佳礼资讯网

 找回密码
 注册

ADVERTISEMENT

楼主: Cherish_Ying

吃動物性食品是否合適?歡迎進來探討(附相關影片、著作與報告推薦)

   关闭 [复制链接]
发表于 26-4-2012 05:24 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 Gap_Gezz 于 26-4-2012 05:28 PM 编辑
佛陀自己吃肉,也没有阻止别人用肉供养他,他的弟子提婆达多提倡素食被佛陀一口拒绝,请问下这个自然现 ...
bashlyner 发表于 26-4-2012 04:19 PM



佛陀是托钵,也就是所谓的三净肉。何谓3净?
自己没有见到杀生。
当下没有想要吃的念头纯粹是别人供养。
当下的肉已经没有生命的迹象了。

此乃三净,如果冒犯任何一条都算犯戒。
今天我们去餐馆时是自己叫肉食呢?还是别人供养你?
这个就是出家人的“自然现象”,跟你去餐馆叫肉吃是有天壤之别。
等你出家后才来评判这个自然现象吧。
现在的你没有托钵,不了解他们托钵的目的就是消融自我,别人给什么就吃什么的心境(随喜)。

还有不要拿下一句讲我乱说因果,你有看到我上面的科学因果吗?
我讲的因果很难懂?有牵涉到前世来生吗?
我就单纯的说明了当下吃肉是比较容易受毒害的果报而已。
你就不能用一下逻辑思考吗?
看看我写的因果环链我有恐吓别人吗?我只是写了一些分析出来,并按照常理推断。

至于说佛陀长不长寿这点是毋庸置疑的,他修过苦行身体曾经消耗到极致了,但是觉悟之后仍旧活到80岁。
阿难却没有受过苦行的阶段,但是按照记载他很长寿。
回复

使用道具 举报


ADVERTISEMENT

发表于 26-4-2012 05:25 PM | 显示全部楼层
为何大家都在谈,吃素环保救地球,可是就没有真真深地检讨说“人”本来就是草食动物,也不想跟谁辩论,人跟 ...
winson2005 发表于 26-4-2012 05:09 PM


人类是杂食动物啦,不然的话犬牙拿来干嘛的?还有人类的消化系统不能够消化每一种植物纤维,比如说路边的野草我们吃了也不会消化得到的。就算是草食动物也不代表能够消化每一种植物,有些只吃叶子有些只吃草。

你说人类有能力分别食物那是对的,所以我们才会搭配不同的食物来平衡营养,就连素食也要搭配不同的谷类和菜类才能够保证吸收到每一种蛋白质和维他命,所以吃肉和吃素都没有违反自然,我们是杂食动物又有智慧,代表我们有选择权
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:33 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 bashlyner 于 26-4-2012 05:39 PM 编辑
佛陀是托钵,也就是所谓的三净肉。何谓3净?
自己没有见到杀生。
当下没有想要吃的念头纯粹是别人供 ...
Gap_Gezz 发表于 26-4-2012 05:24 PM


叫别人供养就不是有心吃肉吗?如果是你去餐馆乞食,餐馆知道你是个德高望重的高僧,特地用大鱼大肉来供养你,你会拒绝吗?佛陀行走印度那么多年他会不知道别人故意杀生给他肉吃?修到这么高的智慧没理由不懂这么简单的供需原理吧?这个自然现象又如何解释?

你说过什么科学因果?说来看看?有数据吗?有什么科学家说过类似的话?滥用因果又滥用科学 佛陀和爱因斯坦都泪流满面


看看我写的因果环链我有恐吓别人吗?我只是写了一些分析出来,并按照常理推断
长期吃肉的人的因果就是毒害自己无形中选择短命的果报

Gap_Gezz 发表于 26-4-2012 02:45 AM


原来不是恐吓,是常理判断
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:34 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复  Gap_Gezz


    吃植物的罪, 这个佛经应该没谈到。我只谈你懂的

为了农作物能收成,喷打农药 ...
tcguanz 发表于 25-4-2012 09:36 PM


就刚才我所说的,为何就在执着在对与不对?也不是回复在“本”省思?我也不是说到回去以前的野生森林时代生活,人是随着时代进步。就像刚刚说的,你能选择放农药,也能选择有机农药。
可是人本来就是草食动物的,这个从科学也能解释,也不能改变的事实,至于说吃蔬菜也是杀生,将会不会是有点偏激歪理呢?
老虎捕食-》它算杀生么?他只是依照本来的生活循环去走吧了。
牛吃草-》也算杀生么?可是在草从里面可能有虫....他能分别么?它也是照吃啊?


总的来说不要在辩论说杀生不杀生了,这只是在因果里面循环吧了,佛陀涅磐前有说道:我说一切法也即是非一切法 ,就是因为我们都死在法中...
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:40 PM | 显示全部楼层
叫别人供养就不是有心吃肉吗?如果是你去餐馆乞食,餐馆知道你是个德高望重的高僧,特地用大鱼大肉来供 ...
bashlyner 发表于 26-4-2012 05:33 PM



你知道托钵是如何分析可以托钵不可以托钵的吗?
不能前往餐馆的原因就在于如果有怀疑对方会杀生这样也不行。

看你不能理解我的分析细节部分的因与果。
很多人不知如何解因果、而把它看到很玄。实际上因果就是科学。
种瓜得瓜。种豆得豆很简单的农作常识吧?

肉食动物需要饲养 :- 需要稻谷物但是这些稻谷物有农药,而屠夫是不会帮你清洗农药的。
所以我说农药在家畜的身上留下更多的毒素。再加上长肉剂。
而素食我们通常都会清洗一番,这样化学毒素的几率就大大减少。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:42 PM | 显示全部楼层
叫别人供养就不是有心吃肉吗?如果是你去餐馆乞食,餐馆知道你是个德高望重的高僧,特地用大鱼大肉来供 ...
bashlyner 发表于 26-4-2012 05:33 PM



滥用不滥用的话,你可以寻找很多质询,至于有人说犬牙,可是我们不是尖锐的犬牙啊,很多有犬牙的都不一定是肉食的。(你也可以说没有犬牙就是草食对吧..)
回复

使用道具 举报

Follow Us
发表于 26-4-2012 05:43 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 tcguanz 于 26-4-2012 05:44 PM 编辑

回复 44# winson2005


    既然不执着在对与不对, 那为何执着于肉食还是素食?

既然你认为人类本是草食动物,你也赞同你的祖先是猴子吗?
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:44 PM | 显示全部楼层
原来不是恐吓,是常理判断
bashlyner 发表于 26-4-2012 05:33 PM



如果言辞吓着你我真的是很抱歉。
回复

使用道具 举报


ADVERTISEMENT

发表于 26-4-2012 05:46 PM | 显示全部楼层
你知道托钵是如何分析可以托钵不可以托钵的吗?
不能前往餐馆的原因就在于如果有怀疑对方会杀生这样 ...
Gap_Gezz 发表于 26-4-2012 05:40 PM


餐馆只是个比喻好不好,只要你去乞食,别人知道你来而愿意给你食物,就已经形成一个供需的现象了。

因果是科学,action and reaction 嘛。不过和佛教说的因果不同,也和你口中的因果不同。请不要以偏概全,有本事请拿出受科学界承认的期刊来说明。


你说肉食比较毒,为何日本人长命?寿命和健康根本就是多种因素造成的,比如说吃素肉的人会长命过吃水煮肉的人吗?饮食习惯给你说成是素食长命,歪理
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:47 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复  winson2005


    既然不执着在对与不对, 那为何执着于肉食还是素食?

既然你认为人类本是草 ...
tcguanz 发表于 26-4-2012 05:43 PM



赞同你,是不是说不执着就可以行恶呢?
是不是说不分别就可以说坏的是好的呢?
真的是,很多人拿这个执着来做文章。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:48 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复 49# bashlyner


是,是歪理。
我错了。很抱歉
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:48 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 tcguanz 于 26-4-2012 05:59 PM 编辑

回复 36# Cherish_Ying

《那些年,我們一起追的女孩》里有没有讲这么一句话:

    “明明不是animal rights activist, 却要假假借animal rights来鼓吹素食,我最討厭這種人”
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:48 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 bashlyner 于 26-4-2012 05:50 PM 编辑
滥用不滥用的话,你可以寻找很多质询,至于有人说犬牙,可是我们不是尖锐的犬牙啊,很多有犬牙的都不 ...
winson2005 发表于 26-4-2012 05:42 PM


犬牙代表我们有能力进食肉类,既然我们有智慧把肉类处理成更容易撕咬的,为何还需要尖锐的犬牙?

既然我们有这个能力,以及这个选择权,为何不能够吃肉?不是肉食动物就=草食???杂食你懂是什么意思吗?
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:55 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 bashlyner 于 26-4-2012 05:58 PM 编辑

我转个文章证明人类不是草食动物
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-05/959372412.Ot.r.html

Are humans vegetarians or omnivores?

Those terms are not strict biological designations, and so the question needs to be rephrased a bit before it can be answered. The confusion stems from the use of the word "carnivore" to mean "meat eater" - instead the word carnivorous should be used. To be biologically strict here, a carnivore is an order of mammal (recognized by the presence of the carnassial tooth, among other things) that includes cats (felids), dogs (canids), bears (ursids), and a number of other mammalian families. Carnivores are not strictly meat eaters - most will eat some type of plants as a part (sometimes even the main part) of their diet.


The term "vegetarian" is strictly a human construct. Vegetarians shun animal products for food, usually for religious or ethical reasons. Even still, there are degrees of vegetarian. Some vegetarians will never consciously eat any food that comes from an animal. Other will consume dairy products (an animal food even though it isn't meat). Others will allow themselves to eat eggs (the pre-chicken, so to speak), or fish. Vegetarianism is more of a dietary philosophy then an ecological food preference, so it's hard to speak of it in biological terms.


Biologists rarely (never in my experience) categorize non-carnivorous animals into one "plant eating" group. That is because different dietary specializations are required to eat different types of plants. Thus, you will hear of herbivores (specialized to eat shoots and growing tips), folivores (specialized to eat leaves) and frugivores (specialized to eat fruit) among other adaptations. Even within these broad groupings there are further specializations, such as grazers that eat grass and browsers that eat shrubs (both are types of herbivore). And even among the "plant eating" animals there is no animal that I am aware of that will not consume some type of animal protein when given the opportunity.


An omnivore is an animal that will draw its food from all aspects of the ecosystem (plants, animals - whatever). As I've already pointed out, you could claim that nearly every animal is omnivorous since a purely meat eater or purely plant eater is very rare. Nonetheless, you can look at the animal's anatomy to look at how they are adapted to process food.


First you can look at the teeth.


Molars are broad flat teeth that are useful in grinding up tough fibrous material - such as plants. Animals that are primarily plant eaters have very large molars with six pairs (three uppers and three lowers) on each side. Animals that do not specialize in eating plants tend to have a reduced number of molars. Humans are equipped with six pairs of molars. Although they are not very large, this would suggest that humans have the ability to process fibrous plant food.


Premolars (bicuspids) are the slicing teeth. Mammals originally had eight pairs of premolars, although most mammals alive today have fewer. Premolars are the primary teeth used by meat eating specialists, and are frequently missing in animals that specialize in plant foods. Humans have four pairs of premolars, which suggests that humans have the ability to process animal food.


Incisors are grasping teeth, that change shape depending upon how they are used. The broad flat surfaces of human incisors is most associated with animals that specialize in eating fruit.


So, if we just look at our teeth - humans are clearly built to be omnivorous. But, of course there is more data. We can look at how nutrients are processes and absorbed in the body.


Meat and fruit are high quality foods that are not difficult to assimilate. Animals that specialize in these types of food tend to have a short digestive tract, with a very short large intestine. Plant foods can be nutritious, but take longer to absorb. Therefore, animals that specialize in plant eating tend to have long and elaborate digestive tracts. Humans are clearly intermediate here. We have a long large intestine (more common in plant eaters), but we lack the elaborations that would allow us to digest and assimilate nutrients from high fiber plant foods (such as grass or leaves). So, again, the human digestive tract can be used to argue that we are omnivorous.


Finally, you need to look at nutritional requirements. There are some B-complex vitamins that are available only by eating other animals. The human body requires this nutrient, but does not synthesize it the way some other animals do. Therefore, if humans truly ate no animal foods, and had no artificial vitamin supplements, they would sicken and die. In nature, there are no true "human vegetarians."


Humans are omnivores. The order of mammals that includes humans (the primates) are all omnivores. To be sure, the modern American diet includes a lot more meat than is healthy. And the human animal can be very healthy by being a lot more vegetarian. But to never eat meat is both unnatural and unhealthy.


Finally, you ask about my credentials to answer this question. Well, I am employed as an anatomy professor (and am therefore a specialist in human anatomy). I teach at a college that specializes in training health care workers (so I am familiar with issues of human health an nutrition). Finally, I earned by Ph.D. in Physical Anthropology (which sort of makes me an expert in how humans adapt both biologically and culturally to the environment).


Some References relevant to this questions:


Harding, RSO & Teleki, G (1981) Omnivorous Primates. Columbia University Press: New York.


Romer, AS & Parsons, TS (1986) The Vertebrate Body. Saunders College Publishing: New York


Oxnard, C. (1987) Fossils, Teeth and Sex. University of Washington Press: Seattle
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:56 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复  winson2005


    既然不执着在对与不对, 那为何执着于肉食还是素食?

既然你认为人类本是草 ...
tcguanz 发表于 26-4-2012 05:43 PM



恩。。哈我也不否认。因为没有一定的对与错啦,这是我自己说的opinion。如果要我自己的享受而宰杀生命,我是不忍心咯。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 05:58 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复 55# winson2005


    你吃肉,你需要屠夫为你宰动物。
    你吃素,你需要农夫为你撒毒药宰昆虫。
    你绝食,那么就不用造孽麻烦屠夫和农夫为了你杀那么多生命了
回复

使用道具 举报


ADVERTISEMENT

发表于 26-4-2012 05:59 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复  Cherish_Ying

《那些年,我們一起追的女孩》里有没有讲这么一句话:

    “明明不是animal ri ...
tcguanz 发表于 26-4-2012 05:48 PM


外表是爱护动物,内在是要传教,这种人我见过不少
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 06:01 PM | 显示全部楼层
犬牙代表我们有能力进食肉类,既然我们有智慧把肉类处理成更容易撕咬的,为何还需要尖锐的犬牙?

既 ...
bashlyner 发表于 26-4-2012 05:48 PM



你对!人有选择的自由,所以我也没说你错啊。哈take it easy men
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 06:04 PM | 显示全部楼层
为何就一个分享总是会引起这么多反效果呢?
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 26-4-2012 06:06 PM | 显示全部楼层
我转个文章证明人类不是草食动物


Are humans vegetarians or omnivores?

Those terms are not stri ...
bashlyner 发表于 26-4-2012 05:55 PM



   也有很多文章能证明人类不是肉食动物啊,现在咨询很多,最后也是看你的分析选择,没有一个对于错,这是我的认为啦。
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

 

所属分类: 人文空间


ADVERTISEMENT



ADVERTISEMENT



ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT


版权所有 © 1996-2023 Cari Internet Sdn Bhd (483575-W)|IPSERVERONE 提供云主机|广告刊登|关于我们|私隐权|免控|投诉|联络|脸书|佳礼资讯网

GMT+8, 26-4-2024 05:04 AM , Processed in 0.077571 second(s), 23 queries , Gzip On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

Copyright © 2001-2021, Tencent Cloud.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表