Vegans are attention seekers
It’s a Wednesday night, and that means chillax time bc I finish my major weekly tutes on Tuesday and Wednesday evenings. As is usual on days like today I have consumed too much food and as a result i’m feeling lazy and bloated. Menu was grilled trout, chicken curry, parippu with niwithi and braised broccoli with more niwithi. Quite rich for a bunch of students innit? (I say innit purely in jest, it is not a term I use with any other purpose). I can’t remember the last time I had two types of flesh for one meal, probably was at home sometime. There was however a time when I ate no flesh at all, I had a vegetarian phase for about 10 months.
I wanted to be a vegetarian around mid 2001. But then I started uni in England and I realised that there’s a limit to how much carrot, potatos and cabbage one can eat without jumping off a bridge. (I am aware that the brits know how to make potatos in a multitude of ways but i still think the best you can do with a potato is to use it as a weapon against shop lifters in supermarkets). So I quit no sooner I started but made a quiet pact with my conscience to become fully fledged vege boy once I pass away out. In 2004 I eventually passed out and after spending a few days gobbling lots of seafood back home I quite abruptly stopped eating all forms of meat. That is, no fish, no meat, no crustaceans and no birds. This was part of my attempt to be more spiritual and “one with nature” since it is fair to equate consuming flesh to killing. And killing is frowned upon. I think I remember the exact moment of inspiration. I was having dinner with my parents and as usual we had some meat and I swatted an annoying mosquito. Ammi at once reprimanded me saying that it’s a sin to kill. Wtp? it’s ok to kill a chicken but not a mosquito? Chickens don’t make annoying buzzing noises when you’re trying to sleep and they don’t suck your blood and they don’t give you God awful diseases (other than recent buggers, bloody poultry - and what’s with Asian Bird Flu inconspicuously becoming Avian Bird Flu? It’s like Sinhala Urumaya becoming Sihala Urumaya after realising that the original name is ever so slightly politically incorrect). So I thought to myself, if it’s bad to kill a mosquito (which it is, doesn’t mean I like them, zzzz zzzz swat!!), it’s equally bad to kill chickens.
I’m guessing most families would encourage a young aspiring vegetarian. But not mine. They said things like, “Don’t be a fool, that chicken would have been killed whether you eat it or not so might as well eat it.” and “Just bc you don’t eat some fish you think all the bloody fishermen will throw their rods in the sea and start knitting hankerchiefs?” Ok so they do have a point, my reduced consumption will not make a sufficient dent in total demand to reduce supply and thereby reduce killing. And if everybody thinks that way there would be no reduction in demand for flesh. But, as more and more ppl think otherwise, the dent in demand becomes greater and greater. Today there are far more vegetarians than there were 10 or 20 years ago, and that would never have happened if everybody had the mindset that one person can’t make a difference.
People forever try to reconcile Buddhism with eating meat, but I think that’s a very tough proposition. They say that the Buddha never said to not eat meat. It’s very difficult to argue that eating meat is not tantamount to taking a life. If we didn’t eat meat nobody would kill cows and chickens and try convince us to put it in our mouths. A good way to look at eating meat is as a sin of collective society, and we as individuals in society are all equally responsible. The way to avoid the sin is to take individual responsibility and remove ourselves from the cycle of killing and eating, that is the least we can do.
Now this is important. I don’t have a problem with ppl who eat meat. We all sin every single day and we know it. We lie, we cuss, we consume intoxicating substances, we lust and we do most things that pious ppl shake their heads at. And yes, we eat meat. I do have a problem with ppl who eat meat and try to make it seem like it isn’t a sin and that it isn’t tantamount to killing. Just bite the bullet. It’s a sin, it’s mean but we do it anyway bc it tastes damn good! I also don’t quite understand how some ppl eat one type of flesh but don’t eat other types of flesh. Now Hindus in particular say that it’s not very nice to eat beef bc we drink the cow’s milk and the bulls work for us and all. Fair enough too, they deserve a peaceful retirement. But screw the chicken, eggs or no eggs, the chicken is going down. And the goats and fish and everyone else. So why is it that some ppl find it a terrible sin to eat a goat or a pig or a cow but quite alrite to eat a chicken or a fish? Aren’t the latter creatures living, breathing beings too? One might say that by not eating certain animals you’re cutting down on the amount of lives you consume. But just bc you don’t eat beef or mutton, are you going to go without flesh that day? You’ll probably compensate with whatever type of flesh that you do eat. If you’re going to not eat meat you might as well go all the way, this is one area where I don’t think there is a gray area in between, it’s either all or nothing. In fact it’s probably better to eat a dish of beef than to eat a dish of prawns bc the latter would result in way more deaths. Another common excuse is that you need animal protein to survive. Cock. There are plenty of vegans who live perfectly healthy lives.
So what happened to my vegetarian phase? Around March this year I got a flu and I was sick for a week, quite basic stuff except that my natural immunity failed to recover, my white blood cell count dropped 40% below normal and I was told that I’m not consuming enough protein and was ordered to eat flesh. Thank God. I had already started cheating by that stage and sneaking in a chicken buriyani on the odd day as opposed to my usual vegetable rice and curry and it was a matter of time before my mental strength gave way to the power of the taste bud. I missed sea food tremendously. But I was very lucky in that I just adore Sri Lankan vegetables. Mallums, wattakka, nelum ala, karavila, watakolu, wambotu and so on, I could just live on the stuff. If not for that there was no way I could have survived even the 10 or so months I did as a vegetarian. Now I eat pretty much anything, as my father says “duwana paninina ona ekak kamu.” I understand that it’s not a very nice thing to do, but then I do a lot of not nice things. Hopefully someday I will have sufficient mental strength to quit meat for good.
Disclaimer: All you vegans out there, hats off to you (don’t take the title personally, it’s from a T shirt I saw and felt i had to fit it in here somewhere). Except the ones who go to social functions and make a fuss saying they don’t eat this and that and embarass their hosts as a result, stop being anal, it’s not going to kill you to eat a bit of meat, though it might kill something else. 
This concept of “sin” doesn’t particularly occur to me, especially when I’m eating but I guess I’m just too far gone down the road to hell for that, hehe.
I am certainly with you on the topic of silly gits who consume one type of meat and not others because somehow one animal is “better” than the other - can I say Discrimination? What happened to equal rights for animals? Everyone should have the right to be eaten goddamit…
oh and
I might be stealing that line from you one of these days.. its fucking hilarious
Comment by loki — November 10, 2005 @ 3:25 am
Sinhala Urumaya became Sihala Urumaya because of politcal correctness? Who told you that dumbarse? Sihala and Sinhala are interchangable words. The party was called Sihala Urumaya from the beginning and some idiots always refer to it as Sinhala Urumaya.
Fucking low caste pariah.
Comment by Dumbarse — November 10, 2005 @ 8:49 am
Oh dear. Somebody needs to get laid.. don’t worry, i know of some quality govigama girls, horoscopes attached of course
Comment by ddm — November 10, 2005 @ 10:56 am
Dumbarse is right, it never was “Sinhala Urumaya” it was always “Sihala Urumaya” and people frequently misspell it or say it incorrectly. And further I see no political incorrectness in the term “Sinhala Urumaya.” Unless of course you think TNA, SLMC, EPDP, PLOTE etc etc are all being politically incorrect as well.
—————-
Besides that, you might find this interesting, about eating meat and Buddhism:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/bfaq.html#veggie
Are Buddhists vegetarian?
Some are, some aren’t. From the Theravada perspective, the choice of whether or not to eat meat is purely a matter of personal preference. Many Buddhists (and, of course, non-Buddhists) do eventually lose their appetite for meat out of compassion for the welfare of other living creatures.
Although the first of the five precepts, the basic code of ethical conduct for all practicing Buddhists, calls upon followers to refrain from intentional acts of killing, it does not address the consumption of flesh from animals that are already dead. Theravada monks, however, are clearly forbidden to eat meat from a few specific kinds of animals, but for reasons not directly related to the ethics of killing.1 Monks are free to pursue vegetarianism by leaving uneaten any meat that may have been placed in the alms bowl, but because they depend on the open-handed generosity of lay supporters2 (who may or may not themselves be vegetarian) it is considered unseemly for them to make special food requests. In those parts of the world (including wide areas of south Asia) where vegetarianism is uncommon and many dishes are prepared in a meat or fish broth, vegetarian monks would soon face a simple choice: eat meat or starve.3
Taking part in killing for food is definitely incompatible with the first precept, and should be avoided. This includes hunting, fishing, trapping, butchering, steaming live clams, eating live raw oysters, etc.
But what if I eat — or just purchase — meat: aren’t I simply encouraging someone else to do the killing for me? How can letting someone else do the “dirty work” possibly be consistent with the Buddhist principles of compassion and non-harming, a cornerstone of right resolve? The Dhammapada expresses this sentiment succinctly:
All
tremble at the rod,
all
hold their life dear.
Drawing the parallel to
yourself,
neither kill nor get others to kill.
[Dhp 130]
Clearly we should not intentionally ask someone to kill for us — as when, for example, we order fresh boiled lobster from the restaurant menu. But purchasing a piece of meat from an animal that was previously killed is another matter. Although my purchase may indeed help keep the butcher or restaurateur in business, I am not asking him to kill on my behalf. Whether he kills another cow tomorrow is his choice, not mine. This is a difficult but important point, one that reveals the fundamental distinction between personal choices (choices aimed at altering my own behavior) and political ones (those aimed at altering others’ behavior). Each of us must discover for ourselves where lies the boundary between the two. It is crucial to remember that the Buddha’s teachings are, first and foremost, tools to help us learn to make good personal choices (kamma); they are not prescriptions for political action.
We are all guilty of complicity, in one way or another and to varying degrees, in the harming and death of other creatures. Whether we are carnivore, vegan, or something in between, no matter how carefully we choose our food, somewhere back along the long chain of food production and preparation, killing took place. No matter how carefully we trod, with every step countless insects, mites, and other creatures inadvertently perish under our feet. This is just the nature of our world. It is only when we escape altogether from the round of birth and death, when we enter into the final liberation of nibbana — the Deathless — can we wash our hearts clean, once and for all, of killing and death. To steer us towards that lofty goal, the Buddha gave us very realistic advice: he didn’t ask us to become vegetarian; he asked us to observe the precepts. For many of us, this is challenge enough. This is where we begin.
Notes
1. Theravada monks are forbidden to eat raw meat or fish, as well as the flesh of humans, elephants, horses, dogs, snakes, lions, tigers, leopards, bears, hyenas, and panthers. See the description of “staple foods” in chapter 8 of The Buddhist Monastic Code. A monk who eats any of those kinds of meat commits an offense that he must confess to his fellow monks.
2. See “The Economy of Gifts” by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
3. Monastics within some schools of Mahayana Buddhism do practice vegetarianism. See Buddhist Religions: A Historical Introduction (fifth edition) by R.H. Robinson, W.L. Johnson, & Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Belmont, California: » Wadsworth, 2005), p. 213.
Comment by Jiminy — November 10, 2005 @ 3:36 pm
First of all D, kudos for the comeback at this Dumbarse character.
Secondly as the resident Hindu I would like to get on my pedantic pedestal to point people properly porward(sic) por(sic) once.
Hindus are of several different types/castes, you have Vaishnavas, Sikhs, Vamanas etc., each following a different kind of law. The Brahmins believe that eating meat, of any kind, and eggs too is prohibited. Though there was this chap called Kannappa who did eat meat and was proclaimed by Shiva to be one of his foremost disciples. Though the Gods seemed to do a lot of this proclaiming those days. Here’s a link to anyone who’s interested here
I am a vegetarian by proxy, Amy is a veggie and we usually cook for each other so apart from the odd sausage, or kebab, or whenever we eat out I eat almost no meat at all, and I really don’t notice it. Also, my poo smells a lot better!
Anyway, I digress, some Hindu scriptures say that it is immoral to eat meat, like the Thirukkural, but some don’t even mention the subject while some people like Guru Nanak even advocated it! Animal sacrifice has been part of Hindu culture for thousands of years and I doubt they just let the slaughtered cow/yak/goat become a happy meal for a bunch of leopards.
I’d love to be veggie, but I can’t resist some nice German Pepper Salami. God those germans have tasty salami. I hope you all get the innuendo there. Oh, and Dumbarse, why don’t you go fuck your cousin you inbred little shit.
Comment by Curious Yellow — November 10, 2005 @ 10:40 pm
Animal slaughter still goes on in the Hindu Temples of Jaffna where they slaughter goats within the temple compounds. Disgusting if you ask me.
Comment by Aravind — November 11, 2005 @ 12:02 am
You might find this interesting & informative:
http://accesstoinsight.org/bfaq.html#veggie
Are Buddhists vegetarian?
Some are, some aren’t. From the Theravada perspective, the choice of whether or not to eat meat is purely a matter of personal preference. Many Buddhists (and, of course, non-Buddhists) do eventually lose their appetite for meat out of compassion for the welfare of other living creatures.
Although the first of the five precepts, the basic code of ethical conduct for all practicing Buddhists, calls upon followers to refrain from intentional acts of killing, it does not address the consumption of flesh from animals that are already dead. Theravada monks, however, are clearly forbidden to eat meat from a few specific kinds of animals, but for reasons not directly related to the ethics of killing.1 Monks are free to pursue vegetarianism by leaving uneaten any meat that may have been placed in the alms bowl, but because they depend on the open-handed generosity of lay supporters2 (who may or may not themselves be vegetarian) it is considered unseemly for them to make special food requests. In those parts of the world (including wide areas of south Asia) where vegetarianism is uncommon and many dishes are prepared in a meat or fish broth, vegetarian monks would soon face a simple choice: eat meat or starve.3
Taking part in killing for food is definitely incompatible with the first precept, and should be avoided. This includes hunting, fishing, trapping, butchering, steaming live clams, eating live raw oysters, etc.
But what if I eat — or just purchase — meat: aren’t I simply encouraging someone else to do the killing for me? How can letting someone else do the “dirty work” possibly be consistent with the Buddhist principles of compassion and non-harming, a cornerstone of right resolve? The Dhammapada expresses this sentiment succinctly:
All
tremble at the rod,
all
hold their life dear.
Drawing the parallel to
yourself,
neither kill nor get others to kill.
[Dhp 130]
Clearly we should not intentionally ask someone to kill for us — as when, for example, we order fresh boiled lobster from the restaurant menu. But purchasing a piece of meat from an animal that was previously killed is another matter. Although my purchase may indeed help keep the butcher or restaurateur in business, I am not asking him to kill on my behalf. Whether he kills another cow tomorrow is his choice, not mine. This is a difficult but important point, one that reveals the fundamental distinction between personal choices (choices aimed at altering my own behavior) and political ones (those aimed at altering others’ behavior). Each of us must discover for ourselves where lies the boundary between the two. It is crucial to remember that the Buddha’s teachings are, first and foremost, tools to help us learn to make good personal choices (kamma); they are not prescriptions for political action.
We are all guilty of complicity, in one way or another and to varying degrees, in the harming and death of other creatures. Whether we are carnivore, vegan, or something in between, no matter how carefully we choose our food, somewhere back along the long chain of food production and preparation, killing took place. No matter how carefully we trod, with every step countless insects, mites, and other creatures inadvertently perish under our feet. This is just the nature of our world. It is only when we escape altogether from the round of birth and death, when we enter into the final liberation of nibbana — the Deathless — can we wash our hearts clean, once and for all, of killing and death. To steer us towards that lofty goal, the Buddha gave us very realistic advice: he didn’t ask us to become vegetarian; he asked us to observe the precepts. For many of us, this is challenge enough. This is where we begin.
Notes
1. Theravada monks are forbidden to eat raw meat or fish, as well as the flesh of humans, elephants, horses, dogs, snakes, lions, tigers, leopards, bears, hyenas, and panthers. See the description of “staple foods” in chapter 8 of The Buddhist Monastic Code. A monk who eats any of those kinds of meat commits an offense that he must confess to his fellow monks.
2. See “The Economy of Gifts” by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
3. Monastics within some schools of Mahayana Buddhism do practice vegetarianism. See Buddhist Religions: A Historical Introduction (fifth edition) by R.H. Robinson, W.L. Johnson, & Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Belmont, California: » Wadsworth, 2005), p. 213.
Comment by Red — November 11, 2005 @ 2:40 am
Jiminy - Thanks that was most informative. Thing is, personal choices are political are often political whether we intend for them to be so or not. My choice of whether to eat meat indirectly affects the butcher’s choices. So our choices do matter, though they maybe indirect. On the Si(n)hala urumaya thing, you’re right, i said that more for the sake of humour than anything else, it wasn’t a profound political sentiment
Dhana - I didn’t know you’re a veg! well done you bugger! most impressed. Also thanks for the resident Hindu input, though I was under the impression that cows are sacred under the general Hindu doctrine (was it also something to do with the cow being a mode of transport of one of the Gods?).
Loki - You have my blessings to acquire any phrases as you see fit. Suwapath vewa.
Comment by ddm — November 11, 2005 @ 8:34 am
human brains evolved to present state partly because we needed to hunt in competition against other predators who have evolved different methods much earlier than us. we are natural born killers.
animal sacrifice can be poetic too in addition to being disgusting.
And soon as the men had prayed and flung the barley,
first they lifted back the heads of the victims,
slit their throats , skinned them and carved away
meat from the thighbones and wrapped them in fat,
a double fold sliced clean and toped with strips of flesh.
And the old man burned these on dried cleft stick
and over the quarters poured out glistening wine
while young men at his side held five pronged forks.
Once they had charred the thighs and tasted the organs
they cut the rest into pieces, pierced them with spits,
roasted them to a turn and pulled them off the fire.
The work done, the feast laid out, they ate well
and no man’s hunger lacked a share of the banquet.
- iliad, somewhere in book 1 translated by robert fagles
now i am going to roast some beef.
Comment by sittingnut — November 15, 2005 @ 3:50 am
We’re natural born killers? Really? Well I guess if you count our ability to run faster than most animals, our sharp teeth, vicious claws, and impressive stealth then yes…Oh, wait. Humans are natural toolmakers and inventors, that is why we evolved the way we did, not because we are good at attacking out prey.
Comment by Jessica — September 25, 2008 @ 1:52 am
HITLER WAS A VEGETARIAN
Comment by FLU-BIRD — November 13, 2008 @ 2:43 am
and Hitler certainly was an attention seeker. i win!
Comment by ddm — November 13, 2008 @ 6:58 pm
god-fearing man
Comment by buddha statue — June 12, 2009 @ 1:19 pm