“Pāṇâtipāta: destruction of life，slaying，killing，murder.（pāṇātipātā veramaṇī，refraining from killing, the first of the dasasīla).”
“These five precepts lead with good behavior to bliss, with good behavior to wealth and success, they lead with good behavior to happiness, therefore purify behavior.” (Imāni pañca sikkhāpadāni. Sīlena sugatiṃ yanti, sīlena bhogasampadā, sīlena nibbutiṃ yanti, tasmā sīlaṃ visodhaye).” —closing words of taking five precepts ceremony
In the latest Buddhism in a Nutshell reel, I speak briefly about the first of the five main/root Buddhist vows or precepts (pañcaśīla) or five rules of training (pañcaśikṣapada; pañcasikkhapada) taken by laypeople and monastics, which is generally considered to be not-killing living beings, or refraining from taking life (pāṇātipātā veramaṇī). The other main precepts are: no stealing/taking what is not freely given, no lying/false speech, no sexual misconduct (for monastics not sexual activity at all) and no intoxicants.
This means that one undertakes the promise to refrain from deliberately and intentionally killing any being, such as out of anger or jealousy, but also for political or worldly reasons, to eat as food, for sport, for profit etc.
Supporting wrong livelihood, death penalty, abortion and euthanasia
This vow clearly includes not deliberately killing animals to eat, but also covers those who kill animals to eat for you and make a profit/business from it. The Buddha stated that killing or trading animals for business (such as a butcher/or meat shop) is a wrong livelihood, which are: 1) business in weapons, 2) business in human beings, 3) business in meat, 4) business in intoxicants, and 5) business in poison). So, buying meat from such people is also wrong in Buddhist terms because it is supporting the unethical, wrong livelihood of others.
The not-killing vow also would cover killing or supporting the killing of a human being for political reasons, such as assassination attempts or out of anger and jealousy. Also, the death penalty as a punishment would breach the vow.
Karmic intensity: Importance of intent
For a vow to be fully breached there normally has to be four factors present, the intent, the action, the accomplishment of the action and a sense of feeling satisfied (or worse, happy) that the action was done. If any of these factors are not present then the karmic negativity is lessened a little. So for example, one might regretfully kill or take life with an intent of genuine love and compassion for a being (as might be the case in an unwanted pregnancy or euthanasia), and although it is still killing, it would not be as serious or negative as the deliberate killing (or supporting the killing) of sentient beings on a regular or daily basis, with little to no regret or concern, for selfish reasons such as one’s health, culinary pleasure and so on.
The Three-Purity Rule for Monastics
The only allowance Buddha made for eating slaughtered animals was when monastics used to go begging for alms food and relied on the food donations for their daily sustenance. In that case, they were allowed to eat meat if it was spontaneously offered, but even then only if it passed the three-fold purity rule of being 100 percent sure that the animal had not been deliberately killed to eat (for more on the three-fold purity rule, see 17th Karmapa’s teaching last year on it here.)
This is why many Buddhists (and non-Buddhists) criticise the 14th Dalai Lama and the Gelugpas, who eat meat for health reasons saying it is permissible. The Buddha never taught that animals could be eaten by monastics (or laypeople) for health reasons, unless they were starving or dying etc. This is why the renowned animals rights philosopher, Prof Peter Singer recently stated in a podcast interview that the 14th Dalai Lama eating meat is ‘absurd‘. Tibetan scholars and masters have also previously critiqued the Gelugpa ‘non-Buddhist’ stance on meat-eating.
Actively taking life breaches the basis of Buddhist ethics: ahimsa (non-violence), love and compassion
So, in a nutshell, it is not the Buddhist way to eat animals, and if one is a monastic it breaches the Vinaya rules on eating animals, so even if a person wears monastic robes and has sincere refuge in Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, one could really not be considered a genuine, practising member of the Buddhist monastic community if one regularly eats meat inside or outside the monastery.
So anyone who is engaging in killing, or supporting others to kill beings, cannot really be said to be a genuine Buddha Dharma practitioner. The root samaya of Buddha Dharma (as HE 8th Garchen Rinpoche taught) is love and compassion for all beings. So supporting their deliberate breeding and killing for food lacks that love and compassion, and cannot be said to be humane, never mind Buddhist.
The Five Vows/Precepts
The five vows form the basis of several parts of Buddhist doctrine, both lay and monastic. Undertaking and upholding the five precepts is based on the principle of non-harming (ahiṃsa). The five precepts are part of the right speech, action and livelihood aspects of the Noble Eightfold Path, a core teaching of Buddhism. Moreover, the practice of the five precepts and other parts of śīla are described as forms of merit-making, means to create good karma. The five precepts have been described as social values that bring harmony to society, and in Buddhist texts, the ideal, harmonious society is one in which people keep the five precepts. The precepts are normative rules, but are formulated and understood as “undertakings” rather than commandments enforced by a moral authority.
I will be briefly looking at the rest of the five main Buddhist vows in future reels. May all beings know happiness and the causes of happiness, and may they be free of suffering and the causes of suffering!
Music? Chant of Metta 慈经 by Imee Ooi.
