Idea of Ahimsa and Asceticism in Ancient Indian Tradition

Author(s): Bansidhar Bhatt
Publisher: B J Institute

Page 46

REFORM RELIGIONS....
37
for monks and nuns. As such, a monk or a nun has to see and ascertain what kind of meat is received in alms. The main Vinaya rules for begging for alms are as follows:
A monk or a nun should not eat knowingly the meat of an animal which is killed for him or her (uddissa-kata). It means, he or she should have not seen (a-dittha), not-heard (a-suta), and not doubted (a-parisan kita), that the meat he or she is eating is of an animal killed particularly for him or her. The meat is thus considered to be pure, i.e. eatable in three respects.
There is also a story in the Buddhist tradition that the Jainas proclaimed Gotama the Buddha guilty of consuming meat knowingly, that his host, the general Siha had killed the animal only for entertaining Gotama and his disciples. The general Siha then declared this proclamation to be false and ascertained that neither he himself had killed the animal nor had he consented any other person to do so, but he sent a servant to find out elsewhere whether the meat was available in hand. In this way, it was "ti-koti-parisuddha" - pure in three respects, i.e. it was not - seen, not-heard, and not-doubted whether the meat was received on account of killing any animal intentionally for the monks :
ajja Sihena ... thulam pasum vadhitva samanassa Gotamassa bhattam katam, tam samano Gotamo janam uddissa katam
msam paribhunjati ... / (from Alsdorf-1. pp. 7-8, for the details regarding this, see Schmithausen-1. pp.70-71, fn.400).
(c) The Buddha and meat-eating :
The Buddha was not vegetarian and the Digha-nikaya mentions that he dies of eating the soft meat of a wild boar (sukara maddava) served to him by Chunda, a blacksmith in the town of Pava. The Vinaya rules allow even the 'sravakas - laypersons or disciples - to eat meat provided it is pure in three respects. ti - koti - parisuddha, but such rules are criticised in the 2. It means: "ti-koti-parisuddha", Mahăvagga 6.31.12-14, Culla vagga
7.3.14 fol., sources from Alsdorf-1. p.6; see also Ruegg. pp.234235; also Majjhima-nikaya I.p.368, Anguttara-nika ya 4. p.187 (i.e. Ruegg. p.235); also Wezler-1. pp.39-40, fn. 116, pp.100 fol. and Wezler-2. p.401. For such a rule in Brahmanism, see 'Alsdorf-1.
p.12 and fn.1. 3. Ĉf. "A Buddhist Bifle", ed. D.Goddard, Boaston 1970, p.18 and
Alsdorf-1. p.6.