2011年3月3日星期四

第二章 佛教支持素食主義的論據 1

Shravasti Dhammika, To EAT OR NOT TO EAT MEAT: A BUDDHIST REFLECTION

Chapter 2   Buddhist arguments for vegetarianism

1. So the next question is this – could vegetarianism be implied from or be more consistent with the Buddha’s teachings in general?

The cardinal virtue of Buddhism is respect for life. This is embodied in the first Precept; not to harm living beings. I use the word ‘harm’ rather than ‘kill’ because on many occasions the Buddha mentioned not just abstaining from killing but also from cruelty and violence as pertaining to the Precept. For example, he said that someone is unrighteous (adhamma) in body if they “kill living beings, are murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence and without mercy”. (Majjhima Nikaya I, 286). It is clear that to kill is to break the first Precept but so is pulling a cat’s tail, flogging a horse or punching someone in the face, although these actions would be less grave than killing. So this is the first point – (1) Not just killing but also being cruel to living beings is against the first Precept.

達爾卡法師 著   伍煥炤 譯 :《吃肉還是不吃肉:佛教的反思》

第二章  佛教支持素食主義的論據

1. 因此,接下來的問題是 — 素食主義是否隱含於或更符合佛陀的一般教導?

尊重生命是佛教的根本道德價值,這點體現在五戒的不殺戒:不傷害生命。我使用了「傷害」而不是「殺害」,因為在很多的場合,佛陀提到關於不殺戒不僅要避免殺生,更要避免殘忍和暴力。例如他說假如人們「殺害眾生、性格凶狠、雙手沾血,熱衷打鬥和和沒有憐憫之心」,他們的身體便是不義的 (adhamma) (《中部》I, 286)。這清楚指出殺生就是違反不殺戒,同樣地,拉扯貓的尾巴、鞭笞馬匹或揮拳猛擊別人的臉也屬違反不殺戒的行為,雖然這些行為沒殺生般嚴重。因此,這是第一點 — (1) 不僅殺生,對眾生殘忍也是違反不殺戒。

* 歡迎轉載,但請註明出處和不改動譯文內容。

沒有留言:

發佈留言