The Dalai Lama talks Turkey

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/24/2005 4:13:43 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, aoclery writes:

I am not saying that meat eaters aren't on the path, what I am saying

is that it is against Ahimsa and Daya for animals, therefore is a

desire samskara to be purified.The DL may or may not be more advanced

than I am, but in the end we still have to purify the Buddhi.

What is against ahimsa is to create suffering for others, animal or

human. The Jains understand and wisely teach this, and most of

course, as you would suggest, choose not to eat meat in order to

avoid that added complication...but they are not absolutists, they

know that at times, regrettably, one has to do things in order to

choose a path that provides for survival, health, and balance. If

your crops are all going to be destroyed by locusts, despite Ahimsa,

the Jains do not believe in infinite mercy toward the locusts, but

will light fires to ward them off and yes, to kill them. During

times of famine, Jains will also even consume locusts, if need be to

survive. They realize that each day, tiny insects and organisms are

destroyed just by their act of breathing, walking and other

activities. They understand that to exist, a larger creature

necessarily is imperfect and will harm, through no voluntary action

untold millions of lesser creatures. We should not increase the

suffering of other beings, nor should we unduly produce suffering in

other family members or ourselves. That too, violates Ahimsa. We

cannot consider ourselves enlightened beings if we protect all other

living things but punish ourselves.

Purification? That is a loaded concept, because it implies that we

are somehow contaminated to begin with. I would prefer to think that

we arrive at a state of clear headed, dispassionate enlightenment that

also has room for love, mercy, joy and bliss. If we take all the

pleasures out of our heaven, I believe that we can safely rename it

"Hell."

Cheers,

ZB

Change Your Life.... www.igonet.com/zencommunications

[Guest guest]

, zen2wrk@a... wrote:

>

>

> In a message dated 11/24/2005 3:27:28 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

> yosyflug@i... writes:

>

> Namaste,

>

> To me the DaLai Lama is a great political and religious leader,

the

> fact he eats meat precludes me from supposing he is an

enlightened

> being...Tony.

>

>

> And your comments, as usual, confirm that you are in no position

to make any

> form of rational assessment on issues of spiritual value. When

did

> absolutism ever refine the search for enlightenment? Should a

person stranded on an

> island never eat meat to survive because they have once chosen to

not eat

> meat for spiritual reasons? What if the life of a child or

children were at

> stake?

>

> We have a name for people who must be totally 100% consistent

under all

> times and conditions. Oh, and it's not "enlightened being,"

it's "foolish."

>

> Zenbob

 

Namaste,

 

It is difficult to talk to a farmer and meat eater about this as we

have found before.

 

A person an a desert island is just a 'red herring' the

circumstances are different. Some primitive humans kill and eat meat

according to custom, to survive...I know that.

 

I have also gleaned from the Vedanta that one desire only is enough

to prevent Moksha. The Buddhi has to be purified, we are all working

on it.

 

I am not saying that meat eaters aren't on the path, what I am

saying is that it is against Ahimsa and Daya for animals, therefore

is a desire samskara to be purified.

 

The DL may or may not be more advanced than I am, but in the end we

still have to purify the Buddhi.

 

http://www.geocities.com/aoclery/AVEGETARIANandAHIMSA.htm

 

ONS...Tony.