Page 23 - Applied Buddhism

for food or if it is suspected that the food was intentionally prepared Karma is the intention (cetana) of the mind, and is performed
for one. This is obviously a way to ensure that one is not a party to directly by the person concerned. If a person is involved in killing,
the act of killing. he is responsible for it. If you are not involved in the killing, you
are free from the bad karma of killing. You cannot be indirectly
Once a disciple of the Buddha, by the name of Jivaka, enquired responsible for the act of killing of others of which you have no
from the Buddha, “Lord, I have heard that animals are slaughtered knowledge.
on purpose for the recluse Gotama, and that the recluse Gotama
knowingly eats the meat killed on purpose for him. Lord, do One may argue on the demand-supply theory that because we
those who say animals are slaughtered on purpose for the recluse eat, other lives are killed. That argument is valid theory-wise but
Gotama, and the recluse Gotama knowingly eats the meat killed on we are still not karmically responsible for their death - those who
purpose for. Do they falsely accuse the Buddha? Or do they speak killed are responsible. If we were to be responsible for that, then
the truth? Are your declaration and supplementary declarations not by sitting here listening to me you are already responsible for the
thus subject to be ridiculed by others in any manner?’ death of many lives because the air-conditioner that is bringing
comfort to you is using gas that is depleting the ozone, and hence
“Jivaka, those who say: ‘Animals are slaughtered on purpose destroying certain lives on earth. The electricity that is used in this
for the recluse Gotama, and the recluse Gotama knowingly eats the microphone is powered by burning fossil fuel, thereby generating
meat killed on purpose for him’, do not say according to what I have carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide and warming the earth,
declared, and they falsely accuse me. Jivaka, I have declared that causing many lives to die. In fact by the same logic, you are also
one should not make use of meat if it is seen, heard or suspected to responsible for the killing of millions of insects and pests when you
have been killed on purpose for a monk. I allow the monks meat that opt for vegetables. Therefore, we cannot extrapolate one simple act
is quite pure in three respects: if it is not seen, heard, or suspected to of us to cover all other consequences. All we can say is that this is
have been killed on purpose for a monk.” (Jivaka Sutta, AN 8.26). a world of unsatisfactoriness or “Dukkha”.

Some people remarked that Buddhists are very clever: they can There are Buddhists who opt for a vegetarian diet. They do so
eat meat while they do not kill. We are indeed clever. Let me offer out of COMPASSION. They know they are not responsible for the
an explanation here. Killing is an act that is karmically bad, and will killing even if they eat meat, but out of compassion, they opt for
bring bad result to the one who kills, but eating meat, like drinking vegetarian food, hoping that less lives would be killed. This is of
water or eating rice, is karmically neutral. The two acts need not be course very praise worthy.
linked together, unless you see and hear the killing or suspect that
the animal is killed purposely for you. When Buddhism spread from India to China, the Chinese monks
did not follow the Indian tradition of going out for alms food. They

010 Applied Buddhism Applied Buddhism 011