Why True Buddhism Is Vegan

Buddhist Teachings On Eating Animal Products

This essay explores the ethical foundations of Buddhism and argues that true adherence to the Buddha’s teachings requires veganism. Drawing on sutras, precepts, and historical interpretation, it challenges the cultural and doctrinal distortions that have allowed meat consumption to persist among Buddhists.

This website edition includes light framing and internal links to help readers explore related essays on personhood, nonviolence, and the ethics of language. The main text remains as originally published. 

The Buddha prohibited animal flesh over 30 times. So why do so many Buddhists still eat meat?

If there is any major world religion whose adherents ought to be vegan, it is surely Buddhism, yet vegans are a minority among those who call themselves followers of the Buddha. There are even so-called Buddhists who eat meat, but in this article I will argue that eating meat directly contradicts the teachings of Buddha himself. When it comes to eating animal products, there are many Buddhist teachings that make it quite clear that true Buddhism is vegan.

The very first precept of Buddhism states: “I undertake to observe the rule to abstain from taking life.” This principle applies to the lives of both humans and non-humans alike. There is no distinction drawn here between killing humans and killing other animals. Killing includes all forms of sentient life. In fact, this precept is generally interpreted as a commitment to the principle of ahimsa, or nonviolence, compelling Buddhists to not only refrain from killing, but to strive to perform the least possible amount of harm to others.

Buddha prescribed a very simple path to enlightenment for all his followers, known as The Noble Eightfold Path. Although the ‘steps’ on this path are numbered one to eight, they are to be viewed and undertaken simultaneously. Number 5 on the path is ‘Right Livelihood’ and the Buddha has laid out specific examples of what is NOT considered right livelihood so that adherents of the Dharma (the Buddha’s Way to liberation) do not get led down a wrong path. In the Vanijja Sutta, not only is the meat trade among the professions specifically forbidden by the Buddha, but it also references ‘business in beings’, which is to say, making money through the buying and selling of sentient beings per se or from their exploitation.

Vietnamese Buddhist monk and teacher, Thich Nhat Hanh, explains the significance of right livelihood thus: “The way you support yourself can be an expression of your deepest self, or it can be a source of suffering for you and others.” Clearly, causing suffering to yourself or others is not in line with the Buddha’s Dharma.

In the Brahmajala Sutra, the Buddha taught his disciples very expressly that they themselves should not kill, or incite someone else to kill, or participate in the planning of a killing, or praise killing, or enjoy seeing someone else kill.

He implored them to “give rise to an enduring attitude of compassion, an attitude of reverence and obedience, devising skilful means to save and protect all sentient beings” and condemned the killing of “a living creature indulging in enjoyment” as a most serious offence — so serious, in fact, that anyone doing so would no longer be considered one of his followers.

The most feared thing is the world is the suffering of death. In terms of the harm that one can inflict upon others, nothing inflicts more harm than the taking of a sentient being’s life, which is more precious to them than all the treasures in the world.

The Nirvana Sutra says that the Buddha addressed King Ajātaśatru as follows: “Great King, in your palace it is standard policy to allow the slaughter of sheep, regarding which, at first you had no misgivings. How is it that you only had misgivings regarding [the killing of ] your father? Even if there is a great difference between human beings and animals in terms of noble and base, there is no difference between the two in terms of their valuing of life and fear of death.”

In the prominent Lankavatara Sutra, eating meat is unambiguously prohibited about 37 times and there is an entire chapter (Chapter Eight) dealing with the issue of meat-eating. During a conversation with a practitioner named Mahamati, the Buddha says, “In the present sutra all [meat-eating] in any form, in any manner, and in any place, is unconditionally and once for all, prohibited for all. Thus, Mahamati, meat-eating I have not permitted to anyone, I do not permit, I will not permit.”

“It is not true, Mahamati, that meat is proper food and permissible for the Sravaka when [the victim] was not killed by himself, when he did not order others to kill it, when it was not specially meant for him. Again, Mahamati, there may be some unwitted people in the future time, who, beginning to lead the homeless life according to my teaching, are acknowledged as sons of the Sakya, and carry the Kashaya robe about them as a badge, but who are in thought evilly affected by erroneous reasonings. They may talk about various discriminations which they make in their moral discipline, being addicted to the view of a personal soul. Being under the influence of the thirst for [meat-] taste, they will string together in various ways some sophistic arguments to defend meat-eating. They think they are giving me an unprecedented calumny when they discriminate and talk about facts that are capable of various interpretations. Imagining that this fact allows this interpretation, [they conclude that] the Blessed One permits meat as proper food, and that it is mentioned among permitted foods and that probably the Tathagata himself partook of it. But, Mahamati, nowhere in the sutras is meat permitted as something enjoyable, nor it is referred to as proper among the foods prescribed [for the Buddha’s followers].”

Within some schools of Theravada Buddhism, consuming animals is allowed if the monks do not see, hear, or suspect that the animals to be eaten were killed for the purpose of feeding them.

This erroneous interpretation of Buddha’s teaching is based on the Pali text of the Jivaka Sutra, the source of the infamous ‘three purities’ argument, which states there are three instances when meat may be eaten:

“..meat should not be eaten when it is seen, heard, or suspected.
I say that meat should not be eaten in those three instances.
I say that there are three instances in which meat may be eaten:
when it is not seen, not heard, and not suspected.
I say that meat may be eaten in these three instances.

It is quite clear that in this passage the Buddha is explaining that if a monk inadvertently consumes meat that has been placed in his begging bowl without his knowledge, he is not at fault, but if he sees, hears, or even suspects that there is meat in his bowl, he is not to eat it. However, later commentators on this sutra gratuitously inserted the phrase [that the living being has been slaughtered for oneself] after the word ‘suspected’. This phrase is a spurious addition which does not appear in the original Pali text. It has been used to deceive and mislead people into the false belief that Buddha allowed his monks to eat meat if the victim was not specifically slaughtered to feed them, or at least when they did not see, hear, or suspect that to be the case.

Not only is this interpretation linguistically unwarranted but it contradicts the many unequivocal teachings of the Buddha on this matter. The Buddha gives extensive arguments against meat-eating in the Angulimaliya Sutra, Nirvana Sutra, Karma Sutra, Shurangama Sutra, Mahamegha Sutra, Lankavatara Sutra, Maha Parinirvana Sutra, the Hastikakshya and others.

Despite this, there are even some who argue that Buddha himself ate meat, but the Sutras are quite clear. In the Surangama sutra, for example, Buddha states that any other teaching, which argues that eating meat is permissable and so on, ‘is that of evil demons’.

Perhaps the most heinous of all revisionist misinterpretations of the sutras is the one claiming that the Buddha himself ate meat and that he died from eating contaminated pig flesh. The Pali term originally used in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta to describe what was eaten by the Buddha during his final meal is sukara-maddava, which literally means ‘pig’s delight’ and is almost certainly a refence to truffles, a type of mushroom adored by pigs. It is unclear how anyone could interpret ‘pig’s delight’ to mean pork. The Pali term for pig meat is actually sukara-mamsa. Carolyn Rhys-Davies, president of the Pali Text Society from 1923 to 1942, clearly noted this over seventy ago, but even today, carnists are still spouting this nonsense about the Buddha eating pork.

The Buddha made it crystal clear time and time again that his followers should not eat the flesh of other sentient beings. Moreover, they should do all they can to avoid causing fear and suffering to others and should promote peace in their actions and way of living. In the Surangama Sutra he went even further when he says “How then can those who practise great compassion feed on the flesh and blood of living beings? If bhikhus do not wear garments made of silk, boots of leather and furs, and refrain from consuming milk, cream and butter, they will really be liberated from the worldly.” Clearly being vegan was seen by the Buddha as a way towards liberation.

The Mahayana Brahmajala Sutra even encourages practitioners to save captive animals: “When you see someone in society killing animals, you should try to come up with a way to protect [the animals], and to release them from their predicament.”

It is inarguable that the meat, dairy, egg, leather, wool and fur industries cause suffering and death on an unimaginable scale to innumerable sentient beings and by supporting those industries we are willing participants in that abuse. If we willingly support actions which cause fear, pain and death, how can we call ourselves Buddhist?

I’ll leave you with this extract from The Dhammapada, which sums up the Buddha’s views on eating animal products and why true Buddhism is vegan:
​
“All beings tremble before danger; all fear death… life is dear to all.
When we consider this, we do not kill or cause to kill.”

Thank you for helping keep this work alive. 

This site is kept free of advertising and corporate sponsorship. It exists through the generosity of readers and supporters who believe in independent writing on justice and rights issues. If you’d like to help sustain this work, you can do so here. Your support genuinely makes a difference. 

Further Reading

The Brutal Truth About Slavery

"They're Not People"

The Forgotten Holocaust - Human Rights, Animal Rights and Oppression

Other Animals Are People, Too