Question:
Recently new to Buddhism this year, I want to thank you for your Podcast #43 on The Foundations of Buddhism. I have a question regarding diet – If we should not intake mind-alternating beverages like caffeine and alcohol and we should refrain from eating animals and seafood that have been killed. How do you justify a plant base diet – were not plants once living and killed for our intake. Then what is a person to eat and drink? Thanking you in advance for your wisdom and guidance.
Answer:
The prohibitions against caffeine, alcohol, and mind-altering substances are due to the harm they do to a Buddhist’s clarity of thought. we need to be present, mindful, and to avoid illusion and deception, while things that alter the mind hinder us in that ability. They make clear meditation difficult and have subtle effects on our daily lives. That’s true even with casual usage; the problems of addiction add another whole level to the problem. Some people may or may not agree with the prohibition, but I think most people understand the reasoning behind it.
Regular food, on the other hand, is more problematic. It’s not optional. We have to eat something, and for the most part, everything we eat used to be alive. The days of finding an animal that just happened to die and eating it are long gone for most of us. Almost all food animals today are raised by people for the sole purpose of being food. Clearly this is planned, and in many cases the animals suffer.
There is much debate on whether or not Buddhists should be vegetarians, and I don’t want to get into that again, because we have covered it numerous times in the past. The majority of Buddhists in the world are not vegetarians, but even if they were, vegetarian food was once alive as well.
Is killing a plant different from killing a person? According to Buddhism, yes. The main point to consider here is what makes humans and animals alike, yet different from plants? Animals have a property called sentience; animals feel pain and suffering. They are self aware, at least to some extent. As far as we can tell, plants are not self-aware and we cannot tell if they feel suffering. If plants do have some form of sentience, then they are much further down the chain than most other animals.
It’s a small point, but an important one. We have to eat something to survive, that’s just the way our world works. You can choose to be vegetarian or not, that’s up to you, but whatever you decide, just remember to be mindful that with every meal your take, someone or something died to give you that meal so that you might live another day. Thank them for giving up their life so that you might eat.
Excellent answers! You have a very accurate understanding of Buddhism thus far that I’ve seen.
Grateful and thankful for your wisdom and guidance in the buddhist diet!
I have always interpreted Buddha’s teaching on intoxicant’s as anything that causes headonism, which would clearly cause us to stay in our conditioned mind and not allow us to practice our buddha nature. I don’t think limiting it to drugs is appropriate. This is the middle way after all and moderation is key to this practice. Besides, tea, which is very high in caffeine,is an integral part of several buddhist cultures and its popularity is often attributed to the Buddha.
I am a vegetarian, and I have always considered the charge to reduce suffering more important in this decision than the proscription against killing. The reality is that animals for food suffer greatly. For me it’s an issue of right livelihood. Can I survive without contributing to the horrible suffering of living beings most people consume for food without a second thought? Of course, the flip side of the coin is that it is my choice alone, and I don’t try to convert friends or family.
In regards to the proscription against mind-altering substances, I have always taken this with a grain of salt. The fact is, our contrived concept of “drug” vs “medicine” will be unduly influencing thoughts and policy on the matter for a long time. However, I believe extending this proscription to television seems more appropriate than extending it to all psychoactive substances. The tea ceremony of Japan is a good example of a (arguably) Buddhist ceremony revolving around a psychoactive substance: caffeine. Also, Zen’s emphasis on direct personal spiritual revelation seems to okay the use of things like psychedelics for spiritual growth in my mind. Certainly there are many who came to Buddhism and Taoism as a direct result of their psychedelic experiences. Self-dilution and drunkenness seem to be the main point of this precept, in my humble opinion. As a side note, cannabis as a meditative aide has been used in India since time immemorial.
I think that its safe to assume that if something has a central nervous system, it is considered a sentient being and therefore is something that should not be killed. Whether that means you should stick to that strictly and be a vegetarian depends on how many negative actions you want to have to offset with actions of merit.
srl
Well, I had some things to say but Nathan said them for me ‚Äî especially concerning the use of caffeine and alcohol. I continue to call myself a Buddhist despite drinking one glass of red wine daily (per doctor’s recommendation) and several cups of green tea. Remember, any substance you take into your body will have some effect on your brain chemistry ‚Äî from carrots to sugar to caffeine. The key is moderation and only taking in that which will benefit you and as many beings as possible. I would hesitate to place television watching under the precept concerning intoxication and instead consider it (not watching or limiting) a “Right Effort” exercise.
If you eat food, fruits or vegetables, from a plant; you don’t usually kill or harm the plant in the process. In fact, if I save the seeds from the fruit/veggie that I eat, and use them to plant next year’s garden.. those seeds have a much better chance of living and growing into a new plant than they do if I leave them to fend for themselves. And, if we speak of tomatoes, I notice that the plants health is reduced if I do not remove some of that fruit. It’s true, that some plants are removed entirely from the ground to eat them, but most plants are not.
The Buddha said that while he was a young man he gave up all intoxication: “On seeing an old man, all intoxication with youth vanished from me. On seeing a sick man, all intoxication with health vanished from me. On seeing a dead man, all intoxication with life vanished from me.”
You will notice that the Buddha doesn’t talk about alcohol or drugs. He talks about attachment.
Thank you for that wisom.
The Buddha was never fond of meat in his last period of life. He was using the least food articles sufficient to survive a human life. Even the reason of his death is known. He had died due to consuming the poisionous meat. I believe he was great and shown us the way to consume the least toxified diet. Though he has allowed to eat the meat but of the animals who were died due to their natural death and not slaughtered intentionally just for taste. In my oepnion veg. diet is best and suffient for humans.
Thank you for the clarification. I believe that the intention behind the precept is that for the sake of “Training” I do not take life. The point is the avoidance of hatred and suffering (not death) by neither causing it nor participating in it. This is different than “no killing” period which is an impossibility. We kill thousands if not millions of micro-organism a day without intending it, but we do not cause them suffering intentionally by doing so. Death itself is not suffering, living in pain is suffering. When we end the life of an animal to survive we are not causing suffering,these animals lived a good life and thrived on their farm until it came to an end. Now, when we cram animals into cages so that we may sell more of them using less space then we cause suffering. You see it is our desires that are causing the suffering not the act of killing them. We eat plants and animals just like animals eat plants and animals, it is out of necessity not desire. When we begin to eat out of desire then we are causing suffering because our demand for plants and animals exceeds our necessity for them and thus Farmers must grow more plants and raise more animals and thus maximize their efficiency (causing suffering in the process). If you wish to avoid suffering then eat only what and when you need and nothing more.
Whether you eat a plant or an animal is kind of arbitrary really, they are both alive and would have died anyway. Regardless of what diet you choose, it will not prevent your death either. Desire causes suffering.