PDA

View Full Version : Apastambha sutras



rameshonweb
03 August 2008, 08:36 PM
Recently I went through the Apastambha sutras on a website and it mentions about Brahmins eating different kinds of meat and I was surprised to read it.
Is it true that Brahmins used to eat meat ? Why is it now non vegetarian food is restricted for brahmins? When I do Sandhyavandana it says "Apastabha sutraha".So if we are following that sutras why are brahmins not allowed to eat meat? Can somebody clarify my doubts? thanks in advance.

rudrasena
03 August 2008, 08:44 PM
as far as i know, vegetarianism was fully adopted after the waning of nastika religious movements. it was mainly due to the influence of such religions (jainism, buddhism).

in tamil texts, before the kalabhras (who were jain/buddhist) came about to tamil lands, brahmins were eating meat etc. Only thing i dont think brahmins ever ate was cow.

yajvan
04 August 2008, 08:59 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste

A post for your consideration:

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2956&highlight=mahabharata+meat

Arjuna
06 August 2008, 11:12 AM
Recently I went through the Apastambha sutras on a website and it mentions about Brahmins eating different kinds of meat and I was surprised to read it.
Is it true that Brahmins used to eat meat ? Why is it now non vegetarian food is restricted for brahmins? When I do Sandhyavandana it says "Apastabha sutraha".So if we are following that sutras why are brahmins not allowed to eat meat? Can somebody clarify my doubts? thanks in advance.

Vedas, Brahmanas and Upanishads also mention brahmanas eating meat. In certain Vedic yajnas it was an essential part of ritual. (Which is accepted not only by scholars, but by Hindu orthodox leaders such as Kanchi Paramacharya as well.)

Later vegetarianism became popular due to buddhism and vaishnava influence.
Even though in some places many brahmanas continued to be non-vegetarians – in Bengal, Assam, Konkana, Kerala, Nepal, Bali etc.

This topic was discussed many times. Vegetarianism is an option in Hinduism and not a must. Exception is vaishnavism, which is almost all vegetarian.

rameshonweb
06 August 2008, 12:26 PM
So essentially you mean to say that by being a Vegetarian , nothing big is achieved by brahmins and a vegetarian brahmin is no better than a meat eating brahmin.
In our house we dont even eat onions and garlic,iam in a shock that the great sages ate meat.

dhruva023
06 August 2008, 11:42 PM
There are many thread about this on the forum, you should read it before you make up your mind.

yajvan
07 August 2008, 07:49 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Śiva Pūraṇa , Vidyesvara samhita, 43rd sloka
A devotee of Śiva shall refrain from eating meat, garlic, onion, red garlic, pothherb, slesmataka, pig of rubbish ( pork) and liquors.

In the Anusasana Parva, section CXV ( or section 115) Yudhishtrhira asks Bishma a few questions.
He says, you ( Bishma) 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?Bishma then says, Listen to me O scion of the Kuru race, what the merit is that attaches to the abstention from me.

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 sacrificesą 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.
Bishma 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.pranams

rameshonweb
08 August 2008, 09:27 AM
You are saying that siva purana asks to refrain from eating meat, if so it means that the great rishis of ramayana and mahabharata time did a mistake? then how did they attain moksha?

yajvan
08 August 2008, 12:33 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


You are saying that siva purana asks to refrain from eating meat, if so it means that the great rishis of ramayana and mahabharata time did a mistake? then how did they attain moksha?

Namaste rameshonweb,
First note I am offering POV's for your consideration. What you injest is your choice.

If you look into the Śiva Pūraṇa, Śrīmad Bhāgavata Mahāpurāṇa, Mahābhārata, Yogadarśana of Patañjali these books offer the principle of ahiṁsā, the first yama/restraint, non-injury.

If you wish to read more about yama and niyama here at HDF, please consiter this post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2956 , multiple posts give all yama&niyama-s offered.

You mention how do sages then become enlightened? If you recall Vālmīki - the author of the Rāmāyaṇa ? Vālmīki's original name was Ratnakar, and had a dubious career (a robber of sorts). He was fortunate to correct his ways by meeting with some enlightened beings and to receive a mantra to assist him in his unfoldment…this mantra was rāma.
Ratnakar said I cannot pronounce this rāma, please give me something different. So, the sages gave him the mantra Mara - note this is rāma backwards MA-RA. So, as the story goes, he gets absorbed in samādhi, stays in one spot for a long time and ants build a hill around him.

Being totally absorbed in bliss, it did not concern him. When the sages return, they ask him to come out - He comes out fully enlightened (jivanmukti) and they give him his new name Vālmīki from 'Vālmīka' meaning an ant-hill. Vālmīki , the author of the Ramayana.

So Why do I offer this story? It is said, success (siddhi) in action (kriyā) is born (janma) of sattva¹ it is not the means. It is though sattva that success & unfoldment comes, that this mokśa begins to unfold. It is through our intent, our actions, our focus on this satyam (truth) that sāyujya (union with the Supreme) unfolds. The wise become enlightened in this manner; Vālmīki, even once as robber, took actions to change and became a great sage.

In Vasiṣṭha's Yoga, the conversation of Vasiṣṭha-jī with Śrī Rām he says to Rām " there are 4 gatekeepers at the entrance to the realm of mokśa (liberation or enlightenment) that is, self-control, spirit of enquiry, contentment, and good company ( satsang) "

"He who wears the armor of self control is not harmed by sorrows."
Enquiry, the study of the sruti and smurti he says " the intelligence becomes keen and is able to realize the Supreme";
With Contentment - "one does not crave" and one that is not content in the SELF will be subjected to sorrow.
Satsang or the company of the wise and enlightened "enlarges ones intelligence" and "is superior to all other forms of religious practice like charity, austerity, pilgrimage, rites, etc".
He concludes by saying " if you cannot practice all 4 , practice one." You will see lots of posts that address these items above. They are the material that dharma is made of.

pranams
1. sattva सत्त्व - the quality of purity; vital breath , life ,consciousness , and the infusion of pure consciousness; strength of character , strength , firmness , energy , resolution , courage , self-command , good sense , wisdom , magnanimity

rameshonweb
12 August 2008, 10:31 AM
Yajvan
I do agree with what ever you have mentioned.But most of them here seems to believe that all the great sages and brahmins and kings ate meat and were non vegetarians.

satay
12 August 2008, 05:28 PM
Who is 'most'?

rameshonweb
12 August 2008, 09:08 PM
Satay
Iam not sure if there were some vegetarians, but iam sure that most of the kings,bhrahmins were non vegetarians, thats the reason i said most..

dhruva023
12 August 2008, 10:32 PM
Could you please tell us how you came on that conclusion?

rameshonweb
13 August 2008, 12:37 PM
I came to that conclusion because, I read myself the apastambha sutras that says what meats to eat on what days by brahmins.

Baobobtree
20 September 2008, 10:51 AM
Namaste Ramesh.

First of all one must understand that Smriti texts, like the Apastambha Sutras are always secondary in authority to Sruti texts like the Vedas.If they contradict Sruti these texts are not considered to be authentic Vedic texts, and are disregarded, or the particular contradicting verse is seen as a later interpolation, and disregarded. Now, as to whether Sruti texts permit meat eating is a bit of debate. To give you an alternate view about the nature of Vedic sacrifices that supposedly involve meat, I'd read through this link- http://www.aryasamaj.org/eng_art/A_clouds_over_understanding.htm

Sudarshan
20 September 2008, 12:49 PM
How can a person claiming to do Yoga whose first yama rule is ahiMsa eat meat? No Yogis of the past ate meat. You should eat plants only if you should. Advanced yogis subsist on just air and divine energy - read the story of Dhruva where he cuts on his food one by one - initially light plant food, then only water, then only air and then only on the cosmic energy. You can eat meat certainly but dont claim yourself to be a prospective sAdhaka. If you are so cruel as to kill animals to satisfy your taste buds then how is it that you obtain a tranquil mind which demands love of all creatures and mankind? And how do you kill a creature you love? With plants you have no choice because you have to live.

The scriptures have tAmasic, rAjasik and sAttvik meanings. They are meant for different adhikArins. Most of the vedic scripture is allegorical in nature and using the veda to support non vegetarianism is a tAmasik interpretation. That is akin to some followers of quran using the quran to bomb planes and cities.

Some of the himsa yajnas were done by pUrva mImAmsakas who expected to get heaven by 'killing the animals'. I think those who killed animals for such purposes went only to the hell instead - andhaM tamaH pravishanti ye.avidyaamupaasate. Vedanta supercedes pUrva mImAmsa and is above the ignorant karma kANda practices of the mImAmsakas. ( and hence has no place for ignorant ritual killings).