tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18193044.post7115618920163178621..comments2024-01-23T04:15:50.693-06:00Comments on The Ratzaz Diaries: Mumbling Towards Babylon (Some Bull)Kalki Weisthorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16400738153780886132noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18193044.post-77668386819700462572007-12-27T19:51:00.000-06:002007-12-27T19:51:00.000-06:00I do disagree with the common assumption that mili...<I>I do disagree with the common assumption that militant vegetarians make that man's omnivorous nature is an absolutely bad things for animals. Very few animals, in this age of massive human overpopulation, would exist at all if not for man's desire to eat or somehow use them. Reflection yields that man's relationship with the other animals is more codependent that you might believe. Surely you don't think millions of cattle would be frollicking freely in the wild? Or that they would even exist as a breed, at all?</I><BR/><BR/>No, I don't think they'd be frolicking in the wild. But if i had to choose between enduring a life of confinement, abuse, suffering and misery, culmuniating in an inhumae death versus not existing at all, I think I would chose not existing at all. Breeding and raising thinking and feeling creatures so that we can torture them and use them as food and commodity is not exactly giving them a gift of life. I think it would be much better to reduce the suffering of living beings by not bringing them into the world for such a cruel purpose in the first place. It's barbaric and sick to do so when it is so unnecessary and destructive to the earth and everyone involved. <BR/><BR/>Thanks for the info on Buddhism and vegetarianism. I didn't realize that, and it makes me even less inclined to look toward any Buddshit organization for guidance. Unneccesary killing of other living creatures is a pretty simple concept, so to say that non-harm is a moral precept of Buddhism, and for the vast majority of them to not follow it in such a way, makes them hypocrites who pick and choose their interpretations as it is convenient for them. We all do this, but I'm certainly not going to respect anyone with such a blatant disregard for their own teachings.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18193044.post-32699640569343126412007-12-27T19:07:00.000-06:002007-12-27T19:07:00.000-06:00Two facts about Buddhism: First, very few Buddhist...Two facts about Buddhism: First, very few Buddhists, or rather schools of Buddhists, are vegetarian. Of the main schools, only the Theravadans, as far as I know or can think of right now. Second, the Buddhist precepts are actually rules for living together socially (originally within a monastic community), not moral commandments as in theistic religions; only when taken as a categorical imperative does "Do no harm" fail to be practicable. So what I said is both true and false. Hey, if Dogen can do it....<BR/><BR/>I do disagree with the common assumption that militant vegetarians make that man's omnivorous nature is an absolutely bad things for animals. Very few animals, in this age of massive human overpopulation, would exist at all if not for man's desire to eat or somehow use them. Reflection yields that man's relationship with the other animals is more codependent that you might believe. Surely you don't think millions of cattle would be frollicking freely in the wild? Or that they would even exist as a breed, at all?<BR/><BR/>The abiding principle of Zen as opposed to some other Buddhism is that one should maintain an inductive faith in the practice of zazen itself, with the guidance of a teacher to keep from getting off course. However, in the long run one trusts one's own experience over any teachings. I realize that many if not most Buddhist teachers claim to think that the world can be saved. I do not, but I don't think that's a problem. I am not a teacher, but I have more and more faith in my own perceptions. And I practice to be able to face reality just as it is. I just trouble having expressing it in words, as honestly I think everyone does.<BR/><BR/>It is not really hard at all to see the difference between a cow, a fish, and human -- objectively, that is. Subjectively, the value we place in them, like in a stuffed animal or in another person (as in my old "Chobits" article you commented on), determines their meaning to us, not an objective existence or soul.Kalki Weisthorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16400738153780886132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18193044.post-17606035110572973362007-12-27T10:16:00.000-06:002007-12-27T10:16:00.000-06:00So basically, you're saying that the moral precept...So basically, you're saying that the moral precepts of Buddhism are not possible to obey, so pick and chose whatever you want to do. The environment cannot be saved, so we might as well continue to rape and plunder it for as long as we can. ? <BR/><BR/>Isn’t the gist of non-harm to *avoid* harm whenever possible? I agree that it is impossible to live completely without harm, but there is a difference between accidently stepping on an ant and choosing to eat a slaughtered animal when there are many other, less violent options freely available. I guess I am curious as to why you chose to identify yourself with Buddhism if you don’t believe in making an honest effort to follow its moral guidelines. Why not make your own brand of meditation or self-inquiry and leave the morality out of it? Granted, I have not been reading your blog for long so forgive me if these are issues you’ve addressed before. I am not trying to be the morality police- just trying to understand why you would affiliate yourself with something you don’t seem to embrace.<BR/><BR/>As to your attitude on the environment, this is what I notice: It seems you have a very justified contempt for the destruction mankind has wrecked on the earth. However, in light of the fact that you identify yourself with Buddhism, I don’t understand your willingness to throw up your hands and make predictions for an apocalyptic future. The world is a reflection of yourself. Your actions moment by moment affect the reflection that you see. What the “future” may or may not bring has nothing to do with the choices you personally chose to make moment by moment. The future is a fantasy, is it not? The judgments you place on what others outside of you have done or are doing are also projections, correct? You, Right now is the only thing that is real. Doesn’t it make sense to do all that you can to respect and revere the earth in every way you live, regardless of the outcome or what ‘others out there’ are doing or have done? Isn’t that what’s real? I’m not that educated in Buddhism. I’m only calculating what makes sense to me. I’m not criticizing you either – I’m probably addressing the ways that I see a reflection of my own tendencies in you. I’m just curious how you reconcile these things.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18193044.post-75551326851891232082007-12-26T20:05:00.000-06:002007-12-26T20:05:00.000-06:00I'll respond very briefly, cause I've done so a...I'll respond very briefly, cause I've done so at greater length before, but (1) as to the environment, you're right, but the environment could tolerate these effects if there weren't so damn many people, and there's really no way to save the environment at this point anyway; and (2)as to harm, it's absolutely impossible to live without causing harm, which makes the first precept of Buddhism completely impossible. So you just have to pick the harm you do and live with it. I empathize with mammals, but not with birds or fish, so I really don't like mistreating them. It's subjective.<BR/><BR/>I certainly appreciate your comments, keep it up!Kalki Weisthorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16400738153780886132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18193044.post-90979588045163172282007-12-26T13:22:00.000-06:002007-12-26T13:22:00.000-06:00I won't get into the debate about whether humans a...I won't get into the debate about whether humans are naturally omnivorous. But I do want to address another factor you didn't mention, and that isthe toll of meat consumption on the environment. You *can't* be an environmentalist or complain about global warming and eat meat without being a total hypocrite. Raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases than all of the vehicles of the world combined. Not to mention deforestation for the land for raising animals for food. The mass capture and farming of fish is also *extremely* destructive to the marine environment. It takes seven times less land to feed a vegetarian than it does someone on a meat-based diet. So it's not just about the animals suffering, it's about *everyone* suffering.(Source: UN Food & Agriculture Organization).<BR/>http://veg.ca/content/view/133/111/<BR/><BR/>Call me a hippie, but I *don't* see the difference between a fish and a cow, or a human for that matter. Aren't these artificial boundaries we create in our mind, somehow thinking we are different and superior to other forms of life? Life is life. Are other sentient beings not just as capable of feeling pain as we are? What exactly makes us different? That we have a *soul*? hehheh : )Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18193044.post-7509342901270066842007-12-22T10:40:00.000-06:002007-12-22T10:40:00.000-06:00First, I repeat - why aren't you a professional wr...First, I repeat - why aren't you a professional writer somewhere?! I enjoyed this post a lot; although, I fully realize that I am probably one of your primary resources for the New Age things haha ... however; if those contributions prime the pump for posts such as this, I will consider it an obligation and duty to find more to send! <BR/><BR/>I agree with most everything you say. Your Dick Cheney comments caused me to laugh out loud (glad no one was around to see that). <BR/><BR/>Agree that there's a big difference between a Native American hunter trying to keep his family alive during a winter than we consumers who have endless choices as to grocery stores and restaurants to go to and continue to support factory farming, which is indeed one of the worst concentration camps ever in existence.<BR/><BR/>Keep it up -- I'm always happy when I have a new blog from you to read.<BR/><BR/>Tanya<BR/><BR/>P.S. Please get a professional writing gig. It's so obvious that it's where your talents belong ... at least it's obvious to me!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com