Rama & Meat eating

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

 

I came to know on some stuff from net that there are some statements made by lord rama especially while leaving for forest. He lamented by saying that he would be missing meat delicacies etc.. is this true?

[maadhav 0]

not true.

read ramayan.

 

besides, rama was an armed kshatriya,

and any forest gives a lot of oppertunity to hunt for food

if one wants to eat meat.

 

[David G Brault 0]

Hey Guest, here is the verse that you are thinking of:

 

स स्वभाव विनीतः च गौरवाच् च तदा आनतः ।

प्रस्थितो दण्डकारण्यमाप्रष्टुमुपचक्रमे ॥२-२०-२६॥

 

देवि नूनम् न जानीषे महद् भयम् उपस्थितम् ।

इदम् तव च दुह्खाय वैदेह्या लक्ष्मणस्य च ॥२-२०-२७॥

 

गमिष्ये दण्डकारण्यम् किमनेनासनेन मे ।

विष्टरासनयोग्यो हि कालोऽयम् मामुपस्थितः ॥२-२०-२८॥

 

चतुर्दश हि वर्षाणि वत्स्यामि विजने वने ।

मधु मूल फलैः जीवन् हित्वा मुनिवद् आमिषम् ॥२-२०-२९॥

 

भरताय महा राजो यौवराज्यम् प्रयच्चति ।

माम् पुनर् दण्डक अरण्यम् विवासयति तापसम् ॥२-२०-३०॥

 

स ष्ट्चाअष्टौ च वर्षाणि वत्स्यामि विजने वने ।

आसेवमानो वन्यानि फलमूलैश्च चर्तयन् ॥२-२०-३१॥

 

सा निकृत्तैव सालस्य यष्टिः परशुना वने ।

पपात सहसा देवी देवतेव दिवश्च्युता ॥२-२०-३२॥

 

This is the translation of these verses:

 

That Rama , being humble in nature , became still modest due to respect for his mother and was set about to ask her permission before setting forth his journey to Dandaka forest. 2-20-26

 

“Oh,mother! You do not know that a great dismay is approaching now. It brings grief to you, to Sita and to Lakshmana” 2-20-27

 

“I am going to Dandaka forest. Why this seat for me? Time has come for me to sit on a seat made of Kusha grass.” 2-20-28

 

“I shall live in a solitary forest like a sage for fourteen years, leaving off meat and living with roots, fruits and honey”. 2-20-29

 

"The great king is giving to Bharata the succession to kingdom and to me, however, he is making me a sage to stay in the forest of Dandaka." 2-20-30

 

“I have to satisfy with the things existing in the forest and subsist with roots and fruits in a solitary forest for fourteen years.” 2-20-31

 

The queen Kausalya fell on the floor all at once like the branch of a tree, cut down by an axe and as an angel dropping down from heaven. 2-20-32

 

 

Maadhav, I would really like to have you reply to this one.

[David G Brault 0]

I don't understand how to delete this post I accidentally wrote.

[Jack_ripper 0]

 

Dear All,

 

I came to know on some stuff from net that there are some statements made by lord rama especially while leaving for forest. He lamented by saying that he would be missing meat delicacies etc.. is this true?

 

I don't think that's true. It would be a very unhealthy to think that God may eat meat, or kill any animal, and too Lord Rama.

How could it be? Maybe the sanskrit lines may have been translated in a different manner, in my opinion.

[suchandra 1]

Prof. M. Sivasuriya, Colombo:

 

Can humanity dispel its animal nature?

 

 

 

http://www.island.lk/2008/10/25/opinion2.html

 

Mr. Bertram Perera has posed the above question in the Opinion/Letters page of "The Island" of October 16, 2008.

My answer to his query is a definite ‘Yes’ and I have no doubt that it would be the same answer from all right thinking Buddhists and Hindus the world over.

All long established religions, Buddhism, Saivism, Brahminism and Jainism - these four being the off-shoots of Hinduism - and also Zoroastrianism, have advocated abstinence from flesh food. Some even regard Hinduism as the ‘mother’ of all the other religions as no one seems to know for certain how and when it originated.

So if there is to be abstinence from flesh food according to these religions, it is crystal clear that there should be no ‘killing’ or ‘slaughter’ of animals (which includes fish - a cold blooded animal living wholly in water) for food.

Vegetarianism is a direct consequence to the adherence of ‘Ahimsa’ (compassion) and ‘Metta’ (loving kindness) advocated by both Buddhism and Hinduism.

I disagree totally with Mr. Bertram Perera that "Man, the animal, has no choice but to remain an omnivore": I would rather state that Man has every choice to be a herbivore like, for example, the elephant, (the strongest animal on earth), the horse (one of the fastest animals), the bull/cow, the camel, the deer, the monkey etc. if he has ‘reverence’ for animal life.

I agree with Mr. Perera that "Man’s superior intellectual powers are dependent on the food he consumes", but this does not imply that he should depend on a carnivorous or omnivorous diet. He need not be that to be a world class cricketer or an Olympic champion as revealed for example by Sachin Tendulkar (cricket) and Martina Navratilova (tennis) and Vassily Jirov, former Olympic (1996) Cruiser weight boxing champion.

Amongst other notable vegetarians the following may be cited:

Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein, Sir Isac Netwon, Plato, Pyhthogoras, George Bernard Shaw, Shakespeare, Mahatma Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore, Aristotle, Seneca, Socrates Rajendra Prasad (the first President of Independent India), Abdul Khalam (a Muslim), the immediate past President of India and (Sir) Paul and (late) Linda Mc Cartney.

Even today, the misconception prevails amongst many, that certain people have special nutritional requirements and may have to eat meat, but this is not correct. Being a medical man myself, I would like to categorically state that medical opinion is is currently of the view that there is nothing more nutritious that could be obtained from a carnivorous (flesh) diet than what could be obtained from a well chosen lacto-vegetarian diet and I might add that this is accepted by the World Health Organization (WHO) as well as the American Medical Association (AMA).

Let me conclude by quoting Dr. Koshalya Walli: " Meat can never be obtained without injuring creatures and so by injuring sentient beings meat eating is detrimental to heavenly bliss and should therefore be shunned. One should consider the disgusting origins of flesh and the cruelty of slaying sentient beings and abstain from flesh eating.

He, who permits the slaughter of animals, he who cuts up, kills, buys, sells, serves it up and eats, everyone is a slayer of animals.

Meat cannot be obtained from straw or stone. It can be obtained only by slaughtering a creature, hence meat is not to be eaten."

So let us "Live and Let Live"

May All Beings Be Well and Happy!

 

Prof. M. Sivasuriya

Colombo 8

[Jack_ripper 0]

 

Prof. M. Sivasuriya, Colombo:

 

 

 

 

Mr. Bertram Perera has posed the above question in the Opinion/Letters page of "The Island" of October 16, 2008.

My answer to his query is a definite ‘Yes’ and I have no doubt that it would be the same answer from all right thinking Buddhists and Hindus the world over.

All long established religions, Buddhism, Saivism, Brahminism and Jainism - these four being the off-shoots of Hinduism - and also Zoroastrianism, have advocated abstinence from flesh food. Some even regard Hinduism as the ‘mother’ of all the other religions as no one seems to know for certain how and when it originated.

So if there is to be abstinence from flesh food according to these religions, it is crystal clear that there should be no ‘killing’ or ‘slaughter’ of animals (which includes fish - a cold blooded animal living wholly in water) for food.

Vegetarianism is a direct consequence to the adherence of ‘Ahimsa’ (compassion) and ‘Metta’ (loving kindness) advocated by both Buddhism and Hinduism.

I disagree totally with Mr. Bertram Perera that "Man, the animal, has no choice but to remain an omnivore": I would rather state that Man has every choice to be a herbivore like, for example, the elephant, (the strongest animal on earth), the horse (one of the fastest animals), the bull/cow, the camel, the deer, the monkey etc. if he has ‘reverence’ for animal life.

I agree with Mr. Perera that "Man’s superior intellectual powers are dependent on the food he consumes", but this does not imply that he should depend on a carnivorous or omnivorous diet. He need not be that to be a world class cricketer or an Olympic champion as revealed for example by Sachin Tendulkar (cricket) and Martina Navratilova (tennis) and Vassily Jirov, former Olympic (1996) Cruiser weight boxing champion.

Amongst other notable vegetarians the following may be cited:

Charles Darwin, Albert Einstein, Sir Isac Netwon, Plato, Pyhthogoras, George Bernard Shaw, Shakespeare, Mahatma Gandhi, Rabindranath Tagore, Aristotle, Seneca, Socrates Rajendra Prasad (the first President of Independent India), Abdul Khalam (a Muslim), the immediate past President of India and (Sir) Paul and (late) Linda Mc Cartney.

Even today, the misconception prevails amongst many, that certain people have special nutritional requirements and may have to eat meat, but this is not correct. Being a medical man myself, I would like to categorically state that medical opinion is is currently of the view that there is nothing more nutritious that could be obtained from a carnivorous (flesh) diet than what could be obtained from a well chosen lacto-vegetarian diet and I might add that this is accepted by the World Health Organization (WHO) as well as the American Medical Association (AMA).

Let me conclude by quoting Dr. Koshalya Walli: " Meat can never be obtained without injuring creatures and so by injuring sentient beings meat eating is detrimental to heavenly bliss and should therefore be shunned. One should consider the disgusting origins of flesh and the cruelty of slaying sentient beings and abstain from flesh eating.

He, who permits the slaughter of animals, he who cuts up, kills, buys, sells, serves it up and eats, everyone is a slayer of animals.

Meat cannot be obtained from straw or stone. It can be obtained only by slaughtering a creature, hence meat is not to be eaten."

So let us "Live and Let Live"

May All Beings Be Well and Happy!

 

Prof. M. Sivasuriya

Colombo 8

Very well said! Exactly what i was trying to say. The bolded lines are the ones which are more convincing. So, I hope no one has doubt.

[Guest]

Hi, Raam Chandra Bhagwan never ever ate meat. He is Maryada Purshottam. he showed others not to lead a life eating meat. he used to often tell Lakshman to obtain berries which had already fallen on the earth only and not pluck certain trees as this would harm them. Whereas some trees would be happy to give their berries for Lord Raam.

 

Even the Vasudev mahatmyam in Skand Puran clearly dictates the story of King Uparivasu and how he would not eat meat. The Rishis like Vashistha also regarded s uttam and fit for humans.They regarded meat as unfit for humans. As this was for animals only. Do have a read.

[chandu_69 0]

 

Hey Guest, here is the verse that you are thinking of:

 

चतुर्दश हि वर्षाणि वत्स्यामि विजने वने ।

मधु मूल फलैः जीवन् हित्वा मुनिवद् आमिषम् ॥२-२०-२९॥

 

 

 

“I shall live in a solitary forest like a sage for fourteen years, leaving off meat and living with roots, fruits and honey”. 2-20-29

 

"The great king is giving to Bharata the succession to kingdom and to me, however, he is making me a sage to stay in the forest of Dandaka." 2-20-30

 

 

Maadhav, I would really like to have you reply to this one.

 

 

It is not Amishaam(आमिषम् ) in the in 2-20-29 it is munivadaamiSham(ascetics= munis).."Like munis"...

 

This question was answered in 2001 in this same forum

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/spiritual-discussions/28150-did-rama-eat-meat-2.html

[sant 0]

god did not eat out of greed.he did eat of some duty during those days.

who followed dharm and who is unmatched in following dharm whe should he be so wanting to eat meat.PLEASE THINK ABOUT IT.

[sant 0]

Whos Name Makes Us Cross The Ocean Of Samsara How Can Thee Be Polluted With Greed Of Eating Meat.

Who Left His Wife Whom He Loved FOR HIS KINGDOM So Much How Can THEE Be Polluted By Greed.

[Haridasdasdas 0]

Ksatriya Dharma means he was allowed to hunt the deer etc in the forest, especially given that the other food available would not have been fitting to a ksatriya life, yes, that's why he carried a bow. As sant says, Lord Rama did not have the disgusting greed for meat, he just did as he was supposed to. To think that eating an animal killed in a slaughterhouse is the same as what lord Rama did is absolute lunacy.

[Soma Juice 0]

“I shall live in a solitary forest like a sage for fourteen years, leaving off meat and living with roots, fruits and honey”. 2-20-29

Does "leaving off meat" not mean he ate meat before he left off to the forest? this must mean he was a meat eater?

[chandu_69 0]

 

“I shall live in a solitary forest like a sage for fourteen years, leaving off meat and living with roots, fruits and honey”. 2-20-29

Does "leaving off meat" not mean he ate meat before he left off to the forest? this must mean he was a meat eater?

 

Not exactly the word munivadAmisaam was brocken up in to two words (wrongly) as munivada and Amisaam.

Also it is redundant to mention about meat seperately if when it is already mentioned living off on roots fruits and honey.No cooked food.That is the stress

[Haridasdasdas 0]

 

“I shall live in a solitary forest like a sage for fourteen years, leaving off meat and living with roots, fruits and honey”. 2-20-29

Does "leaving off meat" not mean he ate meat before he left off to the forest? this must mean he was a meat eater?

 

I find it very hard to beleive someone would quit eating meat before living in a forest. This seems somewhat illogical, especially for an expert archer.

 

I don't trust that if it says that, that's a ridiculous idea, that He would stop eating meat to go into the forest. Why would He do that?

 

Let's bear in mind there's a lot of different Ramayanas out there, so judging something like this cannot be done by quoting sastra.

 

It's logically plausible that Rama did not eat meat in the palace and also not in the forest, out of compassion. It's also possible that He hunted when He lived in the palace and continued when He lived in the forest, out of dharma, since He needed to be skilled at warfare. It's also possible that He didn't hunt when He was in the palace, and started hunting when He was in the forest.

 

To say that he was hunting in the palace and stopped when he lived in the forest defies logic and explanation.

[Soma Juice 0]

Yes it sounds illogical to eat meat in the palace and then leave it when going to the forest.

Not that it would make a big diffrence after all the lord kills goes straight to heaven right? I think i read that in srimad-bhagavatam

 

And when living in the forest i think it is okay to be a part of the system of life and death and eating animals. This is not unnececary like the slaugtherhouses of today

[sant 0]

tell professor m sivasurya that plants also have life

[santdasji 0]

Bhagwan Shri Ramchandra never ever ate meat. No scriptures states that He did. He was Maryada Purshottam.

[Haridasdasdas 0]

 

tell professor m sivasurya that plants also have life

 

So if I eat a cabbage, it screams? You've never killed an animal you coward.

[sant 0]

 

So if I eat a cabbage, it screams? You've never killed an animal you coward.

 

<!-- / message -->

 

 

thanks and sorry i just misjudged mr sivasurya sorry to him

[shobs4u 0]

Hello..

 

I was told by someone that in kamba ramayana,there is a mention that Lord Rama ate meat.. I don't know how far this is true though!..

 

Sorry if i happen to be wrong. No offence meant..

[Haridasdasdas 0]

 

thanks and sorry i just misjudged mr sivasurya sorry to him

 

Who?

[sant 0]

to you and m sivasurya

thanks to you

[Haridasdasdas 0]

 

to you and m sivasurya

thanks to you

 

Okay. I'm not even sure I understand your point. Were you saying origionally that because plants are living organisms, its as bad eating them as it is say a pig or chicken etc?

 

That's what I thought you were saying, but I'm confused now.

[sant 0]

yes

i thought that and misread that m sivasurya was saying something about hindu god eating meat and calling it bad