Why Aren’t All Buddhists
Vegetarians?
05/03/2016 Nicholas Liusuwan Huffpost
In a previous
article, I discussed a few stereotypes
that surround Buddhism. One of which was the idea of vegetarianism.
As I explained in the previous entry, vegetarianism in Buddhism
depends on the sect, and many sects do not require or even
encourage it. It is even generally agreed that the Buddha himself
and his monks ate meat.
But that
just raises further questions. Buddhism is widely known for its
teachings of non-violence, even towards animals. So how is it
possible that such a religion would not require
vegetarianism?
Monasticism
To see why
this is the case let’s start with the monastics. Excluding most
schools of Mahayana Buddhism, Buddhist monastics will usually eat
meat. A part of this has to do with the Buddha’s requirement that
the Sangha, or monastic community, live off the generosity of the
laypeople.
The purpose
of this requirement has to do with both convenience and
compassion.
It is
obviously more convenient and conducive to mental cultivation for a
monk to simply live off the food given by others than it is for
them to cook their own food. Not only does it save time, it frees
the mind from the worry of having to prepare or choose what to
make.
The other
reason is compassion. The Law of
Karma is a huge part of Buddhism,
and finding stories in the Pali Canon of
compassionate monks looking for people in need to accept food from
is not uncommon. Providing the laypeople
with a source of merit, or good karma, is a major reason the Buddha
had this requirement for the Sangha.
The
Buddhist scriptures actually describe the Sangha as the “Anuttaram
puññakkhettam lokassa”, or the “incomparable merit field of the
world”. So requiring the Sangha to live off the generosity of
others was the best way to make use of this detail.
This requirement did change in some later sects of Buddhism
however, mostly due to cultural differences. In many schools of
Mahayana Buddhism for instance, the Sangha is encouraged to be
self-sufficient, a bit of a 180 degree turn from what the Buddha
requested, but makes sense considering begging wasn’t considered a
very noble livelihood in ancient China.
So why
can’t monks simply request vegetarian food?
The reason
for this is has to do with convenience for the laypeople. The
Sangha is supposed to make themselves easy to support, and that
includes not being picky about food, although monastics are to
refuse accepting certain foods for a variety of reasons.
A few
examples of such are meat; if they see, hear, or suspect the animal
was killed specifically for them or if it is a type of meat the
Buddha forbade monks to accept, such as human or tiger meat to name a
few.
Also, just
keep in mind; it would be awfully rude if a faithful but poor
family saved up to buy meat at the market to offer to a monk, only
to get rejected because the monk doesn’t want to eat
meat.
Laypeople
So what of
the laypeople? After all, Buddhist laypeople can choose what they
eat, so why are they able to eat meat?
I remember
one Theravada monk explain this to me using a pretty good example.
Suppose a tiger was to kill a deer, and then ate part of it and
left. Then, a vulture flies by and eats the remainder of the deer.
Is the vulture responsible for the deer’s death?
Long story
short, there is no bad karma in being the scavenger in Buddhism,
but there is in being the hunter. The act of eating meat is
separate from the act of killing, and you don’t necessarily have to
kill to eat meat. In the Amagandha
Sutta, the Buddha recalls his predecessor making this
very point about these two acts being separate, and whether or not
you’re a vegetarian will have no effect on bringing you closer to
achieving Nirvana.
This is the
basis of why it is okay to eat meat in Buddhism. Buying meat at the
market constitutes being a scavenger, and it’s better to make use
of the meat rather than having the animal die just to have its
flesh thrown away.
As for
those who say not buying meat reduces the killing of animals, this
is a good point to make, but not an all-encompassing point. There
is a famous story in the Buddha’s life where he was at a festival
as a child. During the festival, the young prince caught a glimpse
of a farmer plowing his field to plant crops. The observant prince
noticed that as the farmer plowed the field, it exposed and killed
numerous worms and insects in the ground, causing the prince to
feel great compassion for the small creatures.
While the supply and demand effects of buying less meat would shift
killing away from livestock, the consumption of crops also leads to
the loss of life, even if accidental or indirectly. Not to mention,
in today’s world many farmers use pesticides to protect their
crops, a deliberate act of killing. Horrible as it may be, this is
just the world we live in, and it’s best not to focus too much on
things out of our control. Being a vegetarian doesn’t make you
good, and not being one doesn’t make you bad.
Just to be
clear, if you’re a vegetarian, that doesn’t mean you should quit
after reading this article. The purpose of this article is solely
to explain the reasons as to why some Buddhists don’t consider
vegetarianism necessary. Some sects of Buddhism do encourage
vegetarianism for various reasons and some don’t, but just because
a sect doesn’t actively encourage it doesn’t mean it’s
discouraged.
Just
because there are no “spiritual” benefits to vegetarianism doesn’t
mean the lifestyle has no benefits. While the Buddha made it clear
that being a scavenger isn’t direct enough to be considered
killing, vegetarianism is essentially a personal choice that has a
host of health and environmental benefits even for Buddhists of
non-vegetarian traditions.