Customer Reviews

To Cherish All Life: A Buddhist Case for Becoming Vegetarian

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

One of the best books I have ever read on the relationship between Vegetarianism and Buddhism. This book avoids the pitfalls of many related books by gently describing the role of vegetarianism in Buddhist practice rather than "preaching" it's necessity.

Roshi Kapleau also does an excellent job of addressing the many issues and misconceptions encountered by today's Buddhist traversing this often misunderstood path of practice.

I highly recommend this book to anyone who has ever asked the question, "What the heck does vegetarianism have to do with Buddhism?"

Roshi P. Kapleau does an amazing job of cracking the shell placed around contemporary Buddhism. He is adept in expanding its compassionate core to encompass the cruelty involved in consuming flesh (meat) and other animal products. This little book is very easy to access and understand. Its core is one of compassion for all sentient beings. How can this not be clearer? By consuming today's slaughtered (harvested) animals served up for people's taste buds, we consume their intense suffering and become what we eat. I highly recommend reading this for all people interested in cherishing all life as Roshi not only talks the truth but also walks it.

I have been studying Buddhism on my own, and have decided to become a vegetarian. I received this book and started reading it right a way finishing it the same day (the book is not that long 104 pages). I just couldn't put it down! I recommend it to anybody, specially people who has recently decided not to eat meat. It has really helped me make up my mind about the subject once and for all. This book focuses on the moral, ethical, spiritual, physical health reasons for which one should must definitely refrain from flesh eating.

This is a very disappointing book. In the earliest Buddhist scriptures, when the Buddha was asked to make his monks be vegetarian, he said no, it was not necessary. The author insists that this was an invention of later monks who were fond of meat. However, there is absolutely NO evidence for this whatsoever. Kapleau, a self-proclaimed Zen Buddhist roshi, can't understand the stance of early Buddhism, and instead of questioning his own views on the subject, he insists that the Buddha's teaching as we have it is wrong.

The author uses specious logic to support his prejudices and predilections and ignores a mountain of evidence to the contrary. In a short digression near the beginning of the book, he feels it necessary to show that one must be a vegetarian for moral purposes and not for health purposes. He does this by alluding to the "fact" that Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian, supposedly out of a psychotic fear for his health. This is actually untrue; Hitler was not a vegetarian. Even if it were true, it has no bearing on the validity of choosing a vegetarian diet for health reasons. Using this same logic, you can rant about the dangers of having a neatly trimmed mustache, wearing a uniform, or being a good orator. Unfortunately, when Kapleau turns to the main part of his argument, his reasoning gets no better.

He tries to show that there was a long-standing practice of vegetarianism before the Buddha's time by quoting an ancient Indian text, the "Manusmtri". This text says to avoid meat-eating because it is an ascetic practice that will bring good karmic merit. But that same text advocates animal sacrifice, because (it says) that's what the gods created them for; it also says that this type of ritual slaughter will bring good karmic results as well.

It is generally accepted by historians that there was a gradual acceptance of vegetarianism in India only centuries after the Buddha died. Another of the texts that he tries to use for his arguments (the vegetarian chapter of the Lankavatara Sutra) was appended to the main scripture much later and has no organic connection with the rest of the text. It was most likely written nearly a millennium after the Buddha died, so it doesn't offer any support for the author's argument.

It is a Western misconception that Buddhists are all vegetarian; so it's unfortunate to have a book like this furthering a mistaken notion. It's especially a shame that this was written by a Buddhist teacher, who has a resposibility to transmit the Dharma, not to make it support his own beliefs. My regard for Kapleau as a teacher went way down after reading this book.

This book is akin to the texts that "Creation Science" authors publish: it forms its conclusions first, and then goes looking for the evidence. Don't get me wrong -- there may be good reasons for becoming a vegetarian. You just won't find any in this book.