If you are able to accept it if the Buddha reprimands,
but are unable to accept it if an unenlightened being reprimands you on the same matter,
perhaps the Buddha should reprimand you for this bias as well,
for relying on the messenger more than the message.

The wise are happy in discovering hard truths about themselves,
as they realise they can be wiser.

The foolish are unhappy in discovering hard truths about themselves,
as they realise they are not wiser.

- Stonepeace

As a Buddhst, should you avoid all evil? Of course!
As a Buddhist, should you do all good? Of course!
As a Buddhist, should you purify yourself? Of course!
As a Buddhist, should you be a Bodhisattva? Of course!
As a Buddhist, should you be a Buddha? Of course!

But because we can’t do all of the above immediately,
time is needed for diligent practice, for progress.
We are Buddhists, not Buddhas… yet.

我不敢轻于汝等，
汝等皆当作佛。

- 常不轻菩萨 (法华经)

‘I do not dare to belittle you all,
for you all will become Buddhas.’

- The Bodhisattva ‘Never Underestimate’ (Lotus Sutra) Who Became Shakyamuni Buddha

Related Articles:

The Bodhisattva Who ‘Cried’ Truth
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thedailyenlightenment-realisation/message/157
The Story in Comics
http://mahaati.blog.163.com/blog/static/1763504562010111211133702

Some discomfort is good.
That from recognising Dukkha drives us to Nirvana.

Some discomfort is not good.
That from denying Dukkha keeps us from Nirvana.- Stonepeace

Some reject the Dharma due to discomfort with its reality check on Dukkha, that life is prevalent with dissatisfactions, which is the First Noble Truth. Due to this denial, Nirvana, which is the end of Dukkha (the Third Noble Truth), is always far away.

‘The worst [annoying hipsters] are the ones
who complain about all the other annoying hipsters
while not realizing that they they themselves are the annoying hipsters.’

- From ‘Empire State: A Love Story (Or Not)’ by Jason Shiga

Oh… the horror!
of seeing others as horrible,
when oneself is also, if not the most horrid!

This might come across as a little crude, but it is nevertheless true…

If you often defecate too much,
you probably eat too much.

- Stonepeace

In short,
don’t overeat,
don’t waste food.

Related Article: 
You Are Always in Control
http://thedailyenlightenment.com/2011/10/you-are-always-in-control

Was also sharing ideas with Sunday School Dharma teachers at Pujisi yesterday, on sharing the Dharma with kids. Gave an example of using happening music as an entertaining yet ‘enlightening’ attention-grabbing skilful means to share the Dharma: http://moonpointer.com/new/2011/10/coldplays-heartwarming-animal-liberation :-]

Pujisi class participants practising guided mindfulness of Amituofo’s name, in the room set up for Ven Miaodeng’s 96th birthday buffet lunch celebration yesterday. Was sharing a condensed 1.5 lesson version of this 10-lesson course: http://thedailyenlightenment.com/2011/07/understanding-amituofo-via-the-amitabha-sutra-8th-run [Next run is next year :-] Amituofo

Kindly and homely-looking images of the Three Saints of Western Paradise (Amituofo with Guanyin Pusa on his left and Dashizhi Pusa on his right), attached to the shrine wall of Pujishi’s main hall. The term 弥陀慈父 comes to mind – Amituofo is like a loving Father who sees each sentient being like an only child.

I heard from a Buddhist friend, who professes to be vegetarian every day except for a single weekday, when he ‘has to’ lunch with four Muslim colleagues the halal way – with meat included. He believes this is the Dharma practice of ‘恒顺众生’, which is to ‘constantly comply with sentient beings’, so as to benefit them. My question was – ‘Which sentient beings does he wishes to comply with?’ The humans or the animals? Obviously, the humans seem to take priority here.  These questions next come to mind -

(1) Is it a worthy practice to eat animals when there is no need to?
(2) Would it offend animal-eaters to not eat animals in their presence?
(3) How does it help any sentient beings by eating some sentient beings?

The answers are as follows -

(1) Not at all.
(2) Not at all.
(3) Not at all.

As such, to claim he was practising compliance with sentient beings to help them is totally unjustified. He was never pressured to eat animals by anyone. And his failure to make a firm stand to not eat animals also means he continually, on a weekly basis, fails to make his otherwise fully vegetarian diet a natural talking point of interest – which is a crucial way to share the rationale of vegetarianism, be it for secular and/or spiritual reasons. Following the crowd to eat whatever they eat is sheer lack of resolution or laziness of one’s stance. It only furthers the delusion that eating animals is totally alright, even if you’re a ‘dedicated’ Buddhist, which I believe he sees himself to be.

With the power of choice, why not choose not to eat animals? Why not choose only non-animal dishes? Why not ask for some plain noodles or such? If not possible, why not pack a vegetarian meal in advance, since that meal is always anticipated? If we always follow the crowd, where is the line to be drawn, as to when not to comply? The guideline is simple. As to ‘constantly comply with sentient beings’ is a Bodhisattva practice, such compliance should not break the Bodhisattva precepts unnecessarily – one of which is the upholding of vegetarianism, as stated in the Brahma Net Sutra – especially when breaking the precept serves no significant useful purpose. If those of other religions practise according to their dietary guidelines, why shouldn’t Buddhists do the same?

Personally, I would even skip an entire meal if there is no non-vegan food available, while sharing the table with a drink. This is not an extreme practice, as it is just fasting for one single meal. Think monastics who eat only one meal a day! This would be firm practice of compassion, of not adding in any way to the demand for supply of animals killed. He gave the ‘standard’ bad faith excuse that as the animals he eats are not asked to be killed by him, it is okay. If so, why even be vegetarian on other days? Obviously, we all know that every animal-consumer feeds the demand and supply loop – which is why vegetarians and vegans opt out of direct and indirect demand for killing. The animals humans buy to eat are not blameless random alms food, that is free of suspicion of being killed for the general consumer.

I saw him repeatedly patronising a non-vegetarian food-stall at a hawker centre too – when there is a vegetarian stall nearby. He claims that the food there is cheaper, that he picked the vegetarian dishes there, to go with rice. First, it isn’t true that it is cheaper in comparison. I don’t think he even really checked. Second, even if it is, isn’t it worthier to spend a little more to support an authentic vegetarian stall? What is the price of compassion? The non-vegetarian stall will always have many more non-vegetarian supporters, while the vegetarian one is likely to only have relatively fewer supporters – the vegetarian ones. Skilful support is crucial if we really wish to increase supply and demand for kinder food.

When invited to wedding dinners, I always politely request for vegan food in advance, which is a choice always anticipated and respected by the inviting friends. The exclusively prepared vegetarian dishes would always arrive first, before the animal dishes for the rest at the table do. With ease, more than once, I chatted up perfect animal-eating strangers around me about my served food when they seem curious. If I can do this, I don’t see how one can’t do something similar with familiar colleagues who are regular lunch partners. If we seriously believe in the value of having a kinder diet, we ought to make more appropriate statements by our actions and words. If not, how else can we share our dietary sentiments for a kinder world?

If it is true, as he says, which I do hope, that he is vegetarian most of the time, save that one meal a week, I think it is wonderful – much more so than eating more animals for more meals a week. It is just that he can do better, if he reflects on the above. As I could sense his uneasy rationalising, I decided to write this to share with him, in good faith.  I hope he can see understand my intentions, for the sake of the animals. Hopefully, this article will also encourage more to be strong unwavering vegetarians, or even better, vegans. May all beings spare one another from the demand and supply of killing. May all beings be well and happy. Amituofo.

Related Articles:

The Invisible Conveyor Belt of Meat & Murder (Why Consumer Meat is Not Pure)
http://www.4ui.com/eart/214eart1.htm
Fin, Maw of Flesh, It’s Death (Making a Statement as a Vegan at Wedding Dinners)
http://moonpointer.com/new/2010/09/fin-maw-or-flesh-its-death
Why I Skipped the Safest Supper (A ‘Meal’ with Folks from Many Religions)
http://moonpointer.com/new/2009/03/why-i-skipped-the-safest-supper
Irrefutable Good & Secular Reasons to Go Vegan
http://viva.org.uk/goingvegan/index.php

One of the most deluded kind of meditators

are those who imagine they were in deep peace,
when they were really in deep sleep,
who imagine they have experienced non-self mindfully,
when their consciousness was simply switched off while snoozing.

Please be mindful
not to let your eagerness
to share the Dharma
overtake your eagerness
to learn and practise the Dharma,

or you would be talking too much theory
without enough practice,
which is off-balance,
which is pointless,
which is to miss the point of realising the Dharma.

Please don’t bluff yourself
that you were listening to the Dharma
with your eyes closed,
when you don’t see yourself nodding off,
time and again.

Please don’t bluff others
that you were chanting in your mind
with your mouth closed,
when I see you nodding off,
time and again.

Please be earnest,
by being true to yourself and others
when your faults are highlighted,
to help you improve,
by accepting this reminder to be earnest.

If you do not learn the Dharma accordingly
during a Dharma discussion session,
you are being untrue to yourself
and everyone else in the group.

If you do not practise the Dharma accordingly
during a group practice session,
you are being untrue to yourself
and everyone else in the group.

If you do not learn and practise the Dharma accordingly,
why are you there physically at all,
when your heart and mind is elsewhere,
missing the Dharma in the here and now?

How many more good examples
do you need to see around you,
to learn to be a good example yourself,
instead of being a bad example to others?

If the meanings of words
are totally arbitrary,
how can anyone communicate?

Beware of those,
who discuss the Dharma,
using Buddhist terms,
in their own vague terms.

Beware of those,
who discuss the non-Dharma instead,
abusing Buddhist terms,
in their own deluded terms.

If the meanings of words
are totally arbitrary,
why communicate with anyone?