Welcome to Gaia! ::

oh right, how could i mistake you saying that i am not loving for saying that i am not loving. stare

and you want proof? i'll ask you, prove to me that animals have souls and sentience. prove to me that humans have souls and sentience. what's your method of proof?

i can show you a plant's soul, i can show you the presence of a plant's sentience. i don't know if i could call it "proof", seeing as how you simply might not believe that what you experience is true. but tell me, what criteria will you call proof? because now you are simply being a hypocrite and a real jerk!

Just to provide the definitions...

Desire:
1: to long or hope for: exhibit or feel desire for
2a: to express a wish for: request
b archaic: to express a wish to: ask
3 obsolete: invite
4 archaic: to feel the loss of

Anything you do, anything at all, if it is with the desire to do so, is giving in to desire. This includes everything from scratching an itch, to sitting down, eating, drinking, sleeping, getting online, and posting.

Want:
1: to be needy or destitute
2: to have or feel need
3: to be necessary or needed
4: to desire to come, go, or be

Wanting is something everyone has. By the first definition, we want what we need. "Want" is basically another word for "desire."

Crave:
1: to ask for earnestly: beg, demand
2a: to want greatly : need
b: to yearn for

As you can see, cravings are not something we need. We will know what we need just by our want for it. Craving is considerably different, being the result of addiction. Anyone who has actually experienced both, and gained wisdom from that experience, will easily be capable of telling the difference.

This aside, the world is not black and white. What some view as good(Christianity, for example) others will see as bad. What others see as bad, some will see as good. Again, our own personal beliefs do not create truth, facts create truth, and the fact is that all three of those words(desire, want, and crave) are different both in their definition and how they affect us.

And I'm simply pointing out that according to what the Buddha taught. desire and craving (tanha) is the source of our suffering. It is your choice to accept that or not. ANY action born of desire, whether positive or negative, is karma, and such, supports and propagates rebirth in samaric existence.

[quote="Chieftain Twilight"david, why the hell are you so ******** elitist and self-righteous? calm the ******** down, and try looking at things from multiple different points of view. you are not the only one who's right, nor is everyone who agrees with you, nor is your teacher. the way you look at the same words is not the same as everyone else does, and that doesn't mean that someone is right and everyone else is wrong. so chill. quit trying to shove your beliefs down everyone's throat. i'm sure your Buddha would not apreciate that kind of behavior from his students.

Are you seriously telling me to calm down? It is not me calling others "jerk" and "hypocrite" and using other language that must be censored. rolleyes

I do look at things from multiple view points, and then evaluate the merit of those view points. Contrary to popular belief, just because some one believes something, it isn't necessarily factual or based in reality. If stating facts and presenting reality is "elitest" or "shoving my beliefs down everyone's throat", then I am guilty. But no one is forcing you to read or respond to them, and as I stated earlier, I will look at any objective evidence or consider other ideas from qualified, bonafide teachers. But considering doesn't equal unquestioning acceptance. In light of your anger, I think if I were you, I would reconsider who is actually shoving what down who's throat.

i'll do my best to keep cursing out of my conversations here. i appologize.

Well, since you asked me to, this will be my last post. After this I won't even be checking this thread, so if you want any more information you'll have to send me a private message.

This may not really go against your own beliefs, but when I was little one of my teachers decided I needed to see a councilor. While I was talking to that councilor, I learned about how to word things so as not to be offensive. This could be called "gentle speech," it's a way of wording what you are trying to say in a way that others won't be offended. As with swearing, you do have control over how people interpret what you say and you are responsible for hurting feelings or insulting if you do so.


I'm going to underline the parts that can be interpreted as insulting. In this case, what you said is called an accusation. Yes, you were being accused, but a more peaceful retaliation would simply have been to say "Ok, I'll calm down, but you should probably take a moment to calm down as well." It doesn't have to be worded exactly like that, in fact if you take the time and think it through you could probably come up with an even more peaceful way to communicate.


In this case, I could interpret it as you calling my teacher a fool. Since I don't have a teacher, it's no big deal, but this is why I said your beliefs do not make things fact. You may believe that everything Buddha said is the solid truth, but that doesn't mean others will and it shouldn't give you the right to insult others for disagreeing. In fact, I think doing so might be against one of the Buddhist teachings. Most likely relating to being compassionate, kind, and respectful.

The Buddha himself said, "Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own sense."
Note: The statement was also translated to end with "beliefs and common sense" instead.


Some of my friends would refer to this as an "I art holier than though," type statement. Basically, you are more loving and respectful because you do not eat meat. You are better than omnivores and carnivores because you refrain from eating something some people really do require. Aside from that, I can rationalize murder easily.

Hypothetical situation for an example: A living creature is injured severely. He/she has very little to no chance of recovery and(assuming it's not human) would not survive for long due to the physical condition he/she would be left in. What is more kind; leaving it be to die on it's own, attempting to repair it and allowing it to either die slowly or die soon after release, or simply putting it out of it's misery?

Some might cry during this difficult situation, I would not. I would kill it, and not shed a tear. Does this make me heartless? No, but if you believe in reincarnation then you know that it will live again. If it is old, you can also hope or allow yourself to believe that he/she at least had a good life this time and may have a good life next time. I do not believe in mourning for loss of life, rather I rejoice that the being was there to live. I rejoice more if I had the opportunity to get to know the individual that passed because I rejoice not only for his/her existence, I rejoice for his/her friendship, and I pray that he/she will have a good next life as well.

A better way of wording would have been to say, "I don't see eating meat as an act of compassion and since it is not required for my survival I won't do it." And you could leave it at that. Honestly, there was nothing else that was entirely necessary to say. That one sentence says that you are a vegetarian and you disagree with the idea of eating meat. We already know vegetarianism is a Buddhist thing. We already know eating meat is not. Going on about it to carnivores/omnivores only served to direct your information at them and demean them in the process, or at least make it possible for them to be demeaned.

This is all just from this one thread, I didn't bother going through the others. My overall point is, you can word things better and deliver the same message.

The best way to open the possibility of misinterpretation is to start a sentence with "you" or some statement directing a negative opinion of an action that someone does. Starting a sentence with a compliment before offering criticism makes it much less insulting.


I didn't quote this because it's insulting. Actually, I have a challenge for you. Since I do not know every single supplement that exists and doubt I will find one online, or have the time to try, how about you get a list of every single protein, vitamin, and nutrient, then post a list with the supplements. Don't forget the price range, allot of people who criticize meat eaters don't take poverty into consideration. I'll assume for a moment I'm wrong and there is a supplement for every single protein in existence. How many different supplements would I have to get? How much would it cost? And after considering this, is it really worth it?

And that is it. Again, I won't even be checking this thread again. If you want anything more from me, you'll have to send it in a message. The challenge I gave you is more for your own information. You don't have to show me, I already know for a fact I couldn't afford supplements anyways, but it would be a good learning experience for anyone willing to look into it. If it actually proves you right, at least you'll find out something about proteins, vitamins, minerals, and nutrients along the way.

in this moment, david, i would give you a good interupting smack on the back of the head. i find that gets people's attention pretty well.

i have to ask, do you realy find it nessesary to present yourself this way? if you feel so certain that you know what's right, than that's fine. but you cannot go about telling people how wrong they are based on your own belief and not expect them to fight you instead of just back down and accept your words. you put some of us on the defensive.

i don't think how canon what you said was or wasn't was the point. it was obvious that he is trying to show you how you are coming across to other people, and why some of us (like myself for an obvious example) are beginning to think that it is no use talking to you.

i for one a not in this guild for one-sided conversations. i'd like to learn from others, but i'd appreciate them having an open mind as well, or the very least that those i talk to can live-and-let-live. you don't have to agree with me, but please don't put me down like that. i don't have alot of love for fundamentalists in general, and i absolutely HATE elitists. and that is not a word i use lightly.