PDA

View Full Version : Buying Meat for Others



Premāyaṇa
02 July 2013, 01:24 AM
Namaste,

I know in the Manusmṛti it says:


“He who permits the slaughter of an animal, he who cuts it up, he who kills it, he who buys or sells meat, he who cooks it, he who serves it up, and he who eats it, must all be considered as the slayers of the animal.” (5:51)

I am transitioning to vegetarianism (successful for about a week now). But my wife is not vegetarian. She isn't sure if she will be, but for now she is not.

What do I do if she wants to purchase meat? She likes lunch meat for instance, for sandwiches. Our funds are all combined into one bank account, so all money is equally both of ours.

Help would be appreciated.

Premāyaṇa
06 July 2013, 02:01 AM
Namaste,

Anyone? Really looking for an answer about this.

yajvan
09 August 2013, 05:37 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~

namasté


Namaste,

Anyone? Really looking for an answer about this.
I have 3 offerings for your consideration.... I will put them in the next 3 posts, starting with this one.


In the aṇusāsana¹ parvan, section CXV ( or section 115) of the mahābhārata , yudhiṣṭhira asks bhīṣma-ji¹ a few questions.
He says, you ( bhīṣma) have informed me many times that the abstention from injury is the highest religion. Yet in sraddhas, however, that are performed in honour of the Pitris, persons for their own good should make offerings of diverse kinds of meat.

How can meat be procured without slaying a living creature?
What are the faults one incurs by eating meat?
What are the demerits one incurs who eats meat by killing a living creature? Or of him who eats meat buying it from others?Bhīṣma then says, Listen to me O' scion of the Kuru race, what the merit is that attaches to the abstention from meat.

Those high souled persons who desire beauty, faultlessness of limbs, long life, understanding, mental and physical strength, and memory should abstain from acts of injury.
The merit by a person with steadfastness of vow adores the deities every month in horse sacrifices is equal to him that discards honey and meat.
The seven rishis, the Valakhilyasm and the rishis that drink the rays of the sun applaud the abstention from meat.
Bhīṣma continues and says, Narada muni has said that the man who wishes to increase his own flesh by eating the flesh of other creatures meets with calamity.
The man who has eaten meat then gives it up acquires merit by such an act that is so great that a study of all the vedas or a performance of all the sacrifices cannot bestow its like ( or its equal).
The period of life is shortened of persons who slaughter living creatures or cause them to be slaughtered ( i.e. demand for meat).
One should never eat meat of animals not dedicated in sacrifices and that are slain for no reason.praṇām

words

aṇusāsana - the brilliance of this word aṇusāsana parvan shows the great command of the language by vyāsa-ji ( also known as kṛṣṇa dvaipāyana )
This word can be seen in a few ways:
aṇu+sā+sana : aṇu = finer +sā =knowledge + sana = presenting, gain, acquisition. Hence the section (parva) presenting finer knowledge.
anu + śasana : anu = after or afterwords + śasana = killing. Hence the section (prava) after the war.
Bhīṣma happens to be one of the twelve most knowledgeable people on dharma

yajvan
09 August 2013, 05:51 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~

namasté

Offer 2: From an earlier post in the week.

In each case of manufacturing something is sold, and something is received. The manufacturer pays for the materials to make the coat, the transporter is paid to ship the product, the retailer pays the manufacturer for the product, the customer pays the retailer for the coat. Who paid the cow ? Debts (ṛṇa¹) are paid along the way, yet it is the cow that is the giver , no ? Actions are not performed in a vacuum. There is ṛṇa owed to the cow for all in the value chain. There is a connection there.

iti śivaṁ


words


ṛṇānubandha = ṛṇa+anubhandhana or ṛṇa+ anu + bhandhana
ṛṇa = anything due , obligation , duty , debt ;
this word ṛṇaṃ (within one root of √kṛ ) , is to get into debt
kṛ is an action , it is 'to make liable to' as one of its definitions. It also means to procure for another , bestow , grant ; to to form or construct one thing out of another
anubandha = binding , connection , attachment
bhandhana = binding , tying , fettering
kṛtá = cultivated, done, result, accomplished, made

yajvan
09 August 2013, 06:09 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~
namasté

offer 3:

This is the wisdom offered by vimalananda¹ - not many know of him;
He informs us on the use of meat on many levels.

The saṃskṛt term for cow is 'go' (some write gau) and is defined as 'anything coming from or belonging to an ox or cow' i.e. milk, flesh, skin , hide , leather , strap of leather , bow-string , sinew.

vimalananda-ji tells us of the negitive effects of consumption of meat/pork is on the mind. He tells us an additional definition of 'go' is 'an organ of sense' and 'the eye'. Hence 'go' also means a sense organ. ( This is confirmed within the Monier-Williams English to Sanskrit Dictionary)

Via the consumption of meat one is more attracted to the world, to the offering of the senses - more attachment is driven by the foodstuffs taken in. One has more difficulty controlling their senses.
The more violence used to obtain the meat for consumption , the more of this violence is transferred to the consumer.
The more you will find yourself within / confronted by friction or discord within your surroundings. That is for some reason this consumption of meat ( via violence to obtain it) attracts violence to the end-user.

There is much-much more to this, but that for now I think gets you to reasonable optics on how to view the notion of participation of meat.

iti śivaṁ

1. vimala= stainless , spotless , clean , bright , pure + nanda = joy, happiness

Jaskaran Singh
10 August 2013, 01:50 AM
Bhīṣma happens to be one of the twelve most knowledgeable people on dharma


PraṇÄm,

Pshh... It would be nice if you could provide some form of Å›Ästra-pramÄṇa to back up you statement. :rolleyes:

Just kidding, I know where you got that from. :D

सà¥à¤µà¤¯à¤®à¥à¤­à¥‚रà¥à¤¨à¤¾à¤°à¤¦à¤ƒ शमà¥à¤­à¥à¤ƒ कà¥à¤®à¤¾à¤°à¤ƒ कपिलो मनà¥à¤ƒà¥¤
पà¥à¤°à¤¹à¥à¤²à¤¾à¤¦à¥‹ जनको भीषà¥à¤®à¥‹ बलिरà¥à¤µà¥ˆà¤¯à¤¾à¤¸à¤•à¤¿à¤°à¥à¤µà¤¯à¤®à¥à¥¥à¥¦à¥¬.०३.०२०॥
दà¥à¤µà¤¾à¤¦à¤¶à¥ˆà¤¤à¥‡ विजानीमो धरà¥à¤®à¤‚ भागवतं भटाः।
गà¥à¤¹à¥à¤¯à¤‚ विशà¥à¤¦à¥à¤§à¤‚ दà¥à¤°à¥à¤¬à¥‹à¤§à¤‚ यं जà¥à¤žà¤¾à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤¾à¤®à¥ƒà¤¤à¤®à¤¶à¥à¤¨à¥à¤¤à¥‡à¥¥à¥¦à¥¬.०३.०२१॥

My attempted translation:

"O servants (bhaá¹­Äḥ), we (vayam) twelve (dvÄdaÅ›a), [ÅšrÄ« Kṛṣṇa] and ÅšrÄ« BrahmÄ (svayambhÅ«r), NÄrada Muni (nÄradaḥ), Åšiva (Å›ambhuḥ), the four KumÄra-s (kumÄraḥ), Ṛṣi Kapila (kapilo), Vaivasvata Manu (manuḥ), MahÄjana Prahlada (prahlÄdo), MahÄrÄja Janaka (janako), BhÄ«á¹£ma (bhÄ«á¹£mo), MahÄrÄja Bali (balir), and Åšukadeva GosvÄmÄ« (vaiyÄsakir), know (vijÄnÄ«mo) these (ite, from ete) secret (guhyaṃ), unfathomable (durbodhaṃ), extremely pure (viÅ›uddhaṃ) religious principles (dharmaṃ) of BhagavÄn (bhÄgavataṃ) [which] upon understanding (yaṃ jñÄtva) one gains/enjoys (aÅ›nute) eternal life (amá¹›tam)" [BhÄgavata PurÄṇa 6:3:20-21]

In that same PurÄṇa (Å›lÅka 1:9:9?), BhÄ«á¹£ma PitÄmaha is called the "greatest of the vasu-s" (vasu uttamaḥ), which may be a reference to the chapters at the end of the Ä€diparvan which talk of BhÄ«á¹£ma as an incarnation of Dyaus (also known as dyauḥ).

However, there are quite a few statements he makes in the MahÄbhÄrata which aren't exactly very dhÄrmika (which is to be expected, as it is such a large text). In the AnuÅ›Äsana-Parvan [which you mentioned earlier] AdhyÄya 38, he makes the following remarks regarding NÄrada's conversation with ApsarÄ PañcacÅ«á¸a:

अनà¥à¤¤à¤•à¤ƒ शमनो मृतà¥à¤¯à¥à¤ƒ पातालं वडवामà¥à¤–मà¥à¥¤
कà¥à¤·à¥à¤° धारा विषं सरà¥à¤ªà¥‹ वहà¥à¤¨à¤¿à¤°à¤¿à¤¤à¥à¤¯à¥‡à¤•à¤¤à¤ƒ सà¥à¤¤à¥à¤°à¤¿à¤¯à¤ƒà¥¥à¥¨à¥¯à¥¥

My translation: "The Lord of Death (antakaḥ, one of YamarÄja's epithets), the destroyer (Å›amano), death (má¹›tyuḥ), the abode of nÄga-s (pÄtÄlaṃ), the mouth (mukham) of a mare (vaá¸avÄ/vaá¸abÄ) which makes deep/stream-like (dhÄrÄ) furrows (ká¹£ura), [and] the excretion (viá¹£aṃ) of snake-like (sarpo) fire (vahnir) thus (iti) all together (ekataḥ) are feminine (striyaḥ)." [MahÄbhÄrata 13:38:29]

यतशà¥à¤š भूतानि महानà¥à¤¤à¤¿ पञà¥à¤š यतशà¥à¤š लोका विहिता विधातà¥à¤°à¤¾à¥¤
यतः पà¥à¤®à¤¾à¤‚सः पà¥à¤°à¤®à¤¦à¤¾à¤¶à¥à¤š निरà¥à¤®à¤¿à¤¤à¤¸à¥ तदैव दोषाः पà¥à¤°à¤®à¤¦à¤¾à¤¸à¥ नारद॥३०॥

My Translation: "From when (yataÅ›ca) the five (pañca) great elements (mahÄnti) were created (bhÅ«tÄni); from when (yataÅ›ca) the creator (vidhÄtrÄ, lit. bestower) arranged (vihitÄ) the worlds (lokÄ); from when (yataḥ) the souls of men (pumÄṃsaḥ) and women (pramadÄÅ›ca) are formed (nirmitas), at that time (tad) alone (eva), O NÄrada (nÄrada), were these [aforementioned] blames/faults (doá¹£Äḥ) planted in women (pramadÄsu)." [MahÄbhÄrata 13:38:30]

The above Å›lÅka-s seem a bit misogynistic and almost seems to try to portray women as evil, which certainly isn't supported by the Å›Ästras, so even though you stated that he is one of the most knowledgeable in regards to dharma, his nirṇaya was, at many times [as evident in the MahÄbhÄrata] slightly flawed, which leads me to the conclusion that he, just like everyone else, must have gotten to that state [of viÅ›uddha-jñÄnam] in part due to the ká¹›pÄ of BhagavÄn.

I realize that this post was certainly a bit off topic (as it has nothing to do with meat consumption), and I apologize for that. I just felt the urge to respond to that particular footnote, as there wasn't much clarification provided.

Jaya ÅšrÄ« RÄdhe

Necromancer
10 August 2013, 02:46 AM
Namaste,

I know in the Manusmṛti it says:



I am transitioning to vegetarianism (successful for about a week now). But my wife is not vegetarian. She isn't sure if she will be, but for now she is not.

What do I do if she wants to purchase meat? She likes lunch meat for instance, for sandwiches. Our funds are all combined into one bank account, so all money is equally both of ours.

Help would be appreciated.Namaste.

That quote from the Manusmriti sums it up nicely, everybody who has a hand in butchering and selling and cooking an animal is just as much 'at fault' as the one who consumes it.

That being said, you cannot actively stop others from doing whatever they want, as long as you have no direct hand in it and you 'lead by example'.

If your wife wants to purchase meat, make sure it is pre-cooked and she uses her own utensils to eat it.

Cooking meat in a pot that is reserved for vegetables is also sinful.

Let her eat meat, but make her feel uncomfortable for doing so. Cook delicious veggie cuisine for her and give her a break from cooking.

Introduce her to the wonderful world of tempeh.

If she uses 'joint money' to buy meat, it doesn't matter then...at least you are trying to do the right thing and go the correct way and Bhagavan will see that.

Aum Namah Shivaya

Believer
10 August 2013, 09:10 AM
Namaste,

What do I do if she wants to purchase meat?
Nothing.

You are responsible only for your own sadhana. I don't see any need for you to try to restrict your wife or in any way make her feel bad about her dietary habits. Let her live life the way she sees fit. If your sadhana is strong enough, it will rub off with time and hopefully awaken her devotion to the divine, and that will lead to mending her ways on her schedule. Unless there is a spiritual awakening and a desire to give up certain things, forcing the absentations on oneself or on others is useless. It should come from within and that follows a person's internal changes. Unless the mind is ready, the tongue will not voluntarily give up its cravings. And if it is not voluntary, there is lot of undesired internal conflict and turmoil.

Pranam.

Anirudh
10 August 2013, 04:00 PM
If you are practising vegetarianism and you pay (non vegetarian food items) restaurant bills out of professional compulsion or you end up tasting as a cook but don't Deliberately consume them do you SIN or NOT?

I have taken vow in the name of my friend Shree Raama Chandra Prabhu but end up tasting it while cooking to verify its taste. I cook meat products as a part of a medication regime but don't swallow and brush my teeth after spitting. I don't know whether my friend will be angry but I don't have a choice.

yajvan
10 August 2013, 07:15 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~
namasté


If you are practising vegetarianism and you pay (non vegetarian food items) restaurant bills out of professional compulsion or you end up tasting as a cook but don't Deliberately consume them do you SIN or NOT?


The final decision is up to you... yet consider this. The notion of
śaktiṃ dadāti ~ approximately means to enable. Specifically it means providing the energy (śaktiṃ) for gifting (dadāti).

iti śivaṁ

yajvan
10 August 2013, 07:23 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~
namasté


If you are practising vegetarianism

Let me assist if I can... what is being practiced is ahiṁsā and has been reviewed on multiple occasions. By being vegetarian one is applying ahiṁsā to one's actions.

Ahiṁsā is doing no harm. Yet what of preventing harm to others ? And not enabling harm to come ?

praṇām

Anirudh
11 August 2013, 10:08 AM
Namaste Yajvanji,


Ahiṁsā is doing no harm. Yet what of preventing harm to others ? And not enabling harm to come ?

I didn't understand the above statements.

what is being practiced is ahiṁsā and has been reviewed on multiple occasions
I use insecticide like mosquito repellent etc etc and the food we eat has to cross variety of pesticide. I understand that the topic Ahimsa has been discussed in the past. Could you please give me the link. I never understood the difference between Self defense and Ahimsa.

N.B. Have turned into a vegetarian but feed my kid a medicine prepared from the goat's liver.

Viraja
12 August 2013, 06:54 AM
Namaste,

I have a few important questions:

i) My husband says there aren't enough plant food, if the whole world chooses to go vegetarian, is this right?

ii) Should meat-eating be really advocated to some of the people, because they need the nutrients from meat for them to put up with very hard labour..

Many of us are of the view that the notion of vegetarianism as being applicable to entire world is not truly what its meant to be - that many of us are supposed to go non-vegetarian 'cause the environment doesn't support all of us going vegetarian. Is that so?

Eastern Mind
12 August 2013, 07:12 AM
Namaste,

I have a few important questions:

i) My husband says there aren't enough plant food, if the whole world chooses to go vegetarian, is this right?

ii) Should meat-eating be really advocated to some of the people, because they need the nutrients from meat for them to put up with very hard labour..

Many of us are of the view that the notion of vegetarianism as being applicable to entire world is not truly what its meant to be - that many of us are supposed to go non-vegetarian 'cause the environment doesn't support all of us going vegetarian. Is that so?

Vannakkam: The first point is clearly wrong. Animals are very poor middle men when it comes to protein. For example, if much of the land in America now used to grow corn for cattle feed and ethanol production was put into soybeans, chickpeas, and other dals, it would increase protein productivity by at least 5.

That you need meat for heavy labour, or cold weather is also a myth. there is nothing 'special' nutritionally in meat.

Aum Namasivaya

jignyAsu
12 August 2013, 08:13 AM
i) My husband says there aren't enough plant food, if the whole world chooses to go vegetarian, is this right?

ii) Should meat-eating be really advocated to some of the people, because they need the nutrients from meat for them to put up with very hard labour..

Many of us are of the view that the notion of vegetarianism as being applicable to entire world is not truly what its meant to be - that many of us are supposed to go non-vegetarian 'cause the environment doesn't support all of us going vegetarian. Is that so?

The focus of the researchers in this age is towards healthy body only instead of healthy body, mind and soul. After all what do animals acheive with health only at the end of the life?

Today's lack of food and nutrients is also to be blamed on adharmic activities and unbalanced minds only with the increase in chemicals, pollution, genetic alteration, greed, deforestation, unhealthy living style etc. In spite of all this quite a few vegetarians with balanced living and self control are very healthy.

In the name of scientific research, more and more spiritually harmful activities will be promoted in the guise of doing good -

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/eats/u-n-eat-bugs-good-good-world-article-1.1342532

yajvan
12 August 2013, 07:37 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~
namasté


Could you please give me the link. I never understood the difference between Self defense and Ahimsa.


If I perform a search within HDF on ahiṁsā I get multiple strings to look at. I have shown two below ( out of many offerings) ; please try this for yourself. It is good to get proficient at this and it's quite useful.

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=5988&highlight=ahi%26%237745%3Bs%26%23257%3B

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2956&highlight=ahi%26%237745%3Bs%26%23257%3B

praṇām

Anirudh
15 August 2013, 11:31 AM
Thanks for the wonderful explanation and time you spent to identify those two links. I had to read it few times before understanding it. HDF has some thing or other to offer when I am trouble.

yajvan
16 August 2013, 05:49 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

...a fair exchange is no robbery, says vimalananda-ji. I ask the HDF reader what did the cow or pig or chicken get in return that keeps the transaction fair ?


iti śivaṁ

Anirudh
17 August 2013, 11:44 PM
I ask the HDF reader what did the cow or pig or chicken get in return that keeps the transaction fair ?

Namaste Yajvanji,

On many occasions I couldn't understand your statements like in this case. Are you asking me to contribute as much I consume from the forum?

One way of contribution could be appreciate every thing I read, but that becomes monotonous after some time. I am not well read, but life has taught me quite a few things. In fact the learning hasn't come to an end and it wont either. If I start narrating the lessons here it will be either self trumpeting or giving more personal details in a public forum. When I try filter out my personal details from the lessons I learnt and post it as my contribution, they become worthless to post. I mean the intensity is lost some where in the editing.

I see Bhagwaan from a different angle. To me he is real who stays with me all along. He appears in the form of you or Shivafan or any other passer by. And my understanding might not be in accordance with Shastra's or Shruthis or Smruthis or what ever.

When we say something out of our experience that we firmly believe as the answer to the question that was made, some member from no where drops in and try to act like a moderator. I am not against fair criticism but not for harsh words which would provoke.

I stopped posting for about few months because of an unnecessary intervention from a member out here (who is not even a moderator) in harsh words. The irony was the same member in the past had been making similar kind of posts in different context. Are we suppose to engage ourselves in war of words?.

So let me know in what ways an ordinary person like me can contribute to the forum other than being a passive reader and occasionally getting his queries answered.

It is not out bursts of a pent up anger but a genuine carefully drafted question. So kindly don't treat this as an emotional outburst.

Necromancer
18 August 2013, 09:57 PM
Namaste.

I am going to provide a 'what if?' scenario.

What if you are, or have recently become, a vegetarian, but you own a pet...say a cat who won't eat vegetables?

Then you give the cat a tin of cat food to keep the poor animal alive....

I am in that situation.

Aum Namah Shivaya

Asi
02 September 2013, 10:45 AM
Namaste.

That quote from the Manusmriti sums it up nicely, everybody who has a hand in butchering and selling and cooking an animal is just as much 'at fault' as the one who consumes it.

That being said, you cannot actively stop others from doing whatever they want, as long as you have no direct hand in it and you 'lead by example'.

If your wife wants to purchase meat, make sure it is pre-cooked and she uses her own utensils to eat it.

Cooking meat in a pot that is reserved for vegetables is also sinful.

Let her eat meat, but make her feel uncomfortable for doing so. Cook delicious veggie cuisine for her and give her a break from cooking.

Introduce her to the wonderful world of tempeh.

If she uses 'joint money' to buy meat, it doesn't matter then...at least you are trying to do the right thing and go the correct way and Bhagavan will see that.

Aum Namah Shivaya

As a vegetarian living with non - vegetarian flatmates, this was one of the things we had passed over.

We use separate utensils, and if they generally order dishes with meat in them - i don't really mind.

It's about mutual respect at the end of the day. I would disagree with the opinion of making anyone feel uncomfortable due to your decisions.

yajvan
04 September 2013, 06:42 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

As a vegetarian living with non - vegetarian flatmates, this was one of the things we had passed over.

We use separate utensils, and if they generally order dishes with meat in them - i don't really mind.

It's about mutual respect at the end of the day. I would disagree with the opinion of making anyone feel uncomfortable due to your decisions.
What you say is right and appropriate .... yet where does one find the mutual respect for the animal being consumed ?

I saw this dis-respect today. While talking to some people outside an elderly man spotted a snail in the grass. He went out of his way to put it on the sidewalk and smash it with his foot. I protested, do not step on this snail - stop I will take it! He paid me no attention and smashed the snail. A small thing not harming anyone. I ask, why do you did you do this ? He said he has them in his backyard and these things cause some discontent. But I asked isn't your yard 5 miles from here. He answered yes. I said then what harm was this snail doing ?

This arrogance that we are the king of the mountain is dis-appointing to me . That we can take life without any threat being imposed is pure ignorance. It saddens me that humans of are this mindset. It only brings harm to one's self. Again the human remains the paśutā - the state of an animal.

iti śivaṁ

JaiMaaDurga
05 September 2013, 12:26 AM
Namaste yajvan,

When non-Hindu acquaintances ask me why I do not simply squash a spider
etc. when found inside, instead of taking the time to relocate it outside
unharmed- often rather than attempting to explain ahimsa and so forth,
it is easier to make my point in this way:

"Suppose, for argument's sake, there is a form of alien life which is as far
beyond humans in terms of lifespan, intelligence, power, and complexity, as
humans are beyond insects. If such beings' activities brought them within
our world, we would have no hope of understanding them, or
communicating with them; all we could hope for is that their unimaginable
power and intelligence was coupled with wisdom, compassion, respect for
all beings- that they might not squash us thoughtlessly, as they went
about their business.. so why should I kill a creature that means no harm,
simply because I can?"

This has been useful for giving even an atheist something to contemplate,
while saving me some breath and preventing possible pointless argument.

I am no Jain, but will always know that every action of mine has an
effect, however large or small, on all those around me- I cannot be aware
of every creature or person around me at all times, and I cannot know
the details or long-term consequences of my actions as the "ripples"
grow ever wider- and it is exactly because of this inevitable degree of
ignorance, that I wish to err on the side of caution, whenever possible..

If there is a choice that will not cause harm, I will exercise it always.

JAI MATA DI

Eastern Mind
05 September 2013, 07:22 AM
While talking to some people outside an elderly man spotted a snail in the grass. He went out of his way to put it on the sidewalk and smash it with his foot. I protested, do not step on this snail - stop I will take it! He paid me no attention and smashed the snail. A small thing not harming anyone. I ask, why do you did you do this ? He said he has them in his backyard and these things cause some discontent. But I asked isn't your yard 5 miles from here. He answered yes. I said then what harm was this snail doing ?



Vannakkam: In my view, this is part of this man's subconscious, from training. The snails in his garden have conditioned him. My father hated gophers (technically Richardson's ground squirrel) and would go about shooting them, even volunteering himself and his .22 for neighbours. Once I asked him about that, and how he became this way. He related how the farm had lost a favorite and good horse to a broken leg from a gopher hole once when he was young. That event catalysed his 'hatred'.

I am the same as people here. I move ants back outside when possible. If a bug comes in on a flower for my morning puja, I take it back out, etc. Yet at the same time, I can go on long drives to visit family, and have a windshield covered in bugs. Should we all stop driving? Most of us won't, because we, like this man, and my father, have been conditioned from experience to think of it as nothing, or at least consider the visit with a family member to be of higher importance.

Aum Namasivaya

Ramakrishna
05 September 2013, 06:19 PM
Sita Ram,

On a somewhat related note, just earlier today I found an insect in my bedroom. I picked it up with a piece of toilet paper and took it outside to release it upon a bush. (I used to have an old container to catch any insects or flies in, but I recently recycled it by mistake). A man was passing by and he saw what I was doing and laughed out loud. Of course, in his eyes, I looked utterly silly. Yet, a major aspect of being a Hindu, of being a person with principles and conviction, is to simply not care what others think of us when we follow our morality. In that man's eyes and many other people's, doing something like that is silly and even stupid. Yet, from my viewpoint, it is silly and sickening for the majority of Americans to be eating feces-contaminated meat.

Jai Sri Ram

Ashwin
04 April 2014, 03:37 PM
Namaste Premayana,

I must agree with beleiver's wisdom,she has to see for herself as you have.:)


Ohm Namah shivaya...

whatabout
16 May 2014, 02:19 PM
Namaste
I have pets and they essentially need meat as their diet although my family is vegetarian we do buy meat products.
Do let me know will this be considered wrong?

Aanandinii
22 May 2014, 10:56 AM
Namaste What About,

Namaste
I have pets and they essentially need meat as their diet although my family is vegetarian we do buy meat products.
Do let me know will this be considered wrong?
Dogs and Cats, and some other animals Humans keep as pets are Obligate Carnivores (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore#Obligate_carnivores). They need specific nutrients which they can only get from meat and cannot digest vegetable foods because their digestive tract is too short. Indeed, some fruits and vegetables Omnivores and Herbivores can eat are actually toxic to them. For instance Onions, Grapes and Raisins are toxic for both Cats and Dogs. Macadamia and other nuts are toxic for Cats as well, though I am not sure about Dogs. It is a myth that these animals will not eat food that is toxic to them, especially if they're hungry. Tomatoes are very bad for Cats as well, but I have had 2 cats that seem to love attacking and tearing apart our poor defenseless tomatoes. :)

My Cats are kept indoors, and the one that would take off the minute the door is opened has been trained to only go out on a harness and leash. This keeps them away from the local insect, bird, and small mammal population, and also keeps them from cars and other larger predators. I buy them the healthiest food I can find for them and hope that doing this is mitigated, at least a little, by the care I give to them and their needs, and in keeping them from hunting when there is no real need for them to. I take a moment to thank whatever anonymous individual(s) provided their food every time I open a can or pour from a bag. I never buy food taken from Cows - I think all foods put on the label the animal it came from. Small Cats wouldn't eat a Cow in the wild anyway.

Obligate Carnivores need meat, it is a very slow, painful and terrible death for them to be put on vegetarian diets. It is the law of many countries with animal welfare/rights laws that putting an Obligate Carnivore on a vegetarian diet is a form of Abuse and is legally actionable. And with all respect, it is my firm opinion that if a person cannot come to terms with providing the needed diet for their furry, (or scaled or what-have-you), friend, then that person shouldn't have one.

~Pranam

edit to add:sincere apologies if this reads as too forceful or judgemental. I don't meant to sound that way, I care perhaps too deeply about the welfare of those non humans who depend on us.

divnelight
10 November 2014, 10:37 AM
Namaste,

I have a few important questions:

i) My husband says there aren't enough plant food, if the whole world chooses to go vegetarian, is this right?

ii) Should meat-eating be really advocated to some of the people, because they need the nutrients from meat for them to put up with very hard labour.

Many of us are of the view that the notion of vegetarianism as being applicable to entire world is not truly what its meant to be - that many of us are supposed to go non-vegetarian 'cause the environment doesn't support all of us going vegetarian. Is that so?

Namaste,

Your husband's statement is incorrect. In fact, it takes much more room to raise animals then it takes to grow plants. Think about it logically billions of people need to kill billions of animals to feed themselves. Actually, if the whole world became vegetarian we would need far less farmland. Animals need more space they need space to sleep, graze, to move etc. There have been studies that show growing plants take up less space.

Fruits, vegetables and diary will provide more then enough nutrients for labor and daily life. People who are conscious about what they eat will feel better and have more energy. Most of our food is fortified with vitamins as well. It is funny, there is a saying when you become a vegetarian or vegan people all of start caring about your protein and nutrient intake!!!! If your eating veges and fruits those things are packed full of vitamins. Keep in mind you can eat unhealthy as well eating refined and processed food. Since the 1980s when red meat became cheap and readily available heart disease and heart attacks rates have jumped significantly (more then 100 fold). Tell those who laugh at you or snark at you go ahead eat your meat get your protein they will get their protein alright at the expense of hypertension and clogging their arteries. You can get plenty of protein being vegetarian you have milk, cheese, peas, quinoa, nuts, beans, chickpeas, tempeh, tofu, edamame, chia seeds, sesame seeds, poppy seeds, sunflower seeds, seitan, lentils the list goes on and on. Proteins is not a problem in many nations we are not in Africa starving for us to have protein deficiency. Look up Kwashiorkor. One thing I would do is get a blood test see what you need. For example, South Asians are known to be anemic some say this is due to diet but many have a protection against malaria similar to sickle cell (thalassemia) in Africa this effects our B12, iron etc.

Here are some points that we can argue against meat consumption in humans. Humans cannot taste meat (protein) it has no flavor to us the enzyme that breaks down protein is located in the gut. If we were meant to be meat eaters this enzyme should be located in our saliva so we could taste meat. Whereas, amylase which breaks down starches is located in our saliva. In order, for meat to have taste we need to add fat to it ex. marination with yogurts, butter etc. Also, if we look at our intestines they are not meant for a meat diet they suited for a vegetarian diet. Our guts are long and suited for vegetables. Animals who eat meat have short intestines hence when we eat meat it constipates us; our body over-processes it. If we look at populations who consume lots of meat ex Japan eats lots of smoked meat we see increased numbers of colon cancer. In general this is seen people who consume lots of meat.

Don't worry about what the world says "meat eating is the way". You do what you feel is right. Keep in mind of the times we live in moral consciousness is on the decline. People give into their senses and meat eating is considered a part of that it effects our perception and thought process. People will laugh at you/mock you for doing what is right. This is the kalia yuga pay not attention to them. Your doing it for yourself, your spirituality and for your connection with God. If you can understand their desire to eat meat its up to to them to understand your will not to. Hopefully this helps.

-divnelight

divnelight
10 November 2014, 03:08 PM
hariḥ oá¹
~~~~~

namast�


I have 3 offerings for your consideration.... I will put them in the next 3 posts, starting with this one.


In the aṇusÄsana� parvan, section CXV ( or section 115) of the mahÄbhÄrata , yudhiṣṭhira asks bhÄ«á¹£ma-ji� a few questions.
He says, you ( bhīṣma) have informed me many times that the abstention from injury is the highest religion. Yet in sraddhas, however, that are performed in honour of the Pitris, persons for their own good should make offerings of diverse kinds of meat.
How can meat be procured without slaying a living creature?
What are the faults one incurs by eating meat?
What are the demerits one incurs who eats meat by killing a living creature? Or of him who eats meat buying it from others?Bhīṣma then says, Listen to me O' scion of the Kuru race, what the merit is that attaches to the abstention from meat.
Those high souled persons who desire beauty, faultlessness of limbs, long life, understanding, mental and physical strength, and memory should abstain from acts of injury.
The merit by a person with steadfastness of vow adores the deities every month in horse sacrifices is equal to him that discards honey and meat.
The seven rishis, the Valakhilyasm and the rishis that drink the rays of the sun applaud the abstention from meat.
Bhīṣma continues and says, Narada muni has said that the man who wishes to increase his own flesh by eating the flesh of other creatures meets with calamity.
The man who has eaten meat then gives it up acquires merit by such an act that is so great that a study of all the vedas or a performance of all the sacrifices cannot bestow its like ( or its equal).
The period of life is shortened of persons who slaughter living creatures or cause them to be slaughtered ( i.e. demand for meat).
One should never eat meat of animals not dedicated in sacrifices and that are slain for no reason.praṇÄm

words
aṇusÄsana - the brilliance of this word aṇusÄsana parvan shows the great command of the language by vyÄsa-ji ( also known as kṛṣṇa dvaipÄyana )
This word can be seen in a few ways:
aṇu+sÄ+sana : aṇu = finer +sÄ =knowledge + sana = presenting, gain, acquisition. Hence the section (parva) presenting finer knowledge.
anu + śasana : anu = after or afterwords + śasana = killing. Hence the section (prava) after the war.
Bhīṣma happens to be one of the twelve most knowledgeable people on dharma

Namaste Yajvan,

What is the issue with honey? I thought was gloried in our scriptures? Also it is used in many pujas and used during abishek of murtis and shivling. Can you please clarify if is it something that is lost in translation such has don't indulge in sweets which gives into ones desire/pleasure senses.

-divnelight

KasparHauser
15 November 2014, 09:47 AM
Namaste.

I am going to provide a 'what if?' scenario.

What if you are, or have recently become, a vegetarian, but you own a pet...say a cat who won't eat vegetables?

Then you give the cat a tin of cat food to keep the poor animal alive....

I am in that situation.

Aum Namah Shivaya

I too buy meat for a cat. He eats more expensive food than I do sometimes!

Regarding this - "That quote from the Manusmriti sums it up nicely, everybody who has a hand in butchering and selling and cooking an animal is just as much 'at fault' as the one who consumes it."

Isn't there also the story of the righteous butcher and the sannyasin?

cyril
08 April 2017, 08:33 PM
Namaste

Apologies for reviving an older thread, but my (perhaps exceptionally naive) query is related to this topic, mainly out of curiosity. I will elaborate.

I visited a local restaurant run by a Hindu guy and his family. We were talking about the menu (I go there a lot!) and how the local population do not eat pakoda, it does not sell. The menu in fact must be delicately adapted to local tastes to make the business run in a profitable manner. Seems fair. You react to local needs and demands.

Now, another customer arrived and asked about beef curry. He was offered the choices of chicken, mutton, fish and vegetarian (paneer, chana, vegetable etc). So there is that. We don't provide, or eat the cow, but we can sell you the other stuff.

Going back and looking at this from the original point made in the first post:

�He who permits the slaughter of an animal, he who cuts it up, he who kills it, he who buys or sells meat, he who cooks it, he who serves it up, and he who eats it, must all be considered as the slayers of the animal.� (5:51)

How am I to interpret this business decision in line with Ahimsa as well as wider Hindu thought and practice, varied as it is? (no biggie then!!) This is mainly in my mind as I consciously move toward, or away from eating animals. I just cut out the eggs really. The rest is there, mainly because of calorie content but that's another issue.

Anyway, this thought process leads me to a place where I do not use leather shoes, belts or wallets. But then, do I avoid riding in a vehicle with leather interior? I am being deliberately obtuse, principally because it is a thought exercise. As noted, other people are responsible for their own Dharma. But how do all these "choices" impact ourselves and those around us?

I noted from a link posted above the following observation from Yajvan in this post (http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?2956-Yama-and-Niyama-ahi%E1%B9%81s%C4%81-or-non-injury&p=31635#post31635):

I have been taught and understand the notion is simple ' do the least amount of harm' . When you have a choice, choose non-injury.

Perhaps I am over complicating things? The least amount of harm is to follow your own path, and try to to impress upon others your view/perspective? My own thoughts on this one example? Perhaps the impact of not responding to market pressures in this instance (on yourself and your family) is vastly greater than the impact of being dogmatic in your approach to scripture and thought. Follow your own path, let others do their thing, be aware of your actions. But maybe I am just trying to justify a point after the fact?

Input always appreciated. Thank you.

Believer
12 April 2017, 03:31 PM
Namaste,

For our safety and the safety of others, we are required to drive within the posted speed limits, stop when the traffic light is red and wait for it to turn green, not park where 'No Parking' signs are posted, yield to people at pedestrian crossings and follow other myriad rules. There are consequences for breaking those rules.

You seem to be well aware of the rules for spiritual progress and are reaching out for an affirmation. The simple answer is that if you make a choice to deviate, you slow your own spiritual progress. With that in mind, what is your question/doubt?


.....try to to impress upon others your view/perspective?
How does that enter the equation? Who am I to impress upon you as to how to live your life? At your request/prodding, I might share my view/perspective, but would not impress anything on you.

Pranam.

Anirudh
13 April 2017, 12:55 PM
Namaste cyril

Believer has given an excellent answer to your question.

I have been through similar situation, found my answer in Srimad B.G 2nd (http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/chapter-02.html) & 3rd (http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/chapter-03.html) Chapter. If you are not convinced with the answer provided kindly read those two chapters. I reminded of a Swami Chinmayananda quote 'Grace is only to be found by effort, although it is here and now (https://mychinmaya.org/index.php?id=res_gdquotes)'. I replace 'grace' with 'truth'.

Hope this helps.

cyril
14 April 2017, 05:02 PM
Namaste and thank you

I understand a bit better. I think I have been viewing a lot of things in an "either, or" manner. A lot of it is also slightly rhetorical. Yes, if I look within, the answers are there. They are known, but it puzzled me at that point as to why (for want of a better phrase) "people do things that may have negative consequences". Further to that, for me: does/should/will it matter?

You know, one of the small questions in this world! File this or under beginning steps.

But thank you again for taking the time.