Introduction
It has been a topic of great interest for me to find out if eating of meat is truly a sin, as it is often made out to be by self-righteous vegetarians. Even more so, after I converted to vegetarianism. It is true that man likes to impose his personal ideas as the right path for his fellow-men. For extraordinary human beings, this is not necessarily a bad thing, as it often benefits mankind. My intention is not to research the actual effects of meat-eating, but to verify historical claims that the ancients of India have always been vegetarian.
It is one thing to explain to people the benefits of vegetarianism, tell them that you believe in it, and you think it would benefit them. It is quite another to use the names of respected ancients to propound your philosophy. My effort in this ongoing article is to research this claim whether the ancients truly were vegetarians. I shall try to do so with links to texts wherever possible.
I'd like to add, that I personally believe that vegetarianism is good for health, and can help in the practice of spirituality, because that works for me.
The Codebook of Manu
One of the oldest referred scriptures in India is the code book of Manu, the giver of laws. This contains various laws as to the functioning of society. Even today, wannabe lawyers in good schools study this code book in their curriculum (NUJS does).
From the Manu Smrti,
"There is no sin in eating meat, in drinking spirituous liquor, and in carnal intercourse, for that is the natural way of created beings, but abstention brings great rewards" - verse 56
"By subsisting on fruits and roots, and by eating food fit for ascetics, one does not gain so great a reward as by entirely avoiding the use of flesh" - verse 54. [Ref]
It is important to see this in perspective. Manu Smrti clearly lays down that it is NOT a sin to eat meat. However, it recommends abstinence for the rewards are great.
The story of Ilvala
Agastya muni, who is known as the founder of the South Indian Vedic civilization, had a famous encounter with the demon Ilvala. It is said that Ilvala had a brother, named Vatapi. Vatapi could turn himself into a ram. Then he'd be led to sacrifices by unwitting Brahmins. After he was eaten up, Ilvala, using her occult powers, would summon him - and he'd burst out from the stomachs of all the people who had eaten him, and would become whole again(killing the eaters in the process). Agastya muni was approached to help rid this menace. The great muni went to the demon, and was offered the ram meat. He ate it. Then, as Ilvala tried getting her brother out, Agastya muni burst into laughter. He told Ilvala that he had digested Vatapi completely, and the fiend wouldnt come out anymore. Ilvala was terrified and begged for mercy. It is said Agastya directed the demoness to a spiritual path after that.
This story proves without a doubt that Brahmins of the time of Muni Agastya were meat-eaters, for there was no other way that they would sacrifice and eat the meat of a ram. Agastya muni dates from the time of the Ramayana - which would be definitely earlier than 4500 BC (Krishna is dated to be around 3200-3150 BC).
There is another interesting aspect to this story - that these were not just any Brahmins, but South Indian Brahmins, who today claim that they've historically been vegetarian.
Again, I'd like to add, that it is definitely good to be vegetarian, but it is not a fact that historically, South Indian Brahmins have been vegetarian.
The Bhagvad Gita
This is believed to be the nectar from the Upanishads, the summary to speak of. It is the dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna in the battlefield - with Lord Krishna explaining to Arjuna why he must uphold his duty and fight.
The Gita is often treated as a reference text on how we should lead our lives. It is a truly marvellous document of sociology, and is so utterly logical that it makes an interesting read for people studying logic or engineering.
To come to the point, I've often heard that the Gita prohibits the consumption of meat, and hence followers of the Gita should abstain. Let us study this claim.From the commentary of Adi Sankaracharya on the Gita, Chapter 17, verses 7-10 :
7: "Food also, which is dear to all, is of three kinds; and so also are sacrifices, austerity and charity. Listen to this classification of them."
8: "Foods that augment life, firmness of mind, strength, health, happiness and delight, and which are succulent, oleaginous, substantial and agreeable, are dear to one endowed with sattva."
9: "Foods that are bitter, sour, salty, very hot, pungent, dry and burning, and which produce pain, sorrow and disease, are dear to one having rajas.
10: "Food which is not properly cooked, lacking in essence, putrid and stale, and even ort and that which is unfit for sacrifice, is dear to one possessed of tamas.
It is so surprising that we do not find any mention of meat in the "rajas" or "tamas" categories. For if it is truly bad, Lord Krishna could have, in one splendid verse, proclaimed so, and so many millions would have followed. But he didnt.
On the contrary, most of the vegetarian food eaten in Northern and Southern India would easily come under the category of "sour, salty, very hot, pungent..." - hardly sattvic.
Opponents may argue that the interpretation of verse 10 - "that which is unfit for sacrifice" would apply to meat, thus bringing it to the tamasic category. However, such an argument does not hold merit, as we've just examined the story of Agastya Muni and Ilvala, wherein a ram was being sacrificed and eaten. Unfit for sacrifice would in fact apply to meat that has any injury or wound on its body - which is said to make it unholy to offer God. It maybe added that such a concept augurs well with the sense of personal hygiene, as participants in the yajna would partake of the meat afterward.
It is also known that the Ashwamedha Yajna consisted of sacrificing horses and eating their meat. We shall be touching on this a little later.
Opponents may further argue, that meat is "putrid and stale" - but such an argument usually comes from ignorance - no non-vegetarian eats putrid or stale meat, for that is a serious health risk. It is known that meat suppliers have to undergo strict checks for its freshness and non-contamination. It is definitely true that meat gets putrid and stale faster than vegetables, but such meat can be considered poisonous and no meat-eater in his sane mind knowingly eats rotten meat.
Verse 9 is of particular interest when it is applied to Indian cooking - that often borders on the pungent or hot. It should not be construed that all of vegetarian Indian cuisine is sattvic.
Verse 8 sheds light on what the criterion of sattvic food is - and if meat is cooked in that manner, it is hard to dispute that such food should not be considered sattvic.
Our observation from these verses is that - there is no clear indictment of meat, when there should have been if meat-eating is sinful. The reason for this might probably be that people in the period were avid meat-eaters.
The Ashwamedha Yajna
The Ashwamedha Yajna is a famous sacrifice, in which a king interested in "world-domination" would send out a sacrificial horse through the territories of neighbouring kings. This was done to establish the strength of the king, as anyone who stopped the horse would have to face the might of the king's army. Either there'd be battle, or the neightbouring kings would yield and pay tribute. What is interesting is that, at the end of the sacrifice, all the kings, rishis and brahmins would get together, and would partake the horse-meat that was offered in sacrifice. It is very hard to believe that a pure-vegetarian civilization would conjure up such a non-vegetarian sacrifice.
Continuing with this, it is a known fact that two of the greatest kings of India performed this sacrifice. One was Lord Rama, an avatar of Vishnu. His horse was stopped by his own sons - Luv and Kush. As Lord Rama performed this sacrifice, it stands to reason that the Lord had consumed the meat of the horse, and was therefore a non-vegetarian.
The second king worthy of mention was Yuddhisthira, and in his yajna, all the Pandavas and Lord Krishna participated. That means, Lord Krishna and the Pandavas had to take the horse-meat at the end. Was Lord Krishna non-vegetarian ? Such an idea now seems logical as Lord Krishna was a kshatriya (warrior) and a king. It was standard practice for warriors to eat meat, as they had to wage war - and it is not possible to have good warriors who cannot kill.
It is also known that Lord Rama's father Dasrath would go hunting, for that was how he shot Shravan Kumar and got cursed. The question is, what did Dasrath do after he killed the deer or the animal that he was hunting ? It is usual tradition for the slain animal to be cooked in the palace, a tradition that continued right upto the 20th century, when India had its last kings. If it were otherwise, it would turn most ancient kings into sadists interested in satisfying killing instincts for no sensible purpose. I would definitely not think that our noble vedic kings would have been given to such sadistic pleasure, especially as they were the trendsetters of their generation and for several future generations.
It has been a topic of great interest for me to find out if eating of meat is truly a sin, as it is often made out to be by self-righteous vegetarians. Even more so, after I converted to vegetarianism. It is true that man likes to impose his personal ideas as the right path for his fellow-men. For extraordinary human beings, this is not necessarily a bad thing, as it often benefits mankind. My intention is not to research the actual effects of meat-eating, but to verify historical claims that the ancients of India have always been vegetarian.
It is one thing to explain to people the benefits of vegetarianism, tell them that you believe in it, and you think it would benefit them. It is quite another to use the names of respected ancients to propound your philosophy. My effort in this ongoing article is to research this claim whether the ancients truly were vegetarians. I shall try to do so with links to texts wherever possible.
I'd like to add, that I personally believe that vegetarianism is good for health, and can help in the practice of spirituality, because that works for me.
The Codebook of Manu
One of the oldest referred scriptures in India is the code book of Manu, the giver of laws. This contains various laws as to the functioning of society. Even today, wannabe lawyers in good schools study this code book in their curriculum (NUJS does).
From the Manu Smrti,
"There is no sin in eating meat, in drinking spirituous liquor, and in carnal intercourse, for that is the natural way of created beings, but abstention brings great rewards" - verse 56
"By subsisting on fruits and roots, and by eating food fit for ascetics, one does not gain so great a reward as by entirely avoiding the use of flesh" - verse 54. [Ref]
It is important to see this in perspective. Manu Smrti clearly lays down that it is NOT a sin to eat meat. However, it recommends abstinence for the rewards are great.
The story of Ilvala
Agastya muni, who is known as the founder of the South Indian Vedic civilization, had a famous encounter with the demon Ilvala. It is said that Ilvala had a brother, named Vatapi. Vatapi could turn himself into a ram. Then he'd be led to sacrifices by unwitting Brahmins. After he was eaten up, Ilvala, using her occult powers, would summon him - and he'd burst out from the stomachs of all the people who had eaten him, and would become whole again(killing the eaters in the process). Agastya muni was approached to help rid this menace. The great muni went to the demon, and was offered the ram meat. He ate it. Then, as Ilvala tried getting her brother out, Agastya muni burst into laughter. He told Ilvala that he had digested Vatapi completely, and the fiend wouldnt come out anymore. Ilvala was terrified and begged for mercy. It is said Agastya directed the demoness to a spiritual path after that.
This story proves without a doubt that Brahmins of the time of Muni Agastya were meat-eaters, for there was no other way that they would sacrifice and eat the meat of a ram. Agastya muni dates from the time of the Ramayana - which would be definitely earlier than 4500 BC (Krishna is dated to be around 3200-3150 BC).
There is another interesting aspect to this story - that these were not just any Brahmins, but South Indian Brahmins, who today claim that they've historically been vegetarian.
Again, I'd like to add, that it is definitely good to be vegetarian, but it is not a fact that historically, South Indian Brahmins have been vegetarian.
The Bhagvad Gita
This is believed to be the nectar from the Upanishads, the summary to speak of. It is the dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna in the battlefield - with Lord Krishna explaining to Arjuna why he must uphold his duty and fight.
The Gita is often treated as a reference text on how we should lead our lives. It is a truly marvellous document of sociology, and is so utterly logical that it makes an interesting read for people studying logic or engineering.
To come to the point, I've often heard that the Gita prohibits the consumption of meat, and hence followers of the Gita should abstain. Let us study this claim.From the commentary of Adi Sankaracharya on the Gita, Chapter 17, verses 7-10 :
7: "Food also, which is dear to all, is of three kinds; and so also are sacrifices, austerity and charity. Listen to this classification of them."
8: "Foods that augment life, firmness of mind, strength, health, happiness and delight, and which are succulent, oleaginous, substantial and agreeable, are dear to one endowed with sattva."
9: "Foods that are bitter, sour, salty, very hot, pungent, dry and burning, and which produce pain, sorrow and disease, are dear to one having rajas.
10: "Food which is not properly cooked, lacking in essence, putrid and stale, and even ort and that which is unfit for sacrifice, is dear to one possessed of tamas.
It is so surprising that we do not find any mention of meat in the "rajas" or "tamas" categories. For if it is truly bad, Lord Krishna could have, in one splendid verse, proclaimed so, and so many millions would have followed. But he didnt.
On the contrary, most of the vegetarian food eaten in Northern and Southern India would easily come under the category of "sour, salty, very hot, pungent..." - hardly sattvic.
Opponents may argue that the interpretation of verse 10 - "that which is unfit for sacrifice" would apply to meat, thus bringing it to the tamasic category. However, such an argument does not hold merit, as we've just examined the story of Agastya Muni and Ilvala, wherein a ram was being sacrificed and eaten. Unfit for sacrifice would in fact apply to meat that has any injury or wound on its body - which is said to make it unholy to offer God. It maybe added that such a concept augurs well with the sense of personal hygiene, as participants in the yajna would partake of the meat afterward.
It is also known that the Ashwamedha Yajna consisted of sacrificing horses and eating their meat. We shall be touching on this a little later.
Opponents may further argue, that meat is "putrid and stale" - but such an argument usually comes from ignorance - no non-vegetarian eats putrid or stale meat, for that is a serious health risk. It is known that meat suppliers have to undergo strict checks for its freshness and non-contamination. It is definitely true that meat gets putrid and stale faster than vegetables, but such meat can be considered poisonous and no meat-eater in his sane mind knowingly eats rotten meat.
Verse 9 is of particular interest when it is applied to Indian cooking - that often borders on the pungent or hot. It should not be construed that all of vegetarian Indian cuisine is sattvic.
Verse 8 sheds light on what the criterion of sattvic food is - and if meat is cooked in that manner, it is hard to dispute that such food should not be considered sattvic.
Our observation from these verses is that - there is no clear indictment of meat, when there should have been if meat-eating is sinful. The reason for this might probably be that people in the period were avid meat-eaters.
The Ashwamedha Yajna
The Ashwamedha Yajna is a famous sacrifice, in which a king interested in "world-domination" would send out a sacrificial horse through the territories of neighbouring kings. This was done to establish the strength of the king, as anyone who stopped the horse would have to face the might of the king's army. Either there'd be battle, or the neightbouring kings would yield and pay tribute. What is interesting is that, at the end of the sacrifice, all the kings, rishis and brahmins would get together, and would partake the horse-meat that was offered in sacrifice. It is very hard to believe that a pure-vegetarian civilization would conjure up such a non-vegetarian sacrifice.
Continuing with this, it is a known fact that two of the greatest kings of India performed this sacrifice. One was Lord Rama, an avatar of Vishnu. His horse was stopped by his own sons - Luv and Kush. As Lord Rama performed this sacrifice, it stands to reason that the Lord had consumed the meat of the horse, and was therefore a non-vegetarian.
The second king worthy of mention was Yuddhisthira, and in his yajna, all the Pandavas and Lord Krishna participated. That means, Lord Krishna and the Pandavas had to take the horse-meat at the end. Was Lord Krishna non-vegetarian ? Such an idea now seems logical as Lord Krishna was a kshatriya (warrior) and a king. It was standard practice for warriors to eat meat, as they had to wage war - and it is not possible to have good warriors who cannot kill.
It is also known that Lord Rama's father Dasrath would go hunting, for that was how he shot Shravan Kumar and got cursed. The question is, what did Dasrath do after he killed the deer or the animal that he was hunting ? It is usual tradition for the slain animal to be cooked in the palace, a tradition that continued right upto the 20th century, when India had its last kings. If it were otherwise, it would turn most ancient kings into sadists interested in satisfying killing instincts for no sensible purpose. I would definitely not think that our noble vedic kings would have been given to such sadistic pleasure, especially as they were the trendsetters of their generation and for several future generations.
18 comments:
really nice article.
nice research
If you have any such eye openers do tell me. I am compiling many such article in a book on how the original Hindu culture and Vedas are modified to suit people's comfort.
I am not sure if Lord Rama, Lord Krishna, Yudhistir used to kill horse and eat its flesh. "They sent horse and fought with kings who stopped it" - May be it means Horse as a utility to show supremacy and getting involved in medha/vadha of kings/soldiers who stopped them. who knows? .. I never read in Mahabharata/Ramayana that these people ate meat. At the same time it is said that Lord Krishna loves Cows. But we are seeing Beef-eaters now. Arjuna went to protect cows during Uttaragograhana [during Ajnata vas]. If you want to follow Lord Krishna, then go and stop all beef-eaters. Can you? If you dont want to do it, then dont talk about Lord Krishna. Lord Krishna lifted the mountain, can you even imagine to lift a granite?
The last para, which says about Dashrath going on hunting - Buddy, please read Ramayana once again. Dashrath went to stop/frighten Elephants which were causing a damage to crops/sages residing there. He shot the arrow at "Sravana" who was drinking water thinking that it is an elephant or some animal. - So, please don't write just anything.
Now deer part - It was Pandu King - husband of Kunti and Maadri - who shot the arrow at deer mistakenly. This is in Mahabharata.
Now Sujeet - you want eye openers. Whose eyes you want to open? Open our own eyes first then think about others.
One blind is following another.
If you guys want to enjoy meat, go and enjoy. Don't misinterpret Lord Rama and Krishna for that purpose.
I accept that there are some stories about people eating meat. Read about Kaushikopakhyanam and Dharmavyadha. It says Dharmavyadha - though he is a butcher, he attained the self-realization. He continued what he is doing because that was his family occupation and during those times one is supposed to do what his parents gave to him. He followed dharma.
Think good boys. Don't just blah blah blah. It will take some time for you guys to repent on what you are writing on Gods.
Quell c ascribe together the crude with two backs casinos? scrutinization this outcome [url=http://www.realcazinoz.com]casino[/url] circumvent and waver online casino games like slots, blackjack, roulette, baccarat and more at www.realcazinoz.com .
you can also fit into our untrained [url=http://freecasinogames2010.webs.com]casino[/url] convoy at http://freecasinogames2010.webs.com and attain crap unfeeling coins !
another contemporaneous [url=http://www.ttittancasino.com]casino spiele[/url] locality is www.ttittancasino.com , on account of german gamblers, pressurize well-wishing online casino bonus.
Human Beings evolved from Apes(Monkey,gorilla,chimpanzee etc),Apes are both Veg and non Veg,so the man acquired some eating habits too.The ancient man used to eat raw meat by killing animals,after which they discoverd fire and started cooking.so a human is always a flesh eater,Our canine tooth says we are carnivorous,so It is our personal interest of what we Eat and what we wear and what we do. Common interestesed people form a community to become a religion,caste,veg,non veg,cannibals etc...Be it kshatriya,be it brahmin,be it christian ,be it muslim, or Tribals.Gods we praise and workship now are all Human Beings.
Human Beings evolved from Apes(Monkey,gorilla,chimpanzee etc),Apes are both Veg and non Veg,so the man acquired some eating habits too.The ancient man used to eat raw meat by killing animals,after which they discoverd fire and started cooking.so a human is always a flesh eater,Our canine tooth says we are carnivorous,so It is our personal interest of what we Eat and what we wear and what we do. Common interestesed people form a community to become a religion,caste,veg,non veg,cannibals etc...Be it kshatriya,be it brahmin,be it christian ,be it muslim, or Tribals.Gods we praise and workship now are all Human Beings.
Human Beings evolved from Apes(Monkey,gorilla,chimpanzee etc),Apes are both Veg and non Veg,so the man acquired some eating habits too.The ancient man used to eat raw meat by killing animals,after which they discoverd fire and started cooking.so a human is always a flesh eater,Our canine tooth says we are carnivorous,so It is our personal interest of what we Eat and what we wear and what we do. Common interestesed people form a community to become a religion,caste,veg,non veg,cannibals etc...Be it kshatriya,be it brahmin,be it christian ,be it muslim, or Tribals.Gods we praise and workship now are all Human Beings.
1.
I heard that in Aswamedha yagna - FAT of Horse is taken out to use it in Yagna. They dont kill it.
2.
Agastya case - I heard that meat was fed to Brahmins unknowingly. Where as Agastya has digested it before Ilvala called Vatapi.
Eating non veg is a sin and it is also inhuman activity. Animals like lion, tiger, etc are non vegetarian. But man also show too much of intrest in non veg. Then whats the difference between human and animal. Man should show mercy to all creatures in the world by without doing harm to that animals.
yes, i also agree your concept
top [url=http://www.c-online-casino.co.uk/]free casino games[/url] brake the latest [url=http://www.casinolasvegass.com/]casino[/url] autonomous no consign reward at the leading [url=http://www.baywatchcasino.com/]casino online
[/url].
led manufacturer in taiwan there is owing to the present system.
relentless old enemy, who, suspecting his intentions, kept his eye
Here is my homepage led lights manufacturer
My homepage : led lights manufacturer
top [url=http://www.001casino.com/]free casino games[/url] brake the latest [url=http://www.realcazinoz.com/]online casinos[/url] autonomous no set aside bonus at the chief [url=http://www.baywatchcasino.com/]casino online
[/url].
The tro choі Do us alіen to nearbу influences and
frienԁ of unknown formulas. If you're looking for the fastest levels, this to be a elementary Arcade secret plan do you? The AHA instant Arrived I tried and true to Spiel you're sure
to Detect moгe thаn than a few gameѕ
that Suit уour favоritеs. For сhildгen whо аre
young, it is manу gаmеs onlinе are of forgеtful-tіmе Diffeгеnt vіdeo games.
Му ωeb-site; game
Of course, thеre are some υр the fax machinе to cell phone answer.
Also νisit my site; http://wiki.Destinysphere.de/
А Gogo GameIn this game you adԁ bоxes tо Scorеs so
that big covert TV, the minoг but frоѕty Vita ԁisplay suits JSR exactly right.
Loοκing fоr a anything to puncher into your Call bar?
Shame, guilt about fantasies, the will for others besides our partners, our not
enough self-acceptance … all of these impede the sexual reference to our partners and ourselves.
You hate seeing your husband or wife scroll through many porn sites
around the computer. Here are a couple of strategies you are able to
apply in conquering your loneliness:.
Here is my homepage - instrumental
i dnt blame any 1 for any mis interpretation of facts.It is also true that arjuna was hunting while in exile with brothers and met lord Shiva who taught him few things.
Yet at the same time Lord Ram ate flesh is ridiculous.Same goes with Lord Krishna.
They alwaz pushed for non voilence yet also voilence to save people from evil.So u have to look at both aspects.
This article only picks up the part which they want to believe.Not at the other one.which also says that do not do evil.
Cars speed is not provided to race only which can result to life loss in accident.It is provided to travel fast.
The same way animals were killed to save others from getting eaten or when arjunas and family might not have anything to eat.Not to enjoy the meat when you could avoid killing....
So be neutral and then decide without passing a judgement ....
It's a handy blog and I m really impressed with your approach. All the arguments are chronologically arranged. I do have a complaint, the font color used makes it hard to read .. its too light. We may be Hindus or ppl from other faiths. We are trying to understand why there is confusion. The same god that created all humans have different faiths with practices that are as apart as convenience and conviction. Science and faith are both trying to unravel this universe that we are in. Understanding god and understanding the universe is meaning the same thing. Everything we do makes a difference.
I had this question in mind thank you ..
Post a Comment