Florian Weps:
Since this is the only real question in your post, I'll go into it. If this isn't what you were about, please clarify.
You've correctly spotted the question I was asking!
In a way, all intellectual "content" is conceit.
Yes, in a way that's so.
What, in other words, does "compassion" really mean? Is it an ornament to decorate myself with?
Yes, we see plenty of people proudly wearing their vegetarianism or veganism as a medal.
What if somebody who doesn't need to play to a little "carer" in his mind acts in ways to improve the situation...
This is the best response I've heard so far in this thread. Thanks for that.
Cut out the manipulative nonsense, please.
That wasn't intentional manipulation; it was an expression of frustration. But it
does sound manipulative. I could have kept it to myself.
— — —
m m a:
“silabbata-paramaso has been translated as "the contagion of mere rule and ritual”
Holy cats! That's the most ancient description of memetics I've ever encountered! Thanks for sharing that!
no monk that requires the wearing of robes would in any way suggest that robes are a necessary factor of awakening.
Ah, that's an interesting comparison!
Either vegeterianism is a ritual you observe, or it isn't.
It has acquired ritualistic aspects (such as scanning the list of ingredients before buying an unfamiliar item of food), but as noted in the original post it rather happened by itself, so its core wasn't ritual.
Seriously.. we can tell this is a debate you've had a lot...
I've never had this particular debate. It is exceedingly rare that I speak to anybody about vegetarianism. The frustration I alluded to above (in my reply to Florian) concerns the kinds of responses I tend to get on forums. Specifically, there's a whole lot of what might be called “talking down from the pinnacle of attainment.” If this forum is different — I haven't studied every nook and cranny — I apologize.
... pay attention to what its LIKE to experience worry about whether or not vegetarianism is correct, don't get lost in the worrying.
That's a valid point. I alluded to it in my original post by saying vegetarianism could be (or become) a conceit. I can clearly see that.
I suppose that what concerns me is that I've encountered several people who are liberated
in one fashion or another and they've all denigrated vegetarianism. At the same time, though, they speak of liberating humanity. This strikes me as a very specific dividing line.
I can understand denigrating an “ism” — that's a no-brainer. But my concern is
not about the eating of meat. My concern is about the suffering of
apparently sentient beings. (That word “apparently” is key; I don't
know that you, or the family cat, are sentient.) I care not if an animal dies to feed somebody. What concerns me is the months or years of industrialized suffering that we humans subject animals to as we serve our desires.
Should I turn my back on that concern? Should I merely shrug if there's a puppy mill next door? It appears that many purportedly liberated people say I should and ultimately must. This, to me, creates a paradox: they care to liberate sentient life, but don't care if sentient life suffers. Huh? What am I missing, here?
I can't resolve that puzzle. It's not crucial that I
do resolve it, but the puzzle ... puzzles me.
— — —
Thank you, Florian & m m a, for your marvelous replies.