Índice
Geral das Seções
Índice da
Seção Atual
Informação: Este artigo foi gentilmente enviado ao Site Anna Kingsford pelo Sr. Brian McAllister. A primeira parte foi publicada na revista The Vegetarian News (Notícias Vegetarianas), Vol. I, n°12, dezembro de 1921; e a segunda parte no Vol. II, n°13, janeiro de 1922.
(p. 1)
THE ANCIENTS AND VEGETARIANISM.
By
SAMUEL HOPGOOD HART
(President of the Croydon
Vegetarian Society).
By “ancients” is understood those who lived in former ages, as distinct from
those of our own or recent times, who are classed as “moderns,” from which it is
clear that the names of an ever increasing number of persons are constantly
being added to the ancients, and no permanent line of demarcation can be drawn
between the two classes of persons. The attitude of the ancients, generally,
towards that which we understand by “Vegetarianism,” was (at any rate
so far as Europeans were concerned) not very different from that of the
moderns. That this is so, is evident from the denunciations against bloodshed
and flesh-eating which were uttered by the great teachers of antiquity –
denunciations which, for the most part, fell on ears as deaf then as they are
now to any call to a better and higher mode of life in this respect.
I propose to consider the opinions on the question of food and feeding and
allied subjects of some of the great teachers of antiquity, and of these I shall
confine myself to those who lived before the commencement of the
so-called “Christian Era.”
It has been suggested by Mr. Howard Williams in his classical work The Ethics of Diet, that the first move in the West
towards abstinence from flesh foods was due to the rules of living which
prevailed in the Orphic Societies, which originated about the eighth or seventh
century B.C. These rules were ascetic, and “to some extent at least required
abstinence from flesh foods.” If this suggestion be true, then to Orpheus is to
be ascribed the honour, among other things, of having
inaugurated in the West the rule for which your Society stands, and we may
regard Orpheus – who lived at the time of Moses – as the Father of the food
reform movement in Europe.
Orpheus is now regarded by many as a mythical personage. By the Greeks he was
regarded as the most celebrated of the poets who lived before the time of Homer.
According to tradition, he was of Divine origin, and was presented with a lyre
by Apollo, and having been instructed in its uses by the Muses he enchanted with
its music
(p. 2)
not
only the wild beasts, but the trees and rocks upon
In the writings of Hesiod, who lived about 735 B.C.,
and who was one of the earliest Greek poets, we find reference to the age known
as “the Golden Age,” and the gradual fall of man from the ideal thereby
represented – a fall which was accompanied by violence, bloodshed, flesh-eating,
and war – for, of “the Brazen Age” it was said: –
“Bloody their feasts, with wheaten food unblessed.”
In an interesting book on The Great Initiates, by Schuré (which has been translated into English by Mr.
Rothwell, a well-known member of your Society), there
is an account of Orpheus, and however mythical some of the stories about him may
be, I do not think that there is justification for regarding him as a mythical
personage.
After Orpheus, the next great name in the golden chain is that of Pythagoras,
who taught that “those alone are dear to Divinity who are
hostile to injustice.” It was said by Iamblichus
that “A greater good never came, nor ever will come, to mankind than that which
was imparted by the Gods through Pythagoras.” Pythagoras was born in the
Pythagoras regarded himself as one destined by the Gods to reveal to his
disciples a new and purer mode of life. He is, undoubtedly, one of the greatest
teachers of antiquity. His teaching has endured through the ages, and it is now
a potent influence for good in the world. He was a teacher sent from God, a
teacher God-inspired. Plato, it is believed, was indebted to him, as have been
many others. Not much is known of his life, but one thing is certain, and that
is, early in life he travelled far and wide in pursuit
of knowledge, his absence abroad extending over a period of nearly thirty years,
and in his travels he visited Egypt where he remained over twenty years and
where, there is little doubt, he was initiated in the Mysteries. After his
return to Samos, he went to Hellas, and while in Atica he was probably initiated in the sacred mysteries of
(p. 3)
laid
upon the principles of Temperance and Justice
– a justice “of all things towards all” – and the Common Life among the members
of his community was adopted, all their goods being held by them in common.
Iamblichus also says that Pythagoras “entirely abstained from wine and
animal food, confining himself to such nourishment as was slender and easy of
digestion; his sleep was short, his soul vigilant and pure, his body in a state
of perfect and invariable health,” and, regarding offerings to the Gods, he says
that he commanded that “no blood or dead bodies must be brought,” for “neither
he nor any one of the contemplative philosophers, sacrificed animals.”
Pythagoras believed in the transmigration of the soul, and “he commanded his
disciples to regard the animals as their friends so as neither to injure, slay,
nor eat any of them.” Iamblichus
also says that “His particular pupils
he ordered to abstain from all animals and certain other foods which were
hostile to the reasoning power and impeded its energies.” Others who committed
themselves to the guidance of his doctrines might partake of the flesh of
certain animals, but they rarely took fish – “They considered that animals
innoxious to the human race should not be injured or slain.” “There were
many reasons why Pythagoras ordained abstinence from animal flesh, one being
because it is productive of peace. Those who are accustomed to
abominate the slaughter of animals as iniquitous thinking it more unlawful to
kill a man or to engage in war. The most contemplative of philosophers,
who had arrived at the summit of philosophic attainments, were forbidden to eat
anything animated, or to drink wine, or to sacrifice animals to the Gods, or to
injure animals in any way. Pythagoras himself lived after this manner. Those who
acted as legislators were required to abstain from animals, for to act truly
justly they should not injure kindred animals. Even those whose life was not
entirely purified, sacred, and philosophic, and were allowed to eat certain
animals, were required to abstain at definitely appointed times and were
enjoined not to eat the ear, nor the brain for these are parts belonging to the
ruling nature, ladders and seats of wisdom.”
The following reported sayings of Pythagoras admirably sum up his teaching on
the question of food and feeding: –
“Sacred nature reveals to them [the Students of the Divine] the most hidden
mysteries.
If she impart to thee her secrets, thou wilt easily perform all the things which
I have ordained thee.
And by the healing of thy soul, thou wilt deliver it from all evils, from all
afflictions.
But abstain thou from the meats which we have forbidden in the purifications and
in the deliverance of the soul.
Make a just distinction of them, and examine all things well,
Leaving
thyself always to be guided and directed by the
understanding that comes from above, and that ought to hold the reins.
And when, after having divested thyself of thy mortal body, thou arrivest at the most pure Aether,
Thou
shalt be a God, immortal, incorruptible, and death
shall have no more dominion over thee. (1)
(Second part: published in The Vegetarian News, Vol. II, n°13, January
1922.)
(p. 4)
Contemporary with Pythagoras was the great teacher of
Buddha lived from 590 to 510 B.C. His life and teaching were such that he has
been called “the Christ of India.” For general readers, the best account of his
life and teaching is to be found in Sir Edwin Arnold’s well-known book The Light of Asia. Buddha came to a country better
prepared to receive his teaching (which included a non-flesh regimen) than did
Pythagoras, because the Vedas, the sacred books of the Brahmans (the priestly
caste), taught that doctrine which was followed by the Brahmans on religious
grounds. Buddha proclaimed the doctrine not only on religious grounds, but also
as a great moral truth for all, founded on Justice
and Compassion. Buddha was born at Kapilavastu, and was the son of a Rajah (or King). Early in
(p. 5)
life
he renounced the high position of his birth and all the wealth and worldly
privileges which it brought with it, in order to gain Divine knowledge and
become a Saviour of men, and he thereupon adopted the
life of a mendicant. He then became to Brahamanism
what Christ afterwards became to Judaism, a great religious reformer. He began
to preach at the age of thirty-six. He attracted disciples around him – his
disciples including women as well as men. He broke down all caste barriers; the
religion and salvation offered by him was not for the priestly caste alone, but
for all who would believe and follow in his precepts. Salvation was for all,
without distinction of sex, caste, or race, but each man must work out his own
salvation. Buddha’s last words to his disciples were: “Mendicants! I now impress
it upon you, the parts and powers of man must be dissolved. Work out your
salvation with diligence.” The following texts from Buddhist scriptures, which I
have taken from a collection of similar texts to be found in a little book The Imitation of Buddha,
make this clear: –
“Not by birth does one become low caste, not by birth a Brahman; by his deeds he
becomes low caste, by his deeds he becomes a Brahman.”
“Causing destruction to living beings, killing and mutilating, stealing and
speaking falsely, fraud and deception, these are what defile a man.”
“Whosoever harms living beings, and in whom there is no compassion for them, let
us know such as ‘base-born.’”
“In whom there is truth and righteousness, he is blessed, he
is a Brahman.”
“Whoso hurts not living creatures, whether those that tremble or those that are
strong, nor yet kills nor causes to be killed, him do I call a Brahman.”
“In this mode of salvation there are no distinctions of rich and poor, male and
female, people and priests; all are equally able to arrive at the blissful
state.”
“Even the most unworthy who seeks for salvation is not to be forbidden.”
Buddha taught the sacredness of all life, and the obligation of observing
justice and compassion to all beings. One of his first acts was to abolish the
bloody sacrifices of the Brahmans, and one part of the Noble Eightfold Path, as
taught by Buddha, was “right means of livelihood,” and, like Pythagoras, he
taught the doctrine of reincarnation. A Buddhist priest is under obligation to
abstain from destroying the life of beings, and the use of intoxicating liquors,
as well as eating at unseasonable times. The effect of Buddha’s teaching is not
confined to his nominal followers. It is world-wide. It is stamped ineffaceably
upon modern Brahmanism, and there is little doubt that Christianity has
benefited by it. There are those who think that the Christian Gospels are
indebted to it. In his Preface to The Light of Asia,
Sir Edwin Arnold says: “In point of age most other creeds are youthful compared
with this venerable religion which has in it the eternity of an universal hope,
the immortality of a boundless love, the indestructible element of faith in
final good, and the proudest assertion ever made of human freedom.”
(p. 6)
Let us now consider some points in the teaching of this Divine man who
identified himself with all beings. The following verses are taken from The Imitation of
Buddha to which I have referred: –
“Whether now any man kill with his own hand, or command any other to kill, or
whether he only see with pleasure the act of killing – all is equally forbidden
by this law” – [the law of Buddha.]
“My teaching is this, that the slightest act of charity, even in the lowest
class of persons, such as saving the life of an insect out of pity, that this
act shall bring to the doer of it consequent benefit.”
“Shall we in worshipping slay that which hath life? This is like those who practise wisdom, and the way of religious abstraction, but
neglect the rules of moral conduct.”
“How can a system requiring the infliction of misery on other beings be called a
religious system? To seek a good by doing an evil is surely no safe plan.”
“Even so of all things that have life, there is not one that [the
Buddhist anchorite] passes over; he looks upon all with deep-felt love.
This, verily, is the way to a state of union with Brahma.”
“The Scripture saith: ‘Be kind and benevolent to every
being, and spread peace in the world. If it happen
that thou see anything to be killed, thy soul shall be moved with pity and
compassion: Ah, how watchful should we be over ourselves.’”
“Hear ye all this moral maxim, and having heard it keep
it well: Whatsoever is displeasing to yourselves never do to another.”
I have said that one of his first acts was to abolish the bloody sacrifices of
the Brahmans. The story of his action in this respect is told in The Light of
The King
stood in his hall of offering,
On either
hand the white-robed Brahmins ranged
Muttered
their mantras, feeding still the fire
Which roared upon the midmost altar. There
From scented
woods flickered bright tongues of flame,
Hissing and
curling as they licked the gifts
Of ghee and
spices and the Soma juice,
The joy of Indra. Round about
the pile
A slow,
thick, scarlet streamlet smoked and ran,
Sucked by the
sand, but ever rolling down,
The blood of bleating victims. One such lay,
A spotted
goat, long-horned, its head bound back
With munja grass; at its stretched throat the knife
Pressed by a
priest, who murmured, “This, dread gods,
Of many yajnas cometh as the crown
From Bimbisâra: take ye joy to see
The spirted blood, and pleasure in the
scent
Of rich flesh
roasting ’mid the fragrant flames;
Let the
King’s sins be laid upon this goat,
And let the
fire consume them burning it,
For now I
strike.”
(p. 7)
But Buddha softly said,
“Let him not
strike, great King!” and therewith loosed
The victim’s
bonds, none staying him, so great
His presence
was. Then, craving leave, he spake
Of life,
which all can take but none can give,
Life, which
all creatures love and strive to keep,
Wonderful,
dear, and pleasant unto each,
Even to the
meanest; yea, a boon to all
Where pity
is, for pity makes the world
Soft to the weak and noble for the strong.
Unto the dumb
lips of his flock he lent
Sad pleading
words, showing how man, who prays
For mercy to
the gods, is merciless,
Being as god
to those; albeit all life
Is linked and
kin, and what we slay have given
Meek tribute
of the milk and wool, and set
Fast trust upon the hands which murder them.
Nor, spake he, shall one wash his spirit clean
By blood; nor
gladden gods, being good, with blood;
Nor bribe
them, being evil; nay, nor lay
Upon the brow
of innocent bound beasts
One hair’s
weight of that answer all must give
For all
things done amiss or wrongfully,
Alone, each
for himself, reckoning with that
The fixed arithmic of the universe,
Which
meteth good for good and ill for ill,
Measure for
measure, unto deeds, words, thoughts;
Watchful,
aware, implacable, unmoved;
Making all futures fruits of all the pasts.
Thus spake he, breathing words so piteous,
With such
high lordliness of ruth and right,
The priests
drew down their garment’s o’er the hands
Crimsoned
with slaughter, and the King came near,
Standing with
clasped palms reverencing Buddh;
While still
our Lord went on, teaching how fair
This earth
were if all living things be linked
In
friendliness and common use of foods,
Bloodless and
pure; the golden grain, bright fruits,
Sweet herbs
which grow for all, the waters wan,
Sufficient drinks and meats. Which when these heard,
The might of
gentleness so conquered them,
The priests
themselves scattered their altar-flames
And flung
away the steel of sacrifice;
And through
the land next day passed a decree
Proclaimed by
criers, and in this wise graved
On rock and
column: “Thus the King’s will is: –
There hath
been slaughter for the sacrifice
And slaying
for the meat, but henceforth none
Shall spill
the blood of life nor taste of flesh,
Seeing that
knowledge grows, and life is one,
And mercy
cometh to the merciful.”
The teachers to whom I have referred are some only of the great teachers of
antiquity. There was also, before the Christian Era,
the
(p. 8)
poet
and philosopher Empedocles, who lived about 450 B.C. He was a Gnostic, and was
regarded by his followers as semi-divine. He also exhorted the world to abstain
from flesh-eating. “Will you not,” said he, “put an end to this accursed
slaughter? Will you not see that you are destroying yourselves in blind
ignorance of soul?” There was also Plato. He was a Greek, a native of
NOTES
(1)
See The Golden Verses of Pythagoras and other Pythagorean
Fragments, selected and arranged by Florence M. Firth,
with an introduction by Mrs. Besant.
(2) Gleanings from the
Talmud by the Rev. W. Mackintosh.
