The Great Compassion: Buddhism and Animal Rights

by Norm Phelps

Buddhism ought to be an animal rights religion par excellence. It has long held that all life forms are sacred and considers kindness and compassion the highest virtues. Moreover, Buddhism explicitly includes animals in its moral universe. Buddhist rules of conduct―including the first precept, “Do not kill”―apply to our treatment of animals as well as to our treatment of other human beings. Consequently, we would expect Buddhism to oppose all forms of animal exploitation, and there is, in fact, wide agreement that most forms of animal exploitation are contrary to Buddhist teaching. Yet many Buddhists eat meat―although many do not―and monks, priests, and scholars sometimes defend meat-eating as consistent with Buddhist teaching. The Great Compassion studies the various strains of Buddhism and the sutras that command respect for all life. Norm Phelps, a longtime student of Buddhism and an acquaintance of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, answers the central questions of whether Buddhism demands vegetarianism and whether the Buddha ate meat. He is not afraid to examine anti-animal statements in Buddhist lore―particularly the issues of whether Buddhists in non-historically Buddhist countries need to keep or to jettison the practices of their historical homelands.

Genres: Buddhism, Religion, Animals

240 pages, Paperback

First published July 30, 2004

About the author

Norm Phelps was the spiritual outreach director of The Fund for Animals, as well as a founding member of the Society of Ethical and Religious Vegetarians (SERV) and a contributing writer for Satya. His goal was for faith communities of all traditions to include animals within the scope of their compassionate ministries.

Reviews

[Natalie Cartledge · Rating 5 out of 5]

A compassionate book!

This book should be read vegan Buddhists and those who believe that animals are not food! Definitely a must read.

[Jason Dunn · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don't call many books "treasures" but this one is absolutely a treasure.

My favorite quote about Buddhist philosophy comes from this book:

"Buddhist ethics are not a legalistic system that allows us to justify behavior on the basis of loopholes, technicalities, or a strict construction of the text. Buddhist ethics are based on motivation and intent. An ethical act is one that is driven by love and compassion and guided by the desire to do the least harm possible to any living being in whatever circumstance we find ourselves. An unethical act is one that is driven by craving, fear, or anger and guided by the desire to benefit ourselves by harming another living being. Thinking like a lawyer or an academic logician and claiming that it is acceptable to harm another sentient being for our own selfish benefit based on hair-splitting distinctions and nimble logic is contrary to the teaching of the Buddha."

(emphasis mine)

[David · Rating 2 out of 5]

The Great Compassion: Buddhism and Animal Rights was one of the few books I found, when I was researching the opinion/subject, that attempted to tackle the issue related to animal rights. What’s interesting is the line related to the question of animal rights is very fuzzy at best in the Buddhist world.

So before I begin with the specific report, I’ll tell my personal story. This story will hopefully hopefully illustrate the fuzzy line in regard to some animal rights. I’ve been a vegetarian for nearly 10 years of my life. The issue regarding consumption of a meat hasn’t been an issue to me, but I currently work in a Bioinformatics lab. For those unfamiliar with this field, we take data generated from various human and animal experiments and attempt to find scientifically relevant information. For much of the last year I’ve been doing this type of work, my analysis has been done on mostly consenting human subjects (non-lethal of course). The data generated from my analysis is generally confirmed, what are called, “mouse models.” Essentially, all this means are that mice are bred in such a way to exhibit a particular phenotypic quality we’re looking for. In shot, causing the disease we’re interested in looking for. Recently, I’ve been asked to analyze some mouse data that was done for mice with types of eye damage. To do the analysis, the mice are killed. The question I had was if this breaks the precepts – because there is potentially suffering of the animals.

The Good

There are a number of good parts to this book. The primary message is that we should have compassion toward all living beings. This compassion is primarily not consuming meat, but also includes not causing any suffering – as in, keeping a vegan lifestyle. The author references a number of traditions, teachers, and arguments for being both for and against the consumption of animals. Furthermore, the author does reference the animal testing in the medical sense. She is right on the money about how mice are being used in laboratories, and has references. This accuracy makes me feel a little better about the accuracy of the remainder of the text – although I found some areas that were incorrect.

One very interesting thing she discussed is who is attracted to Buddhism in the first place. “Americans attracted to Buddhism tend to fit the same broad profile. We were raised Jewish or Christian and first came to Buddhism between our mid-twenties and mid-forties; we are white, middle-class, college educated, often with graduate degrees, work in professional or managerial careers, and, unless …” From whom I’ve seen go to the Zen Center tend to fit this, mostly.

The discussion about the Dalai Lama (around page 154) is one of the best parts of the book. She discussed why he eats meat, and what his feelings have been on the matter. To those unaware (which I was unaware), the Dalai Lama had some health issues that forced him to start eating meat again. There’s a lot more for it, but I’m sure Wikipedia has it. Nonetheless, this portion of the book was excellent.

The discussion about “Engaged Buddhism”, which Thich Nhat Hanh started promoting is also very interesting. This is around page 163, and the gist of this portion of the book is for Buddhists to not wait for enlightenment to begin helping others, but to be active and help while working to attain enlightenment. Personally, I agree with this totally.

The Rosary of Life (page 167) is by far the best area of this book. It’s, finally, where the author calmed down enough to not sound like a ranting lunatic. It sums up the whole book’s theme very concisely. She compares the “Rosary of Life” with the “Rosary of Death”, which is a counter of how many animals live or die as a result of our choices and actions. I found this worthwhile to read.

The Bad

There are a lot of problems with this book. I’ll start with the most obvious one, that you’d encounter right away – she preaches, a lot. It’s taking one idea and pounding and pounding it until one gets to the point thinking “Is this book over yet?” Sadly this happened, for me, around 1/3rd the way through the book. It’s unnecessary to go on as much as she did with these points, and it made the text much more difficult to read. What’s amusing is at 1350 (kindle location) of the book, she says “One last point, or rather one more repetition of my endless theme: ..” No kidding, right?

With the preaching in mind, she comes off as purely dogmatic in nature. I know people, and I’m sure everyone knows people, whom are like this. They just have to be right and will cite everything and then some to be right. Fortunately, she calms down the further you get into the book – but it’s something to be aware of. Personally, I can’t stand people like this, which made parts of the book very difficult to read.

In the beginning portions of the book, the author tries using very graphic stories to illustrate what’s happening to these animals. I count this as a negative of the book mostly due to the fact I’ve seen Christians on the side of the road holding up anti-abortion signs that weren’t far from this. With that said, it’s not a pleasant read – but is informative at least.

During portions of the book (but redeemed later), the author forgets that the precepts are guide posts to be worked toward. Not everyone can be “perfect Buddhists”, but the point of the precepts is to try and stretch one’s living to be closer to the ideal. To the non-Buddhists readers out there, the ideal is compassion toward all living beings. Much of the book, I felt, she cast these as rules and outwardly would condemn spiritual leaders for not living as precisely as she wants them to. Again, a symptom of one’s ego in needing to be right about something.

Around page 164, the author makes a claim that rabbits are blinded by caustic chemicals, without anesthesia. While this may be true in some places in the world, it’s not exactly true in the U.S. I spent considerable amounts of time reading regulations related to animal use, and I don’t remember anything like this popping up. It’s true that rabbits (or any animal) can be blinded through various methods, but it’s done with anesthesia, and confirmed as research-necessary by quite a few people before anything happens. There’s a lot in these regulations.

Conclusion

/Rating:/ 2 out of 5

There are a few good parts of this book, but they are overshadowed by the near egocentric ranting that occupies most of the book. I’d recommend reading it if you’re at all on the fence on the issue of animal rights or if you consume meat and want a reason to possibly quit.

[Bobby · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Great Compassion is a terrific book. Phelps presents the Buddhist perspective on animals and our relationship to them very clearly so that a novice (or less, like me) can easily grasp the concepts and, perhaps more importantly, the spirit of Buddhism. Phelps also addresses certain viewpoints of full fledged Buddhists throughout the book, particularly those of Western Buddhists, and does so in a manner that is clear and beneficial to a broad spectrum of Buddhists, novice to long term practitioner. The recurring theme throughout The Great Compassion is "it's about the animals, not about us," and the author makes that clear in so many ways. This book is highly recommended to anyone interested in animal rights and in being a more compassionate person / Buddhist.

[Polina · Rating 4 out of 5]

it's not about us, it's about animals

[Judith Cartisano · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overall quite good. The author raises important issues that definitely need to be raised about all the rationalizations Buddhists use to allow themselves to continue eating meat. The author does get a bit preachy though, but I think maybe that's related to his frustration over these rationalizations. A Buddhist nun I know said something like this about Tibetan monks who continue eating meat now that they are living in India and no longer living in the cold climate of Tibet: "They don't need to eat meat. They eat it because they WANT to eat meat."

[Veronica Noechel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well researched book, though a bit on the dry side. If you're at all interested in what the Buddha taught about animals and our relationship to them, this is well worth reading. Dispells a lot of myths tossed about regarding the life of the Buddha and his teachings. An important read for any Buddhist. Lags a little, but it's short, you'll make it through.

[Jess]

A fascinating look into the beliefs that support Buddhists' being vegetarian.