[Buddha-l] Buddhas Meditation

[Richard Hayes]

On Jul 7, 2011, at 17:28, "JKirkpatrick" <jkirk at spro.net> wrote:

> Come on, you philosophes--------------kindly explain why this
> phrase makes no sense, or viprysasa-wise, how it does make
> sense(????)
> 
> "eating meat with non-attachment is preferable to being attached
> to vegetarianism.."

It makes perfect sense as a statement of relative values. The word "preferable" is a value judgment. What the statement means is that the person making it values flexibility and latitude to moral absolutism. It means one prefers moral latitudinarianism to moral perfectionism (if I may be permitted to use the standard terminology from the field of religious ethics).

The Buddha said in Suttanipāta that holding any position so firmly that one denigrates others as inferior is a form of bondage. There is no doubt that being a vegetarian is commendable, but if one's attachment to the commendable practice leads one to condemn or denigrate people who have other dietary practices, then the attachment diminishes the otherwise commendable practice. 

I once wrote a paper on the fanatical vegetarian polemics in some Mahāyāna sutras and the unfortunate consequence they may have had in marginalizing non-vegetarian Buddhists as pseudo-Buddhists. I see that consequence as less preferable than the desideratum of saving animals from slaughter. Obviously, that is a matter of taste over which there is little room for rational dispute. You can take sides, but it's impossible to rationally defend the side you take. 

I read recently that in Nederlands a law was passed that no animals may be killed without first being stunned. I'm not sure what exactly that means. Perhaps Erik can amplify. What I read was that some Jews and some Muslims were unhappy with the new Dutch law, since it would render illegal the ritual killing required in kosher and halal (if that's the right word) meat preparation. I suppose the Dutch Mahāyānins were also unhappy with the law, since it did not ban ALL killing of animals. Those Dutch people are so hard to please, eh?

I trust this helps you to see that the claim about preferences that you asked about is not utter nonsense, even if you do still side with the moral absolutists and perfectionists in dismissing it as humbug. 

Richard Philosophe Hayes