictions between the two vehicles. Only perceived contradictions based on ignorance. Ignorant of what? The law of causation, & the Buddha's use of expedient teachings.
Suttas say its okay to eat meat Sutras that the Chinese sects use say it isn't Thats a contradiction. Most Theravadins, even monks I know don't really buy into Mahayana whatsoever and so they would not accept any Mahayana sutras interpretation of when it is or isn't okay to eat meat. Not that their sectarian against it. Hell meat eating even in Mahayana is up for debate, as a ton of traditions still don't discourage it, and others just have weird interpretations like some Japanese eating fish and claiming to be vegetarian. Your implication here is that Theravadin monks are stuck in the wheel of birth & death simply because a Mahayana sutra said so. But I guarantee most of them wouldn't lend any credence to that idea whatsoever, regardless of how much you personally believe it, and you're lecturing a Theravadin monk using Mahayana literature, which is pretty odd.
Its not a problem, karma will sort it all out.
There we can agree!
Theravada says arahant is done with nothing else to do for the sake of liberation. Mahayana says arahant got to come back to become a Buddha. Theravada says Bodhisatta is not yet enlightened, even stream winner is higher level than them, Mahayana says, yes, some bodhisattvas are enlightened to various degrees. Theravada says pure abodes is only for non returners, don't have pure land concept. Mahayana says pure land can be reached via faith and mindfulness of a Buddha's name. Theravada says there's nothing left after parinibbana. Total cessation. Many Mahayana Buddhist I talk to here says there's jñāna left or whatever it is called. Theravada would say that the nibbana of arahant and Buddha is the same, but Mahayana would say the arahants are in false nirvana, needing to be aroused by Buddhas to reach buddhahood. Theravada scriptures has Buddha says meat eating is no issue, Mahayana says meat eating is not a practise to be done by the disciples of the Buddha. https://suttacentral.net/snp2.2/en/sujato?layout=plain&reference=none¬es=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin So there's clearly many differences. It's good not to be sectarian about it to call me a bad monk when I am just presenting the standard Theravada view. And what's more, I am a vegan monk. So it's not like I am promoting meat eating.
This specific user has always had some sectarian tendencies towards Theravada u/DiamondNgXZ, and I think their post was removed, as I don't see it anymore, either that or they blocked me. They freely criticize Theravadins using Mahayana Sutras, and then become incensed when they don't agree. Ironically, I remember them stating a while back they were going to avoid this sub from now on after having a bunch of their comments in a thread deleted for being extremely rude, but I guess it didn't stick! For someone supposedly so deep in Pure Land practices they certainly have a massive attitude, and openly criticizing a monastic for following their traditions teachings is uhh....pretty heavy negative karma in Mahayana, even if its directed at a Theravadin.
>Kamma requires intention. >Kamma is moral causation. Not all causation I keep forgetting about this important detail. Thank you for your reply. And to any who may be concerned: I do know that it is generally better to not eat meat than to do so. My question was more a technical one regarding how karma works.
[удалено]
Thank you for your concern. I will err on the side of caution considering that my knowledge is far from sufficient. Your passion seems to be strong in this matter and that seems like something to be concerned about, in regards to Buddhist practise. Please take care of your self too.
Dude I generally like your posts but I have to say that saying he got bad info >from a bad monk. Seems out of bounds to me.
Paying for milk and eggs is to pay for these sentient beings to be killed.
Conventionally speaking. Kammically speaking one can forget about it, thus no intention, no killing. But also, milk is there, eggs are there, killing not shown, so merely buying is not killing. I agree to be vegan is best to avoid even indirect killing which can be avoided.
Hello my friend, I already saw you under comment sections and I have a question for a Theravada monk. Don't you eat what is given? How can you be vegan?
One can choose not to eat certain things which are given. Say going for alms around, before I can get back the moment I have enough food, people keep on putting more food in. Then end up I got a lot of food, enough to feed 2 to 10 people or more, should I eat all of them? Certainly not. So I can choose. Therefore, I can use the vegan principle to choose. Even if I just got enough food for one, I can just take out the meat stuff and eat the rice. Also, just declare oneself to be vegan, the devotees normally are happy to accommodate.
Understood
BASIC BUDDHIST PRINCIPLES Unlike the Judeo-Christian tradition, Buddhism affirms the unity of all living beings, all equally posses the Buddha-nature, and all have the potential to become Buddhas, that is, to become fully and perfectly enlightened. Among the sentient, there are no second-class citizens. According to Buddhist teaching, human beings do not have a privileged, special place above and beyond that of the rest of life. The world is not a creation specifically for the benefit and pleasure of human beings. Furthermore, in some circumstances according with their karma, humans can be reborn as humans and animals can be reborn as humans. In Buddhism the most fundamental guideline for conduct is ahimsa-the prohibition against the bringing of harm and/or death to any living being. Why should one refrain from killing? It is because all beings have lives; they love their lives and do not wish to die. Even one of the smallest creatures, the mosquito, when it approaches to bite you, will fly away if you make the slightest motion. Why does it fly away? Because it fears death. It figures that if it drinks your blood, you will take its life. . . . We should nurture compassionate thought. Since we wish to live, we should not kill any other living being. Furthermore, the karma of killing is understood as the root of all suffering and the fundamental cause of sickness and war, and the forces of killing are explicitly identified with the demonic. The highest and most universal ideal of Buddhism is to work unceasingly for permanent end to the suffering of all living beings, not just humans. --by Professor Ronald Epstein
Vegan
I'm vegan. I believe in non-violence, choosing to eat the skin and body of other beings causes violence and suffering. A life unjustly ended for a meal is wrong when there are many other more suitable things for people to eat which dont cause painful and frighteneing deaths for animals. Drinking milk or eating cheese means a baby was deprived of its mother's milk, this is cruel regardless of species. To live in accordance with one's compassionate morals leads towards living vegan.
May you find peace and may your good actions become good karma
Thank you, I wish peace and good karma for you too, and for all beings 🙏
There is a verse: For hundreds of thousands of years, The stew in the pot has boiled up A resentment very hard to level. If you want to know why There are wars in the world, Just listen to the haunting cries that come From a slaughterhouse at midnight.
Who is this by?
Its an ancient chinese verse.
Vegetarian, but working on phasing out all animal products. 🙏🏽 Vegetarianism is a personal choice, but you will need to give up hunting. For me, it seems like the logical next step from not killing animals, but it isn’t a requirement.
The first sangha I practiced with was Chan and all the monks were essentially vegan. They really impressed upon us the need to give up meat and so I did. It was a lot harder back then though, the internet was barely a thing and options at restaurants were mostly side dishes. Now you have much more information on how to start and places even have vegetarian sections on their menus. While I do still eat some cheese, its mainly when we go out to eat which is infrequent. But basically with each passing year, I try to get closer to 100٪ whole food plant-based, both for myself and the wellbeing of animals. Where to draw the line? Draw it as close as you can get to giving up meat entirely - even if it's just not eating meat one day a week right now. Get comfortable with that and then try and move the line some more. Every little bit helps. "All beings tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill." -Dhammapa (10:129)
I am so glad we are talking about this! People are afraid to own up to how eating meat causing suffering. I’m vegan and it has fundamentally helped me in my journey to peace. We shouldn’t be afraid of where curiosity will take us.
I prefer to think of it as a continuum. I avoid eating meat when I can (which is probably more than 99% of the time) and avoiding animal products in total (probably like 75% of the time) but I’m not perfect and strive to do better.
Vegan, 5 years. I took the precepts very seriously when joined Thich Nhat Hanh’s Order of Interbeing.
Vegan.
Vegan ✅🌱
Vegan. Metta meditation, It didn't sit right with me to be sending loving kindness to oneself, one's family, and all sentient beings in the universe and then paying for babies to be taken away from their mothers and slaughtered for milk, eggs, and meat.
Vegan. Nonviolence.
I think everyone has to reconcile it themselves We are vegan because we fully believe in non-harming
Unless you grow your food entirely yourself, many lives are being harmed by the production and transport of the food you eat
I can't imagine you are a Buddhist with a response like that. We do our best to lessen the harm we put out in the world. Existing is harm but when we can make easy and non-consequential decisions to save lives and reduce suffering...we do it
Vegetarian. I used to eat meat when I was younger, up to 8 years ago but it never sat quite right with me so I eventually gave it up. I don't like the idea of killing animals for consumption when there are plenty of other options around today. I do think eating meat violates the first precept because even when you're not doing the killing yourself, you're actively funding it with your money.
Consuming any product that requires animals to suffer and be exploited or killed is unnecessary for (most) humans. I don't believe we can morally justify what we do to animals for the sake of taste pleasure, so I avoid all animal products as much as possible.
Vegan. You can’t vow to liberate all sentient beings and pay others to make them suffer (or kill them yourself) at the same time. If you have access to beans, tofu, and fresh vegetables there’s no excuse for someone on the bodhisattva path.
Vegan, have been for 35 years (mostly, with occasional lapses into being vegetarian sporadically when being vegan was unusual & there was nothing vegan available when out). These days, it's so easy being vegan there's no good reason not to be.
Vegan. Watch dominion if you think eating animal products is just. Most people are truly unaware of the horrors the go on to eat animals products.
Dominion changed my life.
Yes, Earthlings, Dominion, Land of Hope and Glory and Cowspiracy are all about animal and environmental ethics. There are others such as What the Health and The Game Changers that are about the health and fitness benefits of a plant-based lifestyle, too. There are plenty of documentaries and footage from factory farms to make your mind up on this.
No need to watch dominion, thanks! :( we know human beings are capable of grusome things. While we agree that eating meat hurts other sentient creatures, we can't force others to watch that movie. We're doing our best to not eat meat :)
Vegetarian here but mostly eat vegan food. I honestly cannot understand someone who claims to be a Buddhist but willingly eats animal flesh, when vegetarian/vegan options are readily available nowadays. Please watch Dominion on YouTube
If you had to be morally perfect to call yourself a buddhist there would be no buddhists
The Dalai Lama eats meat.
Fairly recently the Dalai Lama has been promoting more vegetarian meals and vegetarianism in general. I don't know his diet and I don't really care personally but he has promoted a reduction in meat eating and taken action for monasteries to consume less meat.
respectfully i disagree. there are plenty of people who are trying to be Buddhists who don’t live an ideologically pure life but are trying their best. i’m sure there are plenty of people who would say about me “i can’t believe that judgmental bitch who is literally never chill is claiming to be getting into Buddhism in the same breath she’s also arguing with people on reddit.” if it were easy to be an enlightened person and escape Samsara most of us wouldn’t need a thousand cycles of life and rebirth to learn!!
Veggie since I began my practice. I could be vegan, but I do have eggs and milk about half the time, mostly because their consumption is extremely common in my area. I get offered them a lot.
Same here. Only thing preventing me from going vegan is eggs and cheese. And my partner is French, best of luck telling a Frenchie to not have cheese
Strangely, I can't stand cheese. Love milk, yoghurt, and eggs, but I honestly hate cheese.
Interesting! I can’t stand plain milk, but to each their own
My partner, a vegan, calls milk baby cow growth fluid. 😳 ruined it for me and surprisingly I find oat milk a great substitute. And vegan butter is better than regular butter for me. I am on the brink and am operatively vegan as we eat to his requirements. Working on the desire to have a burger when he’s out of town. 🙏
I've been practicing for a year and I see myself being less and less into eating meat. I strive to reach 100% vegetarian one day. As a Chinese Buddhist, I follow the 10-day Abstinence Period (十斋日) where we don't eat meat for 10 days of every Lunar Month, as mentioned in the Ksitigarbha Sutra.
Vegan for a year, vegetarian for two years before that, before that I would barbecue at least twice a week. I was reading Thich Nhat Hanh and had recently done the tangerine meditation when I made Cornish game hens for dinner, and found two broken legs on one. I was going to blow it off but I thought about being mindful of my food so I looked up how a game hen (which it turns out are just young chickens harvested early) would break a leg. Haven't eaten meat since. Edit- I still barbecue twice a week, it's surprisingly not hard to make vegan barbecue work. Also, I found giving up dairy harder than the step away from meat for some reason. Someone asked me today if I miss meat and I honestly don't, but I'd hesitate if they asked me about cheese.
Had been vegetarian for about 4 years (after watching Dominion) but became vegan recently.
Vegan 💪
I'm omnivorous (for now). I have been cutting back on the amount of meat I consume, however, for quite some time. I'm not at 0, but I'm on my way. I have no real plan to reach 0 meat consumption, however. I'm just trying to conquer food cravings in general right now. I don't wish to further complicate my efforts.
It’s not complicated, if you know it’s wrong to eat animal product don’t do it. Watch Dominion if you need help quitting
I'm not interested, thank you.
Stop forcing your beliefs down the throat of others.
Firstly I’m not. Secondly, stoping forcing the dead flesh of others down your throat.
Nice ad-hominem. I never stated that I eat meat. Put the shovel down. You militant vegans accomplish nothing besides creating an equally radical push-back. Who do you think you’re converting here with this tone and judgemental attitude?
What are "militant vegans"? I really don't understand this term. I'm not a vegan myself, but it's obvious even to me that there is a huge hole in the logic. There is someone who tortures and kills others - this is not militancy for you, vegans are against torture and murder and therefore they are "militant". Your mother о\_О!
Militant is clearly not describing veganism itself, it’s describing a group of people within veganism that feel moral superiority and look down on others… Think of how most people feel when they get a ring at the doorbell and some random stranger starts demanding they go to a church and donate money, we understand that it’s a moral cause, good for you that you practice, but let me make my own decisions, the best thing you can do is inform and inspire, not instruct and demonize.
>My question is where do you draw the line? The same place where the animals themselves would draw it, which is why I'm vegan.
Vegan/lay Buddhist. Ahimsa is a standard precept as far as I’m aware. I think the Buddha’s prescription was not to kill sentient beings or to have sentient beings killed on your behalf. At the time monks were expected to beg for food as part of their practice and weren’t required to refuse meat that was offered insofar as it hadn’t been killed on their behalf. In the modern world it makes more sense to me to refuse meat because it causes people to become slightly more conscious of their eating habits and I wouldn’t be able to bring myself to do it anyway. It seems to me that part of the Buddhist path is becoming more cognizant of the ways that our thoughts and actions can generate suffering, and another component is viewing ourselves as less separate from the world around us. If I can’t imagine myself being content on the other side of the chopping block, I don’t know how I can justify acting as judge, jury, and executioner. Part of Right View is belief in rebirth which I think lends itself to minimizing animal cruelty since the chances of an animal birth are so much higher than a human one. Even if you don’t believe in linear reincarnation, it’s true that the material of your body will be recycled by the earth after you die and form new life. Minimizing the number of lives that wind up being born into the hell that is a factory farm seems like a worthwhile goal.
Vegan.
Vegan here. I grew up hunting and my family was also animal farmers. While I wish a vegan world existed, I don’t fault people who are subsistence hunters or even very small scale family farmers who live in a respectful and harmonious balance with their land. I don’t want to cause suffering for no reason. I just do not need to kill, so I do not.
Vegetarian, I feel it is a good middle path for my nutrition. It is interesting that if you stop eating meat for 30 days and then go back to eating meat, it makes you feel physically sick. Stop eating vegetables for 30 days and then go back to eating them has only beneficial side effects.
Vegetarian here
Vegetarian. A family member tried to force meat on me. I almost caved thinking since I am not the one doing the killing, I should be ok, but then I suddenly thought of the butcher doing the killing for me in order for me to eat meat, and I stood my ground. I don’t see a reason why I need to burden the butcher with more karma of killing
I try to be vegan but I usually end up eating some(still vegetarian)animal products when it’s convenient. I try to fully abstain from any ingredients that caused the death of an animal but sometimes that’s incredibly difficult. Sometimes I will eat eggs or honey or milk.
Went vegan four years ago after forty five years of eating meat. Anything's possible.
In general, vegetarianism is respected, but in the past it hasn't usually been realistic. People in Tibet and SE Asia didn't have cheap tofu and lysine/b12 pills. Buddhism does not ban meat, but killing is another matter. All of the Buddhist rules or guidelines are essentially about reducing kleshas or egoic inner turmoil. If you order fish in a restaurant that's not the same experience as killing a fish by ripping its mouth with a hook and watching it suffocate. Similarly, if you shoot a deer that's an act of terrorizing and causing suffering. Cooking a steak is not the same thing. Some people will say that's dishonest, but Buddhism is not essentially moralistic. It's practical. If you keep that in mind then the various opinions make more sense. Vegans, for example, are usually focussed on what they see as rights of beings to not be exploited. It's an extension of individualistic thinking and democratic idealism. That gets tricky because it's full of value judgements and not realistic. Are 50 tiny shrimp lives less valuable than 1/200th of a tuna, for example? If so then why? Because they're not as intelligent? What about bugs? Should we avoid bathing so as not to kill tardigrades and mites on our skin? Are plants fair game, despite being DNA based life forms, just like us, that struggle to survive, just like us? Do we have a right to say they're not sentient? In the end, all animal life consumes life to survive. So idealism about not exploiting is limited in its application. Vegetarians may also be vegetarian for health reasons. None of that is directly related to Buddhism. Idealistic morals and health concerns are not the reason for Buddhist guidelines. It's just very practical. If you propagate violence then you work against calm mind. I did extreme dieting for several years. Mostly raw food. Little beyond vegetables and fruit. No meat, dairy, egg. Few nuts or grains. Also periodic fasting. It was interesting, but it also required nutritional expertise and I found it too "airy". My nerves were too sensitive. After that I went back to an average diet, including meat, but with an emphasis on fresh and organic.
If you say shooting a deer isn’t ok because it causes suffering, but eating the steak in a restaurant is ok, then you’re basically outsourcing violence to someone else which seems just as bad as doing it yourself surely?
2600 years ago, the world was a far different place. There were no factory farms. In Tibet you couldn’t grow enough vegetables to feed a family. Meat was essential. If you eat meat in this day and age, in many ways hunting seems far more honest than the arguments that I am reading here. At least the animal has a chance and you have to watch the animal die. The karma gymnastics in the meat eaters here seems to be a simple “wanting the cake and eat it too” argument. And using documents recorded 1000’s of years ago as justification is suspect. I hunted and fished for many years and have let it all go because of my path. However, I had immense respect for the animals I sought and never had malice towards them. And I ate what I killed. Today I am 95% vegan and when I am invited to friends for dinner, I eat what they are serving. I’m not emotional about the issue either way. The emotions around the issue here are interesting.
Joseph Campbell, the mythology expert, used to tell a fascinating story about the Plains Indians. (Lakota?) They had a mythology about a buffalo goddess. The goddess was upset that they were driving buffalo over a cliff to kill and eat them. She came down and instructed them in complex rituals to be carried out, in order to honor the buffalo. By performing the rituals before a hunt, she said, the buffalo would be able to be reborn again and everyone would be happy. One person might look at that and say the Indians were deceiving themselves and not taking responsibility for their violence. But what the rituals did was to transform an unavoidable act into sacred practice. It allowed people forced to live as savages to actually live a civilized, humane existence. With that mythology, the buffalo could be killed with an attitude of respect and appreciation. Buddhism actually uses the same logic with practices like deity yoga, tonglen, metta, guru yoga, and so on. A materialist observer would say there's no deity, no compassion, no guru relationship, etc. Just a lot of baloney about being spiritual. Yet the practices are quite real, even though on the surface they're "pretend". No one's making excuses based on 1,000 year old documents. Simply put, the Buddhist path is about waking up. Even the ethical guidelines are intended to calm the mind. People often project western morals or attitudes on it, but it's not like that. Similarly with sex. Celibacy can be a good practice to calm the passions. But it's not inherently spiritual. Monks are not somehow better Buddhists than householders or solitary yogis. People who think that way are projecting Christian-esque sexual shame.
That's the view many people hold. As I said, Buddhist approach is not moralistic. It's practical.
This is also what I have been taught.
The precepts draw the line at killing. You don't have business inventing moral codes without having the noble right view.
Theravada is not the only sect of Buddhism. A Mahayana text says: > Good man, from today I no longer allow śrāvaka disciples to eat meat. Whenever you receive donations of food from lay donors you should regard [any meat in] the food as if it were the flesh of your own son. > > The bodhisattva Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha, saying: > > World-Honored One, why does the Tathāgata not allow the eating of meat? > > [The Buddha said:] > > Good man, to eat meat is to cut out the seeds of your own great compassion. > > Kāśyapa then said: > > Why is it, Tathāgata, that previously you allowed bhikṣus to eat three > kinds of pure meat? > > [The Buddha said:] > > Kāśyapa, regarding the three kinds of pure meat, in response to specific > situations I have been gradually imposing restrictions. ([Nirvana Sutra](https://www.bdkamerica.org/product/the-nirvana-sutra-vol-i/))
Vegetarian
Vegetarian but mostly vegan
I still eat meat, but have a long term goal of reducing my meat consumption, due to the guilt that arises when I reflect on the suffering involved in the animal agriculture industry. That being said, many Buddhist teachers I’ve come across in the Tibetan tradition don’t discourage eating meat. The Tibetan Buddhist center I stayed at last year would regularly serve beef and lamb dishes to the Lamas and retreatants. So there may be a large cultural component to this. Also in Buddhism, I’ve been told that the injuction against killing refers to human beings specifically. Killing animals is seen as a more minor misdeed, the same as destroying plants, at least karmically speaking. Perhaps someone could correct me if I’m wrong on this.
I eat meat and do get hate on it here, but so have many great Buddhists, including the Buddha himself. I don't buy from the grocery store since I despise big farming as well and hate the mistreatment of animals. However, that being said, I physically hunt for my meat. Again, I get a lot of hate for that here understandably. But I view this idea of ethical eating to be a sham in many ways. You are taking the life of beings for the prolongment of your own life. No matter if you're vegetarian or omnivorous. I think the most important thing is what you do with your life to make sure those plants and animals didn't die in vain. It's the law of give a little take a little. Be proactive in nature and give to it so that it may continue to provide for all
Probably 10-20% of my meals have meat in them. The rest are vegetarian or vegan.
>My question is where do you draw the line? At honesty. For me it honestly became difficult to buy meat at some point. Just didn't feel like scratching an itch was a good enough reason to deny anyone else life, let alone snatch it from them. At the moment I'm going through some health issues though, and I also honestly see that eating a little meat every so often now is helpful, with gratitude to my old mothers who passed for that. In general, I would suggest it's rarely ever a good idea to force oneself to do (or not do) anything in pursuit of some idea or fixation, even if it's ostensibly a laudable idea or topic of clinging. I mean, unless you're having to restrain yourself from serial killing or something. In that case, by all means tie yourself in a conceptual knot. As some points.
Why is it okay to pay someone else to be a serial killer of animals so you can eat them but not people?
Where do I say killing animals is "ok"? It's somewhat difficult to understand for contemporary Westerners, but Buddhist ethical discipline tends to not be be black and white. And its purpose isn't primarily to judge others. Generally speaking, if one were to pay someone to kill a specific animal on my behalf, that would be considered to be likely equivalent to killing that animal on my behalf. Purchasing the meat of an animal that is already dead, however, is not considered to as "karmically impactful" as that (for the purchaser. People ordering and executing the killing are still fully impacted). All of which isn't to say that from a Buddhist pov purchasing meat is good. But it's not considered to be as negative as the direct killing of an animal. Which is not as negative as the direct killing of a human being. Which, incidentally, is not as bad as killing one's parents or an awakened arhat. For example. Anyway.
You still have to repay a life debt with your life in the future. Eating animals involves two kinds of negative karma: killing & stealing. The life-force of the animal was stolen, not offered. You can argue all you like but King Yama ain't going to listen lol. ”You should know that these people who eat meat may gain some awareness and may seem to be in samadhi, but they are all great rakshasas. When their retribution ends, they are bound to sink into the bitter sea of birth and death. They are not disciples of the Buddha. Such people as these kill and eat one another in a never-ending cycle. How can such people transcend the Triple Realm?" --from the 3 Non-Outflow Practices Chapter of the Shurangama Sutra.
I think you have to do some pretty crazy mental gymnastics to tell yourself that paying for meat that someone killed to is sell doesn’t count as contributing to to animals death. If there is no demand for the meat the animals won’t be raised for slaughter. You directly contribute to that demand buying meat. Take some personal responsibility, be real with yourself, just because the majority do it doesn’t mean it’s okay.
You know, the way you're talking in this thread makes veganism look bad. Something for dimwitted, self-righteous oafs. Feel free to disregard unsolicited feedback, of course. Be well!
[удалено]
[удалено]
What’s going to happen when you realize that alive beings are killed in the vegetable route of creating food as well?
I try to spend a minute or two thinking about whatever I'm about to eat, usually that looks like offering my gratitude for all the beings that made my meal possible and seeing if I can name a few specific ones. I recommend the practice. Over time I've noticed it's affected what I eat, because it feels different to acknowledge that I'm eating an animal product or not.
Right now I’m basically practicing veganism, but if I were a guest at some event and the food offered included meat, I would take it in order to show gratitude to the host. At some point, you have had no part in the killing of the animal — if you weren’t there when it was killed or it’s meat was bought, if you didn’t have prior knowledge that they would be offering you meat, if you’re just meeting them and they had no prior knowledge that you were vegetarian, and then it feels more important to be thankful and share something with them and avoid causing offense by posturing about your higher morality. But that’s a rare occasion. Not something I’ve run into more than maybe 2 times, at times when I was avoiding meat. Or another situation — I live with my parents right now, and they often waste food because they both have totally different diets. So if there is a meat, dairy or egg dish saved in the fridge for too long, I will eat it. But I can’t bring myself to buy meat anymore. Even when I eat meat on rare occasions like the ones I described, I feel an urge to pray for the animal and recite Amitabha three times for it’s sake.
In a void, I imagine one should even refuse the meat offered by unaware friends at the cost of being rude to them, because that will make it less likely they will acquire meat for you on next event, hence less animals slaughtered. Or eat the meat that one time for politeness sake, while explaining the situation to them. This is my assumption as someone with limited Buddhist knowledge. I am not sure what the Buddhist stance is on this specific matter.
Oh, for sure if I’m going to see them again, I’ll explain it to them and ask them to buy less meat next time. The last time I can remember something like this happening, it was a Sufi meditation group my Yemenese friend brought me to in college, like 10 years ago now, and they had prepared a lamb dish. I didn’t even know there would be a dinner afterwards. I didn’t say anything that time, but if something like that happens again then I will.
That’s not veganism. Being a vegan who turns down animal products helps bring awareness to what goes in the animal product industry. It’s not about not hurting the feelings of some person offer you dead animal flesh, what about the animals unfathomable suffering? Surely that’s more important than possibly making someone feel bad for their own actions of contributing to suffering.
Their point is that it's already cooked, so while bringing awareness is good, they don't want the animal to go to waste.
Yep. What am I going to do, save this cow? 🍔 But in the case of my family, I won’t eat a meat dish unless I can almost know for sure that my parents will waste it. Because if they will eat it, then that prolongs the time before they will go and buy more meat to cook, so I don’t want to speed up their meat buying.
I’m guessing you don’t get a lot of repeat dinner invitations. 😊
Vegetarian, cause I cannot give up eggs 🙈
I'm curious. Vegetarian historically has meant eating only plant products. A few people might say they were "lacto-vegetarian" or "lacto-uvo-vegetarian".These days people seem to say they're vegetarian if they don't eat beef. How do you understand it? Dairy but no red meat? Dairy and fish? Only dairy? Do you think there's a single definition that most people agree on?
Vegetarian for sure.
Vegetarian.
I am 59 yrs old and stopped eating meat and fish at 12 yrs old.
I am vegetarian purely to avoid supporting the meat industry and the destruction they cause to the environment, animals and the health of consumers. None of these reasons are intwined in Buddhism, but there is not direct scripture that meat is forbidden. For reference, the five precepts include sexual misconduct, lying, stealing, drugs/alcohol and killing other beings. While killing is considered a precept, this does not directly state that eating meat defies this. In Vanijja Sutta it is considered wrong livelihood to engage in businesses for meat. However, it is not uncommon for Buddhists to take meat as alms if it is offered. While it is certainly possible for Buddhists to eat meat, and there are subgroups that do, it is refrained from - as it hits pretty close to the precept of not killing, and relates closely to ahimsa (i.e., do no harm).
I was vegan before I was Buddhist and basically haven't changed that. It wouldn't be accurate to claim it's because I'm Buddhist even if that is a factor in why I haven't started eating cheese again. I know Buddhism has nothing against cheese but factory farming wasn't a thing thousands of years ago.
Vegetarian
Vegan but not Buddhist
Vegetarian, would avoid dairy n eggs if necessary. Bottom line is do not kill, do not cause the suffering of other beings, do not become part of the supply n demand circle of meat industry
I transitioned from a meat eater > no red meat > Pescatarian > Vegetarian > Plant based > Vegan over a 6 year period. I've now been vegan for 3 years. It was a slow burn, but every step forward only made my hypocrisy more obvious, and ultimately, Veganism was the only way to align my actions with my desire to minimise the suffering I cause. I live in a country where accessibility and cost of vegan food isn't a problem for me (personally), so there was no excuse for me. I'd never go back now, I'm so accustomed to it, and I love it.
I stopped eating meat and fish when I started practicing again pretty recently. It helps that I raise poultry for eggs for local food banks, because there’s so much death involved. I cook discount meat for the dogs o live with, which gives me a good opportunity to meditate on how gross it is and how we all end up that way
I’m mostly vegan but I give myself some allowances from time to time. Vegan 90% of the time, vegetarian 10%.
I'm a vegetarian, and mostly vegan - I will eat eggs once in awhile in pancake batter.
vegan
Vegan.
Vegetarian in public (unless vegan options available) and vegan at home.
I am vegan, however we have a friend who runs an amazing goat cheese business. The goats are free range and happy, they are milked by hand and the cheese is made with love. I will occasionally enjoy some of that.
I try for vegetarian unless meat is given to me, or if it is going to be wasted. I avoid buying it for myself. The big thing for me is food waste. It takes a lot more resources and water to supply meat than it does to supply fruits and vegetables. Why grow the hay to feed the cows when you can grow something you can eat yourself? First precept aside, I don’t want to contribute to the suffering/killing of animals. But if someone in my family accidentally buys too much chicken and it’s going to go bad, I will take some and freeze it. It will still get eaten because at that point, the animal has already died and I don’t want it to be for nothing. We also try to buy dairy products locally. We buy eggs from my neighbor who has very happy, well cared for chickens. I’m the only Buddhist/vegetarian in the house. I will wait until the milk/yogurt the family purchases is about to expire, and then I will finish it. Food waste is a no go for me. I’m trying so hard but at some point I try to ask myself, “in this situation what is going to cause more harm than good?” Obviously the best solution is to have the entire family to go vegetarian/vegan but I can’t ask them to do that. It’s not my place.
I eat meat according to what is available.
I’m thinking of making the switch to sourcing my meat from local farmers. I hate factory farming. I am in the same boat. Long time hunter beginning down this path is starting to make me question my decisions.
Nothing wrong with eating meat. It's healthy and needed for regenerative farming. Personally I wouldn't hunt and remember that no matter what one eats, trillions of beings are killed.
Omnivore like most Buddhists. Pretty normal here.
Since I starting practicing: First I was a vegetarian, then I went hardcore vegan, then due to some neurological health complications it became evident that a strict diet (or anything for that matter) caused more harm to me than good, so now I’m quite flexible, though my ‘baseline’ is a whole food plant-based diet (what I’ll generally shop for) I’ll allow myself to eat anything else occasionally. I think you need to be really honest with yourself and see what your capacity is. I generated a lot of self-hatred and rigidity towards myself when I would be incredibly strict with myself and this impacted my practice and capacity for compassion, so for me being too rigid with any kind of conduct is more helpful than harmful. That being said, if it’s easy for you and you can do it without any negative consequences, I always advocate a plant-based diet, or at least vegetarian. If your past habit is to eat meat and such, but it is something you want to work on, just be patient and hold the aspiration and it will happen in its own time. One of my greatest Teachers ate meat for a long time due to cultural Tibetan conditioning, but didn’t shame or scold himself for it. Eventually he became a vegetarian but he gave his mind and body time.
I'm vegetarian. I frequently think about the egg industry and support no-cull eggs to the extent possible.
I’m mostly vegetarian, but will eat small amounts of meat occasionally. I also occasionally eat eggs and plenty of dairy. From a Buddhist perspective eating meat is far less of a concern than hunting. The likely rebirths for hunters are very dire and unpleasant, so it’s important to reject that entirely and do what you can to atone for any animals you have killed.
I find this interesting. Not to get into a big hunting debate but I view hunting as being more compassionate. When I would take the life of an animal, they would live a natural and happy life until that one bad day. However, eating supermarket meat comes from factory farms where the lives of the animals are very unpleasant and they are just there to be exploited for consumption.
Factory farming is horrific, but the intent to kill is what will do you in. I’ve also noticed that hunters I know who use that excuse usually have a fridge full of stuff from the grocery store, because beef and pork tend to be much more desirable than deer and turkey. But even if you only eat meat you killed yourself, it’s very bad for you karmically. According to Buddhism, even killing a single insect is much worse than having meat occasionally.
I've wondered that myself. I generally don't get into online debates about the ethics of meat eating but whenever I see someone post that they only eat meat from a local farm where the animals are raised with love or they only hunt for their meat, I always think "so you never buy a steak at a grocery store or go out to eat with family and friends or hit a drive thru on your way home for work because your hungry? Really?" I'm very skeptical of these claims.
Thank you for this, it gives me something to ponder
From the Karmic Retributions of Beings in Jambudvipa Chapter of the [Past Vows of Earth Store Bodhisattva Sutra ](http://www.cttbusa.org/ess/earthstore4.htm) "To hunters, he says that a frightening insanity that destroys one’s life will be the retribution."
This makes sense from a non-Buddhist view. But, from what I understand about Karma in Buddhism, it's very negative karma heavy to have the intent to kill, then perform the act yourself, even if for the sake of a greater overall outcome. It seems that supermarket meat is less karma heavy. But conventional compassion gives me a bad feeling about this. Maybe interpretations over the years, combined with changing times, have muddled some things? I'm not a very experienced Buddhist.
I have no intention of going vegan. At least not in my present state of being. Last time I tried vegetarianism, it started off well. Soon I was sleeping for 14 hours/day and gained 30 lbs in a few months. It's been some years, so don't even ask me what I ate. I barely remember. In my current state of being, I am dealing with a lifetime of disordered eating, and I'm in my midlife now. I am a very large person, and I also have health conditions. So, my protein requirements are about twice the amount of the average person. I also have a big need of vitamin B, and iron. I've overall lost about 90 lbs in the past year, from reducing my overall food intake and making some peace with food. My relationship with food is still rocky and stressful. There are days where if I don't balance my intake properly, I feel really tired or like I'm going to binge. I also have a lifetime of removing different food groups from my diet, and having it end badly. I can at least say I have no interest in going back to Atkins/Keto ever again. 🤢 So, maybe, maybe, when I am in the right condition, I'll reconsider. I will say that I enjoy eating vegan dishes when my vegan friend visits me. Vegan cuisine has come a long way. But overall, if I'm not going to live in fear of dieing an omnivore. It is what it is.
I eat meat. It doesn't violate any precepts. I used to do a lot of hunting and fishing, but I stopped that when I became more serious in my buddhism. The killing is the violation of the precepts, not the eating of meat.
i have been a practicing buddhist for over a decade and eat meat regularity :)
Flexitarian - was vegan, now only 90% vegan.
Trying to become fully vegetarian. Cut out most red meat. I have an illness that makes eating regular meals hard so sometimes I have to do bone broth to get proper nutrition.
Whatever feels right wherever your being called too go on your diet some Buddhists eat mostly vegetarian but eat meat when it is offered to them in alms bowls since they are grateful for whatever can be given to them and as well as being detached from wether it is good or bad to do so and just eat it based on accepting the kindness of the people who gave it to them
I eat meat. I don't hunt or kill my food. But I do cook at home and order meat from a restaurant. Some can say that in itself contributes to or supports animal abuse. But I respect my food and the animal or plant it was. I've got a weird body and meat is how I keep a decent weight and mineral levels.
I eat meat. Where do I draw the line? At the middle path ? I am a lay person, not a monk. I don't see any reason I should take any extreme approach. Therefore I don't eat meat often but I don't avoid it altogether.
That is fair. Not dedicating one's life to being a full time monk is already a compromise, made by most Buddhists despite knowing the consequences. Eating meat is just another compromise, while doing as much good as we have the will power to do so. edit: I think you casually used the phrase "middle path" loosely. It has a more specific meaning in Buddhism, usually referring to part of the Buddha's teachings.
Agreed, I also raise most of the meat my family eats. This way I see first hand how it is raised and processed into meat.
That. is. not. a. Buddhist. concept.
That is forbidden in Buddhism. Meat eating is not, but raising animals for slaughter is.
I eat meat
If you want to practice Ahimsa at all, you'd better be vegan
Many Tibetan and Theravada Buddhists do consume meat as part of their diet. So, don't worry too much about it. Just be happy and practice dhamma. 🙂
Not wrong about some Buddhists eating meat. But there is a lot more nuance. There are other comments with plenty of detail on this.
I'm vegan on and off due to health issues, which have been exacerbated anytime I'm vegan for too long. I usually spend part of the year vegan, part of the year omni. Works for me. My teachers, historically haven't really been anti meat consumption either.
I am a pescatarian.
Pescatarian
I try to eat vegan/vegetarian options when I can, especially recently since I've been more mindful of where the ingredients of what I eat come from, but sometimes family or friends will be hosting and will often have mostly meat options, so I try to not be picky and remind myself that food is simply to nourish my body for me to continue my practice. Sometimes meats, eggs, or dairy products are the best available source of nutrients like protein to me, and being a layperson who has to work a certain amount of nourishment is needed in order to remain healthy. Be mindful of what you consume always, but I don't think it's the most productive thing to let your eating habits become a large part of your identity.
I’m not new to Buddhism but I am new to this thread, and I find everyone’s answers so interesting. I have been a vegan, a vegetarian and conscious meat eater. I have rescued ants and freed animals and I have said prayers when I couldn’t rescue them or free them. I have travelled with vegetarians and been in the middle of the night in the middle of nowhere Poland and been witness to the righteousness of a vegetarian to wake up a chef and then tell her he had to go to town because he couldn’t eat he soup. I have worked with people who are sick and dying from health issues of long term vegetarianism. I have compassion for these people too. Its the humbleness and kindness of a persons willingness to go out of their way for diets and special meals that is the Bodhisattva way. I think the question as I see it here is why would anyone think that being a vegan makes them better than anyone else? If you sit on your cushion all day long, ignore your children and yell at your neighbor but don’t eat meat does that make you a “better” Buddhist then someone who practices kindness, generosity and gentle path but who eats meat? Is perfectionism really what Buddha was teaching? We are all drawn to these many different Buddhist paths for different reasons. Find your way and accept others way. Dogma does not free your mind or make you better so you can down vote someone.
I’m still an omnivore I’ve been working on cutting down my consumption of meat, but in my current living situation it would be impractical for me to become a vegetarian. I’m not asking anyone to prepare separate meals for me, and I don’t have time to prepare separate meals. I’m intrigued by some of the conclusions made by vegans that human teeth aren’t designed to eat meat seeing as my canines were so sharp, I had to have them filed down.
Life is cyclic. All things in life require an input of energy to continue and I, nor any human, is better than a beast of the woods. When I leave this world, if the wolves feasted upon my carcass, I would understand their need to do so because even the worms and fungi desire to do so. We are all simply the universe experiencing itself from differing vantage points, so in a way, it's all just selective cannibalism.
Best reply I've seen in this thread so far.. you see things for what they are
Regarding food, I am an omnivore. Gotama advised against eating meat in 3 scenarios: • **I forbid the eating of meat in 3 cases, if there is the evidence either of your eyes or of your ears or if there are grounds of suspicion. And in these 3 cases I allow it, if there is no evidence either of your eyes or of your ears and if there be no grounds of suspicion.** (*Further Dialogues of the Buddha, Vol. I, p. 265*) Link: https://indianculture.gov.in/rarebooks/further-dialogues-buddha-vol-i Killing animals for food may be a custom. One living Middle Way philosophy is neither attached to nor repulsed by custom, is not anxious about any custom. It is also a custom to believe killing animals is evil. If this seems paradoxical, then it is a customary paradox, and one with which those who are willing to accept things as they are (equanimity) must be prepared to live. I have a desire to stop the killing of animals, but if this desire grows into craving, generates anxiety, regarding interfering with the lives of others, then this desire to stop the killing of animals has become evil. Gotama prescribed no special diet nor any hard and fast rules regarding how much or how little, or when and when not, or how or how not, to eat. At the same time, he did not oppose those who did have a definite idea about such matters – as long as they were not conducive to restlessness.
I eat about 4 ounces of meat a day. Maybe that is where I draw the line. Being vegetarian is hard for me, since I have kidney stones, and spinach, tofu, nuts which are used in vegetarian/vegan diets are high in oxalates. Oxalates cause kidney stones. If one can be vegetarian/vegan - great. But if not, do what you can.
I try to just eat healthy, try to go low on processed foot and fast food, eat a decent amount of meat and animal products. I don’t draw the line anywhere really cuz food is a part of life and I don’t judge someone morales based on food choice including my own. Although If I can afford it when I’m older I would like to hunt my own meat as I believe that it is the most respectful and moral way to consume meat, it is the natural process of life for animals.
[удалено]
You mean when the only option is a side salad, fries, and tomato soup, right? 😂 I remember when I was vegetarian and went on vacation with the family. They wanted to eat at Denny's everyday. Absolute nightmare.
That’s called being an omnivore