Guest guest Report post Posted April 29, 2009 A small contribution on the topic from the Shrimad (Devi) Bhagavatam I.XVIII.57-61: Janaka said: " The killing of animals in a sacrificial ceremony is not killing; it is known as ahimsa; for that himsa is not from any selfish attachment; therefore when there is no such sacrifice and the animals are killed out of selfish attachment, then that is real himsa; there is no other opinion in this. Smoke arises from a afire when fuels are placed in it and smoke is not seen when no fuel is added. So, O Munisattama! The himsa, as prescribed in the Vedas, is free from all blemishes, selfish attachment, etc. and therefore it is unblameable. So it follows the himsa committed by persons attached to objects, is the real himsa that can be blamed, but the himsa of those persons who have no desires is not that sort of himsa. Therefore the learned men that know the Vedas declare that the himsa done by the dispassionate persons, with their hearts free from egoism, is no himsa done at all. O Dvija! Really speaking, the killing of animals done by the householder attached to senses and their objects, and done under their impulses can be taken into account as a real act of killing; but, o Mahabhaga! of those whose hearts are not attached to anything, of those self controlled persons, desirous of moksha, if they do an act of himsa out of a sense of duty, with no desires of fruits and with their hearts free from egoism, that can never be reckoned as a real act of killing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 29, 2009 Om Namaha Shivaya Om Sri Matre Namaha Rajesh, you have quoted the truth as revealed in the Veda (meaning " Truth " ). But accepting truth is not an easy thing. We all try to justify a thing from our standpoint. See Sergio saying, if one is dispassionate and consumes meat it is ok(ultimately that is the message). If you are dispassionate, why do you want to order meat in a restaurant? When you order a particular meat, you are attached to it and wants to taste and eat. Where is your dispassion? No amount of argument is going to help. Meat eaters will eat it and justify it, as a drunkard will sing the glory of drinks. So, the truth is lets not go into the righteousness aspect of it. Whether one eats meat or not or drinks or not-in the Shakthi worship or not, he/she is our brother/sister and is made in His/Her image and deserves our love and respect. Yes, eating meat or drink can connect one to the Shakthi in a different level (left-handed path) as against not doing so(right-handed). I think some debate on this may help us all - in the Shakthi Group. But the latest " swine-flu " is a reminder of pork-eating (earlier it was " mad-cow " and " chicken flu " ). Let's eat our ego and drink the divine nectar. Namaskar Ravi On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Rajesh MR <mrrajeshvedamwrote: > > In vedas,especially in yajurveda,it says ma hinsee,don't kill,aja ma > hinsee, [....] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 30, 2009 Thank you Ravi for a balanced perspective. As a Tantrika, I have chosen to be an omnivore. I offer the pleasure of my sensory experience to Shiva and Shakti when I eat ANY food. I KNOW that something has died for me to have this experience- whether goat, pig, fish cow OR VEGETABLE. To me, this makes ALL food Sacred and all food Prasad. I have often wondered if a carrot " screamed " in fear and pain when pulled (aborted) from the womb of its mother earth. Simply because I am not capable of perceiving it does not mean a vegetable does not suffer. Is its life less precious than a chicken? Every breath I take causes millions of bacteria to be destroyed by my body's defense system as an act of unconscious and divinely ordained protection. Thus, whether wanting to or not, I DO take life to keep myself alive. I am reminded of a story wherein a monk, who previously having given up food and water in an attempt at total ahimsa on realizing that his every breath caused such death, resolved to take his own life as to not be contributary to further death. When his master informed him that he would then be causing the death of the billions of cells and microorganisms that live in and on the human body his quandry spun his mind beyond its ability to process and the monk attained. Some may see this as the " drunkard rationalizing " or simply an honest acknowledgement that the very act of life itself is dependent on the consumption of life. I pray that the nitrogen from my body will feed the earth and contribute to continuity of the food chain when I am gone. I have on many occasions through the years (56 and counting) radically altered my diet to experiment with what would be optimal FOR ME -- the ONLY person I feel righteous in counseling on lifestyle. A vegetarian and vegan diet led me to a more Sattvic energy while flesh foods were more Rajasic in the ayurvedic sense of constitution FOR ME. The former had me feeling very " Yin " and mellow with a tendency to spaciness. My body does not handle carbohydrates well and thus I found a meat based diet incredibly energizing though amplifying the " Yang " energies both pleasant and unpleasant as I was more focused and physically energetic, but more prone to dynamic and aggressive energy. Each has had its appropriate place in my life, for example, working in a New York city hospital emergency room versus working in a psychiatric unit where a Sattvic constitution was more appropriate. Very different energy levels expended and experienced in each, and neither -IMHO- " wrong " . I have been able through the years to find MY place of balance. A last thought (and hopefully not one too many) is that whatever the food industry has as its practices, there ARE choices of eating meat humanely and organically grown and slaughtered if one is willing to research and pay the financial price of these less commercial sources. My choice to eat meat or not eat meat will not alter millenia old worldwide commercial meat slaughtering and it would be rather egotistical to believe that it would. To let meat rot on a store shelf of an animal previously slaughtered is to refuse the value of its sacrifice and waste its gift. All cultures seem to have an act or rite of blessing food prior to consumption. The acknowledgement that something (animal or vegetable) has died for one's sustenance leads to a TRUE appreciation of the gift of nourishment. Namaste to all, Cliff Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 30, 2009 Maybe my friends should read Lalitopakhyana. The relevant portion is already translated and available in the files section lali.pdf. There meat eating and drinking have already been dealt with. --- On Thu, 4/30/09, Ravi (New Zealand) Iyer <iyerlaw wrote: Ravi (New Zealand) Iyer <iyerlaw Re: Re: beef Thursday, April 30, 2009, 1:19 AM Om Namaha Shivaya Om Sri Matre Namaha Rajesh, you have quoted the truth as revealed in the Veda (meaning " Truth " ). But accepting truth is not an easy thing. We all try to justify a thing from our standpoint. See Sergio saying, if one is dispassionate and consumes meat it is ok(ultimately that is the message). If you are dispassionate, why do you want to order meat in a restaurant? When you order a particular meat, you are attached to it and wants to taste and eat. Where is your dispassion? No amount of argument is going to help. Meat eaters will eat it and justify it, as a drunkard will sing the glory of drinks. So, the truth is lets not go into the righteousness aspect of it. Whether one eats meat or not or drinks or not-in the Shakthi worship or not, he/she is our brother/sister and is made in His/Her image and deserves our love and respect. Yes, eating meat or drink can connect one to the Shakthi in a different level (left-handed path) as against not doing so(right-handed) . I think some debate on this may help us all - in the Shakthi Group. But the latest " swine-flu " is a reminder of pork-eating (earlier it was " mad-cow " and " chicken flu " ). Let's eat our ego and drink the divine nectar. Namaskar Ravi On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Rajesh MR <mrrajeshvedam@ .co. in>wrote: > > In vedas,especially in yajurveda,it says ma hinsee,don't kill,aja ma > hinsee, [....] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 30, 2009 ayurveda has aja mamsa rasayana and many other rasayanas where meat is an ingredient. Anyway this controversy is unnecessary. The later hindus - vaideeka as practiced by some brahmins - demand vegitarianism. Let them have it. Real tantrikas use meat and alcohol. I know many great siddha bramin srividya upasakas who will not speak of this but do use them. The guptatwa or secrecy of srividya prevents people - except initiates - from knowing what is used and what is not. --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Rajesh MR <mrrajeshvedam wrote: Rajesh MR <mrrajeshvedam Re: Re: beef Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 12:36 PM In vedas,especially in yajurveda,it says ma hinsee,don't kill,aja ma hinsee,not kill the goats,ga ma hinsee not kill coe.so according to vedas killing is not permitted at all.then comes about yaga and yaga pasu.adhwara is the synonimn of yaga.yaska the great etymologist give the meaning of adwara like this;:Adwara ithi yajna nama,dwarathi karma himsa,tad prathishedha ithi adwara.adwara is against himsa.then those who are intersted in eating meat changed the word alabhana into alambana.alabhana means to tetch and make free ,alambana means to kill.this thing is very clearly stating by charaka the greatest ayurvedic exponder in vimanastana of charaka samhitha.he says that when in yagas sarted killing of animals the new illness also appeard in the earth.From these thgings it is very clear there is no meat eating in vedas or in ayurveda.acharya m.r.rajesh Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 30, 2009 What I pointed is ,charaka the exponder of ayurveda says that when we start meat havan in yaga ,verious illness also started in the earth.If ajamamsa rasayana in ayurveda means it is against charaka.Another thing aja in commen sanskrit means goat.But when it takes aja medha there aja means not to take birth.it is the meaning of god also.here aja in rasayana is actually seven years old rice grain.it will not sprougt out because of its oldness.The system of ayurveda is the off shoot of veda.I think we must have a good research on this thing ..thanking all of you.acharya m.r.rajesh --- On Thu, 30/4/09, sankara menon <kochu1tz wrote: sankara menon <kochu1tz Re: Re: beef Thursday, 30 April, 2009, 8:51 AM Maybe my friends should read Lalitopakhyana. The relevant portion is already translated and available in the files section lali.pdf. There meat eating and drinking have already been dealt with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 30, 2009 What I pointed is ,charaka the exponder of ayurveda says that when we start meat havan in yaga ,verious illness also started in the earth.If ajamamsa rasayana in ayurveda means it is against charaka.Another thing aja in commen sanskrit means goat.But when it takes aja medha there aja means not to take birth.it is the meaning of god also.here aja in rasayana is actually seven years old rice grain.it will not sprougt out because of its oldness.The system of ayurveda is the off shoot of veda.I think we must have a good research on this thing ..thanking all of you.acharya m.r.rajesh --- On Thu, 30/4/09, sankara menon <kochu1tz wrote: sankara menon <kochu1tz Re: Re: beef Thursday, 30 April, 2009, 8:58 AM ayurveda has aja mamsa rasayana and many other rasayanas where meat is an ingredient. Anyway this controversy is unnecessary. The later hindus - vaideeka as practiced by some brahmins - demand vegitarianism. Let them have it. Real tantrikas use meat and alcohol. I know many great siddha bramin srividya upasakas who will not speak of this but do use them. The guptatwa or secrecy of srividya prevents people - except initiates - from knowing what is used and what is not. --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Rajesh MR <mrrajeshvedam wrote: Rajesh MR <mrrajeshvedam Re: Re: beef Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 12:36 PM In vedas,especially in yajurveda,it says ma hinsee,don't kill,aja ma hinsee,not kill the goats,ga ma hinsee not kill coe.so according to vedas killing is not permitted at all.then comes about yaga and yaga pasu.adhwara is the synonimn of yaga.yaska the great etymologist give the meaning of adwara like this;:Adwara ithi yajna nama,dwarathi karma himsa,tad prathishedha ithi adwara.adwara is against himsa.then those who are intersted in eating meat changed the word alabhana into alambana.alabhana means to tetch and make free ,alambana means to kill.this thing is very clearly stating by charaka the greatest ayurvedic exponder in vimanastana of charaka samhitha.he says that when in yagas sarted killing of animals the new illness also appeard in the earth.From these thgings it is very clear there is no meat eating in vedas or in ayurveda.acharya m.r.rajesh Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 30, 2009 Hi I possed a question on wether a hindu can eat beef. I got the answer now. thanks But the argument keep going back to vegetarianism. I wish to share my view on this. If ur into vegetarianism its good for spirituality. One fasting enthusiats told me that removes toxins from the body. And his fasting is just drinking plain water for 10 to 14 days. Absolutly no food goes though his mouth during this fast. At the end of the fast(zero food) he attains excellent mental clarity that increases his psychic powers. He attribute it to toxins in meat, insecticide and fertilizer in plant. When he does not consume anything all toxins are removed. But i doubt that vegetatianism makes one peace loving eg .Hitler was a vegetarian. So can one attain moksha by vegetarianism. That a defininate yes. Now comming to meat. Can one reach moksha. Somewhere in the shakti sadhana website , Goddess matangi, when she was on earth, she was a meat eater. So any vegetarian who is adament about their vegetarian position should then go to the picture of goddess Matangi(and many other gods and godess) and yell at her for being non vegetarian. Even other herbivourious primates like chimpanzee sometime take a diet of meat(probably for biological rasons). And human are omniverious , we (in theory)need at least a little meat in our diet. If i remember corectly , our intestines not exactly a herbivours one and there are certain vitamins lacking in vegetarian food. But can one attain moksa with non vegetarianism. That is an also astounding yes. (So its ok to be a non vegetarian, im sure many throughout history reached moksha) Let me streach the topic. If one wants to do tantric sex attain moksha ,let them carry on. If one wants to smoke marijuana and attain moksha , let them carry on.(but getting arrested by police is a sparate matter). If one is disgusted people having tantric sex and smoking marijuana for spirituality, then curse and swear at lord Shiva. Lastly on this matter on books, different books tells u different thing. Its like a blind man feeling the elephants tail and calling it elephant and while another blind man holding a trunk and calling elephant. I think its more important to choose a correct methodology about doing well in it. whatever bring you moksha, then fine. I think a person not harming animals is his or her personal choice. It is sometimes reenforced because there are books that promote such behaviour. So If such person eats meat , it automatically becomes a sin. But for all others (non vegetarians)who dont follow such rules, there is no sin. Books sometimes can be dangerous. A group of people interprated a holy and it lead to the collapse of the world trade center in 9/11. Another group of fanatics in india (which im so ashamed of) are attacking christian rendering them homeless. I dont know what on basis or book they carry out their actions. (Christian are also worshiping lord shiva) My point is books are guide not absolute truth, , Rajesh MR <mrrajeshvedam wrote: > > What I pointed is ,charaka the exponder of ayurveda says that when we start meat havan in yaga ,verious illness also started in the earth.If ajamamsa rasayana in ayurveda means it is against charaka.Another thing aja in commen sanskrit means goat.But when it takes aja medha there aja means not to take birth.it is the meaning of god also.here aja in rasayana is actually seven years old rice grain.it will not sprougt out because of its oldness.The system of ayurveda is the off shoot of veda.I think we must have a good research on this thing .thanking all of you.acharya m.r.rajesh > > > --- On Thu, 30/4/09, sankara menon <kochu1tz wrote: > > sankara menon <kochu1tz > Re: Re: beef > > Thursday, 30 April, 2009, 8:51 AM > > Maybe my friends should read Lalitopakhyana. The relevant portion is already translated and available in the files section lali.pdf. There meat eating and drinking have already been dealt with. > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 30, 2009 Only " Real " tantrikas use meat and alcohol, huh? This is so humorous and silly that it is beyond words. JAI AMMA! Surya Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
