Two years ago, a report from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) landed on my desk. Called Livestock's Long Shadow, it revealed a stunning statistic: global livestock production is responsible for about one-fifth of all greenhouse gases - more than transportation.
This was a signal moment for me, coming along with some personal health problems, an overall gloomy global outlook, and an increasing concern with animal products in general-the quality of meat, the endangerment of wild fish, the way domestic animals are raised, and the impact of our diet has had on the environment. Never before had I realized issues of personal and global health intersected so exquisitely. The destiny of the human race and that of the planet lay in our hands and in the choices-as individuals and as a society-that we made.
And, same topic from a different angle, this is the chapter Spiritual Correctness from Cheri Huber's Trying to Be Human: Zen Talks
Spiritual Correctness
Discussions of harmlessness often lead to questions like, where do you draw the line about what life forms you do and do not kill?
Within myself, it is not necessary to draw any lines, because I am always responding to an internal sense of how something feels to me. Obviously I eat. People will ask me, "What about a carrot? Don't you think a carrot feels?"
Maybe it does. However, looking into the eyes of a carrot and looking into the eyes of a cow, I have a very different experience, such that right now I am going to eat the carrot, and I am not going to eat the cow. I would ask people who can eat cows with no difficulty to spend a little time looking in the eyes of a cow and see if it seems like there is anybody home there.
It is not compassionate to this creature (pointing to self) not to eat anything at all - nor would it be compassionate to force myself to eat the cow.
People argue that because the nervous system of a mosquito is not developed to the point that it can understand itself as a seperate being, it's okay to kill them. When I look at a mosquito though, I clearly see that it is alive, and it is going about its life. Just because I cannot see into its eyes does not mean it doesn't have eyes, it just means my seeing is too gross. Why should the mosquito pay with its life for the limitations of my perception?
It is also argued that if you are three times removed from the killing of a creature, it's okay to eat it. That means if somebody kills it and somebody else processes it and somebody else sells it, there is no harm in buying it and eating it. The word "rationalization" always springs to my mind when I hear that. Why would people go through the trouble to rationalize something like that if they did not in their heart suspect that it wasn't the thing to do?
I go so far as to not eat with people who are eating creatures. When this peculiarity of mine is mentioned, I am sometimes asked how I avoid offending people. The answer is, if I lived my life to avoid offending people, I'd be out of a job. But usually I am not in situations where this is a difficulty. I arrange it that way; I do not lead retreats where anything other than vegetarian food is served, because I cannot look at the flesh and not think about the creature.
I am not suggesting any "shoulds" based on a notion that not eating meat is the more spiritual thing to do. In fact, "the more spiritual thing to do" is an idea that is always interesting to question.
No comments:
Post a Comment