Was Lord Buddha a beef eater?

[Tshering22]

Yes I agree with you that if Himalyan regions were not harsh, maybe meat eating was not that pervasive but it is also a fact that even Buddhists living in plains do eat meat and much heavily than Hindus. That one should not eat meat is basically a Vaishnavite innovation, copied by jains under Mahavira and then by Buddha. Even today, largest number of vegetarians are in Jain-Vaishnav dominated areas like Braj, Marwar, Gujrat, Malwa etc. Upper castes of rest of India are meat eaters, particularly Bengali brahmins who can not do without fish.

It is not just compassion that is the reason behind promoting vegetarianism; there is a bigger reason to it even in your own ancient texts. Meat is a passion driven food which aggrevates tendencies of passion in people be it anger lust happiness or any other emotions. Anything inciting passion is a distraction to a guru/rishi/saint/abbot whatever you call a man who meditates. Similar to Garlic, ginger, onions etc which jains avoid.

That was the simply scientific knowledge behind not eating meat. Compassion of course has its place.

But if you live in a climate and terrain like ours which as we go upwards becomes more like Ladakh meat eating becomes unavoidable for common people as vegetation gets lesser and lesser.

 

[Vikramjeet]

It is not just compassion that is the reason behind promoting vegetarianism; there is a bigger reason to it even in your own ancient texts. Meat is a passion driven food which aggrevates tendencies of passion in people be it anger lust happiness or any other emotions. Anything inciting passion is a distraction to a guru/rishi/saint/abbot whatever you call a man who meditates. Similar to Garlic, ginger, onions etc which jains avoid.

That was the simply scientific knowledge behind not eating meat. Compassion of course has its place.

But if you live in a climate and terrain like ours which as we go upwards becomes more like Ladakh meat eating becomes unavoidable for common people as vegetation gets lesser and lesser.

Yes I agree here completely. As per our ancient texts, there are three types of attributes of foods- sattvic, rajasic and tamasic. Meats and onion garlic were classified under third category.I also appreciate role of climate, Ladakh and Tibet are indeed very harsh place and so yes, meat might be essential there. Anyway, Buddha himself says that one who treats animals badly is not a noble person and this tells us Buddhist approach.

Onion and garlic were banned even in Hindu texts, Ashoka refused to eat same on plea that he was a kshatriya. Xuanzang visited India in seventh century, learnt Sanskrit and has left records of India. His description on dietary habits of all Indians( Hindus, Buddhists, jains) is this

"As to agricultural operations, reaping the crops, preparing the
soil (lit. ploughing and weeding), sowing and planting go on in
their seasons according to the industry or laziness of the people.
There is much rice and wheat, and ginger, mustard, melons,
pumpkins, kunda (properly the olibanum tree) are also cultivated.
Onions and garlic are little used and people who eat
them are ostracised.
Milk, ghee, granulated sugar, sugar-candy, cakes aud parched
grain with mustard-seed oil are the common food; and fish,
mutton, venison are occasional dainties (lit. are occasionally
served in joints or slices). The flesh of oxen, asses, elephants,
horses, pigs, dogs, foxes, wolves, lions, monkeys, apes is forbidden,
and those who eat such food become pariahs."

 

[sgarg]

This is in India I think. People who live in colder areas eat more meat per meal. The type of food one eats depend on the locality of that person.

Meat was a luxury in Europe before nineteenth century. All this cold stuff is BS. People have started eating more meat after factory farms and improvement in medical technology that has made meat cheaper.

 

[sgarg]

In general, availability of vegetarian food is far greater (at least a ratio of 50 to 1 between vegetarian food and non-vegetarian food) so it is a no-brainer what provides the nutrition to human race.

The role of meat in diet of humans is quite small and is ONLY HYPED UP.

 

[HeinzGud]

Meat was a luxury in Europe before nineteenth century. All this cold stuff is BS. People have started eating more meat after factory farms and improvement in medical technology that has made meat cheaper.

Meat wasn't a luxury in Europe. Many Europeans were farmers back then. Which meant that they had cows/pigs/chicken etc., at their disposal at any time of the year. But the Europeans kept their livestock as a food source for the winter months.

 

[HeinzGud]

Brother, Sadly in your beautiful country Buddhism has turned to be more political like Xtianity and Islam. It has lost its spiritual connect with many monks who ordain religious privileges for political power. I was saddened by this.. In fact on PDF, I was surprised to find a Lankan national accusing me of falsely claiming Buddhism because I didn't agree with his views on hating our Hindu brethren in India.

Whether he was a false flagger Pakistani or not I don't know but if he wasn't, then Sri Lankan Buddhism has become just like Islam and Xtianity are; money and power and no connect with the spirit of the universe, just like the Shakyamuni/Siddhartha Gautama had taught us all.

Yes Buddhism has turned into a political force in Sri Lanka. But it is not a new phenomenon. The very reason for the survival of Buddhism in Sri Lanka is it's involvement in politics.

Anyway this doesn't mean there are no ordained monks in Sri Lanka.

Buddhism cannot survive itself with the pacifism it taught. Little bit of profanity is needed to secure it's survival.

 

[Compersion]

whats wrong with being a vegetarian

 

[Tshering22]

Yes Buddhism has turned into a political force in Sri Lanka. But it is not a new phenomenon. The very reason for the survival of Buddhism in Sri Lanka is it's involvement in politics.

Anyway this doesn't mean there are no ordained monks in Sri Lanka.

Buddhism cannot survive itself with the pacifism it taught. Little bit of profanity is needed to secure it's survival.

Use all the force you need against the Religion of Pieces (read Islam) or their Cross cousins. We will fully support you. But I was talking about the internal politics which some political monks are screwing up life even for common Buddhists of your country.

 

[Ray]

The Buddhist monks are not only involved in politics in Sri Lanka, they are also assassins.

SWRD Bandarabayke, a Christian turned Buddhist for political reasons, was assassinated by a Buddhist monk.

They have shattered the fair name of Buddhism of being peaceful a religion that is beyond temporal nonsense.

 

[HeinzGud]

Use all the force you need against the Religion of Pieces (read Islam) or their Cross cousins. We will fully support you. But I was talking about the internal politics which some political monks are screwing up life even for common Buddhists of your country.

No one is screwing anyone life. The BBS is campaigning for what they think is right. Sri Lanka is a democratic nation, therefore anyone can express their concerns.

Similar thing had been done when Sikkim Mahinda thero was living in Sri Lanka.

 

[HeinzGud]

The Buddhist monks are not only involved in politics in Sri Lanka, they are also assassins.

SWRD Bandarabayke, a Christian turned Buddhist for political reasons, was assassinated by a Buddhist monk.

They have shattered the fair name of Buddhism of being peaceful a religion that is beyond temporal nonsense.

SWRD Bandaranayake is a Buddhist turned Christians later turned back to Buddhism. What is the wrong here?

No one ask for anyone's opinion of Sri Lankan Buddhism. If Sinhalese are happy about it why other worry so much. We don't try to convert anyone to Buddhism.

 

[DingDong]

Use all the force you need against the Religion of Pieces (read Islam) or their Cross cousins. We will fully support you. But I was talking about the internal politics which some political monks are screwing up life even for common Buddhists of your country.

Buddhism practiced in Sri Lanka is not really Buddhism as we know here in India, Buddhism in Sri Lanka is used for identity politics. In Sri Lanka Buddhism is more about Sinhalese identity and less about the theology and the teachings.

No one is screwing anyone life. The BBS is campaigning for what they think is right. Sri Lanka is a democratic nation, therefore anyone can express their concerns.

Similar thing had been done when Sikkim Mahinda thero was living in Sri Lanka.

I agree but the degree of influence of the religious people has breached the acceptable level. Aren't these people supposed to limit themselves to spirituality?

SWRD Bandaranayake is a Buddhist turned Christians later turned back to Buddhism. What is the wrong here?

No one ask for anyone's opinion of Sri Lankan Buddhism. If Sinhalese are happy about it why other worry so much. We don't try to convert anyone to Buddhism.

Actually several Sri Lankan Buddhists are here in India. They are the major groups behind conversions to Budhism in India, and are quite aggressive ad different compared to the Buddhist religious figures in India. It is not like we are concerned, Budhism is a part of the dharmic family and hence in our eyes this really is not "conversion".

 

[HeinzGud]

Buddhism practiced in Sri Lanka is not really Buddhism as we know here in India, Buddhism in Sri Lanka is used for identity politics. In Sri Lanka Buddhism is more about Sinhalese identity and less about the theology and the teachings.

In Sri Lanka we follow Theravada Buddhism. It is as same as what people in Thailand, Myanmar etc., practice. What you have mistaken is the Sinhalese culture. It is interwoven with the Buddhism.

I agree but the degree of influence of the religious people has breached the acceptable level. Aren't these people supposed to limit themselves to spirituality?

This is not for you to decide. It will be decided by Sinhalese.

 

[Vikramjeet]

I agree with Heinz Gud, this entire idea of 'monks should be limited to spirituality' is an idea which is result of people interiorizing western intellectuals emphasis on secularism too much. Religions are not just some dos and donts, they are complex creators of civilization, identity and institutions of any people and top figures of religions must have some say in politics for politics is what ensures continuity of that civilization. Just look at India where Hindus can not get one temple built for Ram because ' religion should be separate from politics' bullshit.

Sinhalese people have a right to do whatever they like in a nation whose 2300 years of history is interwoven with Buddhism and Sinhala language, lack of which means no Sri Lanka, certainly not SL we know. Ofcourse it must be admitted that Buddhists of Hinayana variety have always been more intolerant than Hindus and from Burmese attackers to modern day Sinhalas have repeatedly broken Hindu temples. Hindus on other hand, chant 'dharmic family' thing.

 

[Singh]

In general, availability of vegetarian food is far greater (at least a ratio of 50 to 1 between vegetarian food and non-vegetarian food) so it is a no-brainer what provides the nutrition to human race.

The role of meat in diet of humans is quite small and is ONLY HYPED UP.

The fact that Humans can eat meat shows that meat is an acceptable form of food.

 

[sgarg]

Meat wasn't a luxury in Europe. Many Europeans were farmers back then. Which meant that they had cows/pigs/chicken etc., at their disposal at any time of the year. But the Europeans kept their livestock as a food source for the winter months.

That is not the issue. The cost of producing meat is on average 20 times compared to veg, taking the same calorific value.

Not everybody is a farmer. It is a fact that common Europeans did not eat as much meat before as they do today.

 

[sgarg]

The fact that Humans can eat meat shows that meat is an acceptable form of food.

The Vedas prohibit consumption of meat. If you are a Hindu (Hinduism accepts precedence of Veda in all matters), then you must understand this.

 

[PredictablyMalicious]

The fact that Humans can eat meat shows that meat is an acceptable form of food.

Not really. Acceptable in the sense that it's possible and nutritious? Yes. Acceptable in the sense that it's morally permissible? No.

 

[Khagesh]

Humans can be made to eat anything, how does that prove anything about is acceptable as food.

Ki gondogol logic.

 

[Ray]

SWRD Bandaranayake is a Buddhist turned Christians later turned back to Buddhism. What is the wrong here?

No one ask for anyone's opinion of Sri Lankan Buddhism. If Sinhalese are happy about it why other worry so much. We don't try to convert anyone to Buddhism.

Every Christian is a convert. His ancestors had an original native religion and then he converted and his progenies followed Christianity.

Anyway, this might open up your eyes to reality about the origins of the Bandarnayke family.

The House of Nilaperumal
"Our prime minister's direct male ancestor, of whose connection some members of this family used to take pride in (see e.g. Twentieth Century Impressions of Ceylon, edited by Arnold Wright, 1907, p.525) was Nilaperumal, a Tamil from South India who arrived in Ceylon in the late fifteenth or early sixteenth century. He was described as a 'High Priest' of a temple in Ceylon. He was the first Kapurala in his family of the Nawagomuwe Dewale, with the fortunes of which the Bandaranaikes were long associated. Kakapuge was a name which the family used to affect in the past. It is the Sinhalese version of Nilaperumalage, the ge name of the Bandaranayakes......

One of S.W.R.D.Bandaranaike's nieces and academic Yasmine Gooneratne nee Bandaranaike wrote a readable book, Relative Merits: A Personal Memoir of the Bandaranaike Family of Sri Lanka (C.Hurst & Co, London, 1986). I quote the following two paragraphs from its foreword, entitled, 'Ancestors'.

""¦an Indian officer 'of high standing' who, serving under the Kings of Kandy and bearing the name Neela Perumal, was made high priest of the Temple of the God Saman, and commanded to take the name of Nayaka Pandaram (Chief Record Keeper) in 1454. If this tradition has truth in, we may surmise that the Indian name of Nayaka Pandaram came in time to adopt the form of Pandara Nayaka. By the time it had turned into the Sinhalese Bandaranaike, the Hinduism of its bearers had been replaced by Buddhism; just as we know, from written genealogical records dating back to the early seventeenth century, that Buddhism was itself replaced in the family by Christianity in its Catholic and later in its Protestant forms. However, the occupations of scribe seems to have descended in the family down the centuries, together with a tradition of service to the Court.

The pandaram of India are a Brahman sub-caste of genealogists and keepers of Court and family records, and the retinues of Indian princesses who came to the island in early times, to be married to a King or Prince in Kandy, must have included many such among the 'nobles as well as commoners duly absorbed in the vast statecraft of the Kingdom and in the hierarchy of the Court and palace personnel'. From very early times Mantai, or Mantota, had been the port of entrance to arrivals in Sri Lanka from South India"¦" (pages 3-4)
The Bandaranaikes from the House of Nilaperumal

Here is something to tell you about Buddhists not converting anyone