| CLAUDETTE: How difficult
was it to carry out research into Buddhist morality and the practice
of flesh-eating?
TONY: It was surprisingly easy. I have been a student
of Buddhism for 20 years but have always been disturbed by the number
of modern Buddhists who ate meat, as well as by the relative neglect
of animal rights as an issue with Buddhist groups in the West. I
have always understood that, given its strong principle of "ahimsa"
or non-violence, Buddhism frowned upon meat-eating, since meat-eating
inevitably meant doing violence to animals that were slaughtered
for food.
But I found that a lot of present day Buddhist teachers and practitioners
were actually trying to justify meat-eating. Clearly, something
was wrong. So I decided to see what the scriptural basis for meat-eating
was. I resolved largely to by-pass what later commentators on Buddhism
had said on the subject (many were meat-eaters) and go back to
the original scriptures to see what the Buddha himself had stated.
It is always best to go back to the source, as far as possible.
And I was tremendously encouraged to see that there was a wealth
of evidence showing that Buddha Shakyamundi was himself against
the eating of meat and was in fact a strong advocate of vegetarianism
and compassion towards animals. This formed the basis of my book.
|
| CLAUDETTE: Isn't there
a difference regarding the question of meat-eating between the two
big schools of Buddhism, "Theravada" and "Mahayama"?
TONY: Yes, seemingly so. The Pali scriptures of the Theravada
school report the Buddha as having died from eating some rotten
pork at the end of his life, and also claim that he said it was
OK to eat flesh as long as you yourself have not seen, heard, or
suspected that the animal was killed especially for you. On the
first point, when one investigates the Pali work "sukara-maddava"
– translated by meat eaters as pork – the evidence suggests
that it actually means "pig's delight", ie. a type of food favoured
by pigs, probably truffles, rather than pig's meat.
On the second point, if one reads the relevant Pali scripture carefully,
one sees that the phrase "killed especially for oneself" is not
used by the Buddha. It is interpolated (in parentheses) by later
commentators. All the Buddha says is that meat might not be eaten
if it is seen, heard, or suspected, it may be used. It seems very
clear to me that what this means is that any meat put into a Buddhist
monk's begging bowl (along with various other food items) should
not be eaten if the monk actually sees, hears from others, or suspects
for himself that what has been given to him is indeed meat. If by
chance he does not notice this and unrealisingly goes ahead and
swallows what actually turns out to be meat (it presumably being
mixed in with other pieces of food), he is not committing an offence
against Buddhist morality, since he is acting unwittingly.
|
| CLAUDETTE: What does
the Mahayama school say?
TONY: Things are even clearer in these scriptures. The
Buddha emphatically condemns as "twisters of truth" those
people who go around saying that the Buddha allows meat eating.
He says in no uncertain terms that flesh eating is incompatible
with the Buddhist principle of compassion.
|
| CLAUDETTE: You mentioned
the principle of non-violence or non-harming (ahimsa) as being important
in Buddhism. What does this mean in a practical everyday sense to
you?
TONY: It means respecting all beings – humans and
animals – as having feelings, as being sentient, and not deserving
deliberately to be hurt. So a Buddhist would never swat a fly or
purposefully step on an ant or spider. "Non-harming" also means
that one should not work in a profession that involves harming others,
for example, a butcher or soldier. The main point to remember is
to try and show kindness to all creatures, including of course humans.
But animals are part of it too. After all, the Buddha took birth
many times as an animal – sometimes a deer, or a monkey, or
a fish, or a dog etc. He knew what it was like to be an animal.
He also taught that we have been animals in our past lives and in
fact all the animals are related to us, quite literally. At some
point in the past they have been our mothers, fathers, sisters,
cousins. So if we harm animals, we are actually harming members
of our own family.
|
| CLAUDETTE: What is your
understanding of karma and eating animals?
TONY: Karma is the spiritual law of justice which makes
us experience the good and the bad effects of what we do to others.
So, if we harm animals by killing them, eating them, or experimenting
on them, we will have to suffer analogous experiences ourselves
in the future – or at least have to undergo some form of suffering.
Only when we ourselves go through what the animals have been through
will we definitely know that hurting animals is wrong. So eventually
we will develop an empathy, a belief in our kinship with all sentient
beings, including animals. It is interesting to note, also, that
if we are kind to animals, kindness and happiness flow back to us.
The Buddha says that if you perform one act of kindness to an animal,
you will be recompensed a hundredfold.
|
| CLAUDETTE: What is the
climate like now in England now with regard to animal rights?
TONY: I think it is growing more favourable. More and more
people are hearing about the wrongs of meat-eating, hunting and
vivisecting, and recently some major animal experimental centres
have been closed down. Young people in particular are turning against
animal exploitation. But the Blair Government is little better than
the Conservatives when it comes to animal rights. We must continue
to put pressure (non-violent of course) on the MPs.
|
| CLAUDETTE: Tell us about
your own organisation Tony?
TONY: A few years ago I set up the UK Antivivisection Information
Service, which is just a very small, unsalaried organisation aimed
at getting the truth out about vivisection – especially how
the practice is of no medical value due to its many unpredictable
physiological differences between animals and humans. I have written
books on the theme, plus Buddhist books, which approach the question
of animal rights from a more moral/spiritual angle. So I try to
distribute this kind of information to whomever is interested in
it.
|
| CLAUDETTE: In your opinion how can we best
avoid oppressing our fellow non-human creatures?
TONY: Through educating as many people as possible about
the suffering that animals are unfairly subjected to, and letting
people know that there is an alternative – vegetarianism, veganism
and natural medicines. And we must practice non-harming in our daily
lives.
We should be a living example of what we preach. It is no good,
in my view, to preach Compassion and then discount human suffering,
for example. Animals and humans should be viewed as equally capable
of suffering, so we should care about human rights and animal rights
equally. This definitely gets more respect from the public. But
never should any being be sacrificed involuntarily-wise, and the
dire karmic consequences of harming any being, no matter what the
alleged (but deluded) motives are.
|
| CLAUDETTE: Do you have
a Utopian dream regarding animals and humans?
TONY: Yes. I dream of a world where animals are viewed
as sentient and sensitive people, whose right to be free from human-enforced
suffering is respected and where our only relations with animals
are motivated by the wish to love and help them. At the same time,
I want to see a society that respects other humans much more, too,
and our IQ variants, sex and sexuality. We also need to change the
education system, so we are not churning out robotic, fact-and figure-filled
automata, but feelingful, caring, creative and truly human beings,
in touch with what the Buddha calls our innermost Buddha-Mind of
Wisdom and Compassion.
|
| CLAUDETTE: Any final thoughts?
TONY: Just to thank you all in Australia for the great
work you are doing. Whether you know it or not, by being vegetarian,
or better still, vegan and gently encouraging others to support
animal rights you are truly helping to bring a little bit of Paradise
down to our Earth. And what could be more rewarding for us all than
that?
|
Dr Tony Page can be contacted
at:
UKAVIS Publications
PO Box 4746
London SE11 4XF |
|
