________________
Since we must destroy some life in order to live, it is better that that life is from the lower levels; that is plant life. This is acceptable because at the lower level, the life process is more cyclic and involuntary as compared to that at higher level. Life and death at lower levels are much rapidly acted upon, not individually but as progressive evolutionary process.
Another and more important factor is judging the effect of a particular food on our own physiological and psychological systems. Broadly speaking, there are three types of foods according to their effects on the body: one that excites physically and mentally, one that imparts lethargy, and one which is purely nutritious without any side effects. There are a variety of combinations of all these properties in different degrees in all types of foods. One has to be cautious in selecting a combination, from the available eatables, so as to produce minimal undesired effects.
In this age of technological achievements, synthetic products have been produced where hardly any living organisms, as stipulated in traditional definitions, are involved. According to the traditional norms there should be no harm in consuming L. S. D. as no destruction or harm to any form of life is involved. A little rational thinking would show that the real object behind rejection of a certain eatable does not end at preventing more destruction of some particular form of micro-life. In fact, the determination of the harm it causes to the consumer is of primary importance. If a food is not obtained by destroying life, but after eating it pushes one towards irrational and destructive behaviour, it should be considered even worse.
Negation of flesh eating is based on both of these reasons. All animal forms are recognized as individually con
AHIMSA: THE SCIENCE OF PEACE 74 For Private & Personal Use Only
Jain Education International
www.jainelibrary.org
