Haridasdasdas

I thought I'd add that a Gujurati friend of mine told me once that the vegetable ghee in india often contains not just animals fats, but cow fat too.

I don't know the truth of this, or how prevalent it is. It is my understanding that ghee available in Europe, both vegetable and butter, is vegetarian.

Good deal. I just proved it in my last post. Using your quote that Srila Prabhupada said to offer commercial milk only until cow protection was established. That was over 40 years ago and it is clear cow protection in the vedic model will never be established within the next 100 years in the West to any significant degree that leaves veganism as the ONLY viable method of cow protection that we have.

 

So it is clear that Srila Prabhupada was in favor of cow protection and you as a dairy consumer are not protecting cows but rather supporting there slaughter the onus is really on you to show that you will be a follower of Srila Prabhupada's instruction to protect the cows. Will you now?

Prabhupada never said to end dairy consumption. He said to always offer dairy products to Krishna to relieve the suffering of the cows.You've twisted his words to suit your own agenda, in the same way you previously twisted my words to pretend that I said Vaisnavas need to drink milk.

I also do not care in the slightest for your swearing and insinuation of such. I have not approached you as an enemy, I have tried to talk with you, and you attack me with 'FU'. It doesn't raise the bar of the conversation. Neither does posting the same topic again and again all over the forums. That comes across as obsessive, and fanatical.

For the record, I recall in the first one of these threads you made a few months ago, you said that people who supported the dairy industry were cow killers. You can search it up if you like. Prabhupada supported the dairy industry. Therefore I am not taking you out of context in any way if I say that you are making a very direct attack on Srila Prabhupada.

I can't imagine that I have much else to say on this matter, and please excuse me if I take a while to reply, because I may be away for a few days.

So Prabhupada is a cow killer, because he bought dairy products? This is what you are saying.

Why do you link to a site of the books of someone who by your definitions is a cow killer?

Why have you posted this so many times about not taking dairy, when the real reason why you don't is due to your lactose intolerance?

Can you understand why you don't come across as an emotionally stable individual?

Babrhu,

 

Kurma das's arguement is a health based one, listing various sources that claimed to show the detrimental effects on the body of the foods in question. I have nothing to say about that. Some praise both foods for their health bestowing properities. Maybe garlic and onions have benefical and detrimental properties both.

 

I wonder how he would deal with commercial cow's milk. Would he be against the use of commercial cow's milk (blood milk) whose list of health destroying properties is far more agreed upon then anything relating to onion and garlic.

 

Just a curiousity on my part.

He would accept what Prabhupada said, since he is Prabhupada's disciple.

Why is always Krsna in the picture, Theist? Where is Balaram, the twin brother of Krsna? What do you think is Balaram`s opinion? There are two sides of the coin. And I want to know Balaram`s side on this grave matter. If there`s a ying, there`s a yang to it. The negative and the opposite. Without it there`s no attraction. There`s no electricity without the negative and the positive come clashing together. That`s the ecosystem at work here. Carnivores have reincarnated into human beings and they are now eating hogs, cows, and chickens or else this planet would be inhabited by trillions of animals and they are being fed by multitudes of human beings who don`t eat meat!

People would stop breeding them.

Now stop pretending that your desire to enjoy your senses is anything else than just that. After you accept this, you can change.

Many of the people on this forum were once meat eaters, and they have accepted meat eating as the pointless activity which it is, and discarded it.

Do you think Adi Sankara was a meat eater? What about Sri Caitanya? Sai Baba?

Meat eating is what you do when there is nothing else to eat. Fortunately, there is plenty else to eat for everyone in the western world. Stop the pretending, and face the facts.

Also, Balaram is not the opposite of Krishna, where did you get that idea from? They aren't YIN and Yang, that Chinese philosophy. Please stop making things up.

I guess it all boils down to how much you believe in the Bible really.

I don't think you'll find many Hindus who do.

There's more than one version of the Valmiki Ramayan, you know that? Stupid Troll.

The question is about cow protection, not only in west but in India as well. Just that the point doesnt get looked over, Theist is emphasising on it over and over, which is right onits own. I dont think see any contradictions here. You as well emphasized on protection of cows. So did Srila Prabhupadji. Its all about becoming aware of it and spreading the word. I would like to tell all of you though, we must spread the word OUT where there is BIGGER issue of Slaughtering of ANIMALS, that is a REAL problem, and it is attaching itself to the dairy, and many other things which we many knowingly or unknowing consume, thats a shame.

Prabhupada's disciples asked him if they should still buy milk products from commercial dairies involved in the meat industry. He said we should take it and offer it to Krishna, until we can get it all from cow protection efforts of our own.

So basically you haven't answered my question, and didn't really understand it in the first place.

Fine, it's your choice. According to you one can't be a Gaudiya Vaisnava without drinking milk. I don'r share that opinion.

 

For me the emphasis should be on cow protection and not drinking the milk of enslaved, ill-treated and soon to be slaughtered cows.

When I said a Gaudiya I meant a follower of Prabhupada, Narayan Maharaj etc.

So how can a follower of Prabhupada decry something that Prabhupada did? Where is the consistency? I am not saying you do or don't have to take any dairy products.

I am saying that saying dairy is unethical is contradictory to the teachings of Prabhupada, and anybody who claims to follow him should be aware of that. How can a person accept Prabhupada as Jagat Guru, and then say, 'oh, but he was wrong about milk products, he was supporting cow slaughter, he was a bad person'?

So basically you think Prabhupada was an unethical person. Am i wrong?

EDIT: Just to let everyone know, theist is lactose intolerant as he said in the previous thread. So he can't take dairy products. Correct me if I am wrong.

Theist:

If you can prove to me that your stance does not contradict Prabhupada, and does not condemn him as a supporter of killing, then I shall fully accept what you say, and I shall stop buying dairy products immediately. That is my promise.

I have always wondered in my childhood days why my parents always say that i should not eat meat ...

 

But they could not explain a real reason for it...

They will say that you cannot kill and eat and they think its because

animals might have some disease and you may get it (which i could not accept).

 

But now i found out a explanation for it...

According to vedic system there are three modes of living,

 

1. Mode of goodness – In this mode you follow all the basic rules and you do chanting.

2. Mode of Passion – If you are following the basic rules but you don’t chant and you are in constant passion. Like we want to see places we want to buy different things and desires are more.

3. Mode of Ignorance – If you eat meat you are in this mode.

 

Even the Vedas are divided according to these 3 modes.

People in different modes need to read different vedas.

 

is this the correct explanation....Please share your views...

 

OM NAMA SHIVAYA

Yea, that's one of many arguments from a vedic perspective. As well as that you have the basic ethics of it, you are killing unnecessarily for no reason other than to satisfy your senses. When you have plenty of other food available, it's not easy to justify meat eating.

Many meat eaters will come up with this argument or that argument, but would they wear fur? Usually not. Why not? Because they think it is cruel to kill an animal for your own enjoyment. Okay then, but what is meat eating? It is proven scientifically as not only unnecessary for good health, but also very impractical unless you live in a desert or on a tropical island or something and you just cant grow crops.

I'm not even going to talk about the environmental implications, it's just an all round bad idea (but you probably won't get a disease).

Good people, bad habits, that's what I say.

Just a thought that came to my mind.

What would u say about TAKING the milk away from the calf - and drinking it. Cow does not willingly gives it away. I think even that is wrong.

What are your thoughts.

Well in a civilized society, the cow is fed, and after that, the cow is milked and humans take the remainder.

Between that time and the next feeding time of the calf, the mother will have produced more milk.

I've seen this practiced, and cows provide loads of milk anyway, more than a calf can drink.

What was Krishna's childhood occupation?

All I know is that Prabhupada said that devotees should take dairy milk, and that it would be much better if they could establish goshallas themselves, Laxshmi allowing. As far as I understand, Narayana Maharaja and Sridhar Maharaj made similar statements.

Prabhupada was well aware of the sidelines of the dairy industry, etc, but he still said, we shall take milk and offer it to Krishna.

So I couldn't call it intellectually consistent for a Gaudiya Vaisnava to be a Vegan on ethical grounds. To me, Veganism would be a condemnation of Prabhupada, saying that he is like a meat eater etc.

Are we to stay celibate always.. even in marriage? Because I don't think I can do this.. Will Krishna not accept me if I have sex within marriage? And If I do have sex in marriage I would practice it with tantra.. Is this OK?? I kind of feel depressed over this..

I can tell you with reasonable certainty that most Iskcon devotees don't practise celibacy within marriage. Personally I've never seen it as some big sin to, unless you made a vow not to (ie initiation), but it simply isn't Krishna Conscious. Then again, neither is going to the cinema, or other activities like that.

In the Bhagavatam 3rd Canto, even the sage Kashypya gives into lust for his wife, so don't feel bad or guilty. Then again, Prabhupada says in that purport that children born of lust are more likely to be demoniac by nature, like Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakasipu in that example.

So, do what you can really. Just don't get into guilt spirals or anything like that. If you cannot cultivate celibacy, then it will be much easier to cultivate humility. Just my input, I'd recommend that you get other people's opinions.

Namskaram,

 

If One person doesnot marry means he is not elligible for moksha?

 

pls clrarify this doubt?

What gave you that impression?

Yea maybe if you aren't a lawyer or a doctor you won't get moksha either. Not if you don't finish your greens either!

Dont talk like that.This country is for muslims also.

There are more muslims in india than in pakistan.

Anyway i asked my lawyer teacher about this.

HE explained that this is because our country respects the ethics of religions.

LAws are same to everybody except for some social laws.

Such as marriage, which are social in nature.

To protect the rights of religions these laws are different because each scripture of each religon might have different views on marriage,children etc.

So in order to respect their sentiments such measure are taken.

Remember these are just some laws and not all.

Also to promote the interests of some minorities and for their upliftment such things are done.

Well the intention is noble, but I think it would be better to give everyone the same rights, if there is some special marriage ceremony for muslims, allow everyone to have it, etc. Do you understand what I mean?

I don't think the religion thing is that bad, it's just the principle of it.

did you hear about the lawyers who were going to sue Ikea?

They assembled the case, but it collapsed.

I was thinking that you would think like that.Please don't create more enmity in your heart.

The laws were set for the rights and in the interest of all the citizens while respecting religious interests.

But in the partition of India there was a separate country for Muslims, which are now two countries.

Surely that is sufficient? What rights would be violated by having one system of law for everyone like every other country on earth? The right to be denied a divorce until you officially 'convert'?

This is divisive. Name another country on earth that has separate laws like this. You can't wonder why there are so many riots against Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs in India when the government actually separates them officially like this. It can't be the way forward, I'm sorry.

Hello everyone,

 

sort of new here... From India.

 

When I won't get sleep I just read a book until the boredom of the book puts me to sleep. But that is not a good idea, I should do something what Sonic Yogi has done. Meditation is a good idea.

 

cheers

'cheers'?

Oh who could this be? I can't think.

Raw food is healthy. Juice is also healthy.

We do not live entirely off juice. As far as I am concerned it is the same principle.

Krishna can talk to you when your body is asleep. We are not these bodies remember.

 

For gently inducing sleep take a sublinqual tablet of melatonin 3 mg. 1/2 hour before you need to be asleep.

That's supposed to be better than sonic yogi's experience?

I don't even know what melatonin is but I'll die very happy if i never take that rubbish in my life. Same goes for the rest of the expensive 'cures' they feed people for the myriad of 'afflictions' that have magically been discovered in the last twenty years.

In India some laws are there that are to be applied to Muslims,christians and people of other religion differently.Laws relating to marriage ,abortion ,minority etc. are not necessarily the same for parcis,muslims,christians or any other religion.For example a hindu cannot practice practise polygamy but a musalaman can marry more than one wife.

So for such legal purposes registration specially when converting ,if you want to be known as a person from for examlpe hindu religion legally, is required.

jai ram

To me, that seems ridiculous. Shouldn't there be one set of laws for everyone?

Religion is a matter of the heart, not a piece of paper or a basis for the state to decide what laws to uphold. With all respect, I can't appreciate the idea of different laws for different people.

Can I ask why you need to do a legal procedure in India? To a westerner that seems not just strange and divisive, but actually scary that the government is keeping tabs on peoples religion like this. Why is this done?

In most countries people don't register their religion, apart from if they live in Saudi Arabia or somewhere.

I recently heard a sannyasi disciple of Prabhupada who said that who said that anyone is welcome to come to a temple, whoever they are in a relationship or married to, but we do not perform homosexual marriages in Iskcon.

Being in a relationship with someone of the same sex, whether or not there is any ceremony involved, would be considered breaking the regulative principles.

However, I don't see it as any different to heterosexual couples who are breaking regulative principles, and we treat them equally, so I think practising homosexuals fit into the same category.

I don't see that there is any debate here. There is no basis for barring homosexuals or treating them badly and there is no basis for marrying them.

Yes, that is true. Rama had an elder sister named Shanta. Dashrath was her biological father but Dashrath gave her to his friend Romapad. Thus Romapad brought her up. Shanta's husband was sage Rishyashring. Rishyashring was the chief priest, who conducted the yajna after which Ram, Bharat, Laxman and Shatrughan were born.

Well that's impressive.

Hare Rama/Hare Krishna

 

Rama asked his wife to walk on fire. This doesn't seem nice. He also slaughtered a low-caste man who was reciting the veda.

 

Krishna, on the other hand, called himself brahmachari and yet abducted many women. He lied throughout the Kuru war, instigated Arjuna to kill his relatives.

 

All this doesn't point to any divinity at all in these two blokes. Why is it we consider them on par with the Brahman described in upanishad?

Three cheers for muslim websites!

Hey why don't you pick up a book now and then? Moron.