Buddha Died After Eating ...

[caption id="attachment_1421" align="aligncenter" width="665"] The cause of the Buddha's death may be a subject of theological dispute but the event itself has inspired countless artists and sculptors down the ages. This 19th century Japanese print shows women and a cat mourning the suicide of actor Ichikawa Danjuro VIII in a scene reminiscent of traditional artistic conception of the Buddha's deathbed, in which animals are often depicted grieving alongside humans.[/caption]

“I forgot today is the Buddha’s anniversary and ate meat!” the Buddhist lady lamented from the back of the car as we cruised along the Princess Highway from Sydney to a South Coast destination.

“Why?” I replied. “The Buddha himself is said to have died after eating pork!”

This was a revelation to the devout lady, who, after a shocked reaction, retreated into silence.

The cause of the Buddha’s death - mahaparinirvana in the Buddhist canonical jargon – is a matter of theological dispute between the two major Buddhist traditions of Theravada and Mahayana.

It is an article of faith in the Mahayana tradition, which has traditionally held sway in Nepal, India, Tibet, China, Korea and Japan, that the Enlightened One died after eating a meal of mushrooms. For the adherents of Mahayana, it seems that anything less than the Buddha’s imagined vegetarianism detracts from his divinity and precept of karuna (compassion) and ahimsa (non-violence).

On the other hand, the more orthodox Theravada tradition, which took root in Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand and Cambodia, takes a comparatively more relaxed view on this delicate matter, holding that the Buddha died after eating a meal of pork near Kusinagar, India. For the doctrinal purists of Theravada, the Buddha’s system seems to rest on a more substantive foundation than his dietary habits.

Almost half a millennium passed before the Buddha’s life and teaching were committed to writing. Needless to say, myth and legend were pressed into service to embellish his actions and utterances and also to promote the agendas of rival claimants to his “true” teaching.

As the Roman statesman and philosopher Cicero wrote, “There are many questions in philosophy to which no satisfactory answer has yet been given. But the question of the nature of the gods is the darkest and most difficult of all…. So various and so contradictory are the opinions of the most learned men on this matter as to persuade one of the truth of the saying that philosophy is the child of ignorance…”