View Full Version : No violenec & beef in the VEDAS

30 June 2012, 01:26 PM
The material presented here is based on a thorough and objective analysis of roots of Vedic words, the context in which they appear, Vedic Vocabulary, Philology, Grammar and other tools critical for correct interpretation of the Vedic mantras. Thus this research series does not merely rely on blind reproduction of works of Max Muller, Griffith, Wilson, Williams and other indologists on Vedas and Vedic language. While they are more popular in contemporary western academia, we have objective reasons to conclude that their works are far from authoritative. We shall explore this facet in more detail in this research series.

Welcome to this first part of the research series on critical evaluation of Misconceptions surrounding the Vedas – the first books of knowledge on earth.

For centuries aspersions have been cast upon the Vedas; the primary holy scriptures of the Hindus of having unholy contents. If one really started believing in those aspersions, the entire Hindu philosophy, culture, and traditions would reduce to nothing but savagery, barbarism and cannibalism.

The Vedas – the very roots of Hinduism, rather the first source of knowledge on earth – are meant for guiding the actions of human being in order to lead a blissful life.

This slanderous campaign has been unleashed by different vested interests to embarrass Hindus around the world citing specific references from the Vedas.

This also comes handy in convincing poor and illiterate Indians to give up their faith on the grounds that their fundamental holy books – the Vedas – contain all the inhuman elements like denigration of women, meat-eating, polygamy, casteism and above all – beef eating.

The Vedas are also accused of animal sacrifice in sacrificial ceremonies popularly known as the YAJNA. Interestingly a section of home-bred intellectuals claiming to have deep study of ancient India has also come up, who cite references from works of western indologists to prove such unholy content in the Vedas.

Saying that the Vedas permit beef-eating and cow-slaughter amounts to striking a lethal blow to a Hindu’s soul. Respect for cow forms a core tenet of Hinduism. Once you are able to convince him of flaws in the foundation of this core tenet and make him feel guilty, he becomes an easy prey for the predator faiths. There are millions of ill-informed Hindus who are not empowered to counter argue and hence quietly surrender.

The vested interests that malign the Vedas are not confined to foreign and home-bred indologists alone. A certain class among Hindus exploited the rest of the population including the socially and economically weaker sections by forcing them to believe and follow what they said in the name of Vedas or else face the wrath.

All the slanders heaped upon the Vedas can be attributed mainly to the interpretations of commentaries written by Mahidhar, Uvat and Saayan in the medieval times; and to what Vam-margis or the Tantra cult propagated in their books in the name of the Vedas.

In due course the falsehood spread far and wide and they became even more deep rooted when western scholars with their half baked knowledge of Sanskrit transliterated these interpretations of commentaries of Sayan and Mahidhar, in the name of translating the Vedas.

However, they lacked the pre-requisite understanding of Shiksha (Phonetics), Vyakarana (Grammar), Nirukta (Philology), Nighantu (Vocabulary), Chhanda (Prosody), Jyotish (Astronomy), Kalpa and so on that are critical for correct interpretation of the Vedas.

The purpose behind Agniveer movement is to objectively evaluate all such misconceptions about the Vedas – the foundation of human knowledge and establish their piety, sanctity, great ideals and philosophy that cater not only to Hindus but to every human being without bars, bias or discrimination of any kind.

Section 1: No violence against animals

Yasmintsarvaani bhutaanyaatmaivaabhuudvijaanatah
Tatra ko mohah kah shokah ekatvamanupasyatah
Yajurveda 40.7

“Those who see all beings as souls do not feel infatuation or anguish at their sight, for they experience oneness with them”.
How could people who believed in the doctrines of indestructibility, transmigration dare to kill living animals in yajnas? They might be seeing the souls of their own near and dear ones of bygone days residing in those living beings.
Anumantaa vishasitaa nihantaa krayavikrayee
Samskartaa chopahartaa cha khadakashcheti ghaatakaah
Manusmrithi 5.51
Those who permit slaying of animals; those who bring animals for slaughter; those who slaughter; those who sell meat; those who purchase meat; those who prepare dish out of it; those who serve that
meat and those who eat are all murderers.
Breehimattam yavamattamatho maashamatho tilam
Esha vaam bhaago nihito ratnadheyaaya dantau maa hinsishtam pitaram maataram cha
Atharvaveda 6.140.2

O teeth! You eat rice, you eat barley, you gram and you eat sesame. These cereals are specifically meant for you. Do not kill those who are capable of being fathers and mothers.
Ya aamam maansamadanti paurusheyam cha ye kravih
Garbhaan khaadanti keshavaastaanito naashayaamasi
Atharvaveda 8.6.23

We ought to destroy those who eat cooked as well as uncooked meat, meat involving destruction of males and females, foetus and eggs.
Anago hatya vai bheema kritye
Maa no gaamashvam purusham vadheeh
Atharvaveda 10.1.29

It is definitely a great sin to kill innocents. Do not kill our cows, horses and people.

How could there be justification of cow and other animals being killed when killing is so clearly prohibited in the Vedas?
Aghnyaa yajamaanasya pashoonpahi
Yajurveda 1.1

“O human! animals are Aghnya – not to be killed. Protect the animals”
Yajurveda 6.11

Protect the animals.
Dwipaadava Chatushpaatpaahi
Yajurveda 14.8

Protect the bipeds and quadrupeds!
Kravy da –kravya[ meat obtained from slaughter] + Ada [ the eater]—the meat eater.

Pisacha — pisita [meat] +asa [eater]—the meat eater.

Asutrpa — Asu + trpa [one who satisfies himself on]—one who takes others life for his meals.

Garba da and Anda da – the foetus and egg eaters.

Mans da – the meat eaters

Meat eaters have always been looked down in Vedic literature. They have been known as Rakshasas, Pisacha and so on….All these words are synonyms of demons or devils that have been out-cast from the civilized human society.
Urjam no dhehi dwipade chatushpade
Yajurveda 11.83

“May all bipeds and quadrupeds gain strength and nourishment”

This mantra is recited by Hindus before every meal. How could the same philosophy which prays for well-being of every soul in every moment of life, approve of killing animals?

[B]Section 2: No violence in Yajna

Yajna never meant animal sacrifice in the sense popularly understood. Yajna in the Vedas meant a noble deed or the highest purifying action.

Adhvara iti Yajnanaama – Dhvaratihimsaakarmaa tatpratishedhah
Nirukta 2.7

According to Yaaska Acharya, one of the synonyms of Yajna in Nirukta or the Vedic philology is Adhvara.

Dhvara means an act with himsa or violence. And therefore a-dhvara means an act involving no himsa or no violence. There are a large number of such usage of Adhvara in the Vedas.

In the post-Mahabharata period, misinterpretation of the Vedas and interpolations in other scriptures took place at various points intime. Acharya Shankar reestablished the Vedic values to an extent.

In the more recent times, Swami Dayanand Saraswati – known as the grandfather of modern India – interpreted the Vedas as per thecorrect rules of the language and authentic evidences. His literature, which includes commentary on the Vedas, Satyarth Prakash loosely translated as Light of Truth, An Introduction to the Vedas and other texts led to widespread social reformation based on Vedic philosophy and dispelling of myths surrounding the Vedas.

Let us discover what the Vedas have to say on Yajna.

Agne yam yagnamadhvaram vishwatah pari bhuurasi
Sa id deveshu gacchati
Rigveda 1.1.4

O lord of effulgence! The non-violent Yajna, you prescribe from all sides, is beneficial for all, touches divine proportions and is accepted by noble souls.

The Rigveda describes Yajna as Adhvara or non violent throughout. Same is the case with all the other Vedas. How can it be then concluded that the Vedas permit violence or slaughter of animals?

The biggest accusation of cattle and cow slaughter comes in the context of the Yajnas that derived their names from different cattle like the Ashwamedh Yajna, the Gomedha Yajna and the Nar-medh Yajna. Even by the wildest stretch of the imagination the word Medha would not mean slaughter in this context.

It’s interesting to note what Yajurveda says about a horse
Imam ma himsirekashafam pashum kanikradam vaajinam vaajineshu
Yajurveda 13.48

Do not slaughter this one hoofed animal that neighs and who goes with a speed faster than most of the animals.

Aswamedha does not mean horse sacrifice at Yajna. Instead the Yajurveda clearly mentions that a horse ought not to be slaughtered.

In Shathapatha, Ashwa is a word for the nation or empire

The word medha does not mean slaughter. It denotes an act done in accordance to the intellect Alternatively it could mean consolidation, as evident from the root meaning of medha i.e. medhru san-ga-me

Raashtram vaa ashwamedhah
Annam hi gau
Agnirvaa ashwah
Aajyam medhah

Swami Dayananda Saraswati wrote in his Light of Truth:

A Yajna dedicated to the glory, wellbeing and prosperity of the Rashtra the nation or empire is known as the Ashwamedh yajna.

“To keep the food pure or to keep the senses under control, or to make the food pure or to make a good use of the rays of Sun or keep the earth free from impurities[clean] is called Gomedha Yajna”.

“The word Gau also means the Earth and the yajna dedicated to keep the Earth the environment clean is called Gomedha Yajna”

“The cremation of the body of a dead person in accordance with the principles laid down in the Vedas is called Naramedha Yajna”.

Section 3: No beef in Vedas

Not only the Vedas are against animal slaughter but also vehemently oppose and prohibit cow slaughter.Yajurveda forbids killing of cows, for they provide energizing food for human beings

Ghrtam duhaanaamaditim janaayaagne maa himsiheeh
Yajurveda 13.49

Do not kill cows and bulls who always deserve to be protected.

Aare gohaa nrhaa vadho vo astu
Rigveda 7.56.17

In Rigveda cow slaughter has been declared a heinous crime equivalent to human murder and it has been said that those who commits this crime should be punished.
Sooyavasaad bhagavatee hi bhooyaa atho vayam bhagvantah syaama
Addhi trnamaghnye vishwadaaneem piba shuddhamudakamaacharantee
Rigveda 1.164.40 or Atharv 7.73.11 or Atharv 9.10.20

The Aghnya cows – which are not to be killed under any circumstances– may keep themselves healthy by use of pure water and green grass, so that we may be endowed with virtues, knowledge and wealth.

The Vedic Lexicon, Nighantu, gives amongst other synonyms of Gau[ or cow] the words Aghnya. Ahi, and Aditi. Yaska the commentator on Nighantu, defines these as-
Aghnya the one that ought not to be killed
Ahi the one that must not be slaughtered.
Aditi the one that ought not to be cut into pieces.

These three names of cow signify that the animal ought not to be put to tortures. These words appear frequently throughout the Vedas in context of the cow.


Aghnyeyam saa vardhataam mahate soubhagaaya

Rigveda 1.164.27
Cow – The aghnya – brings us health and prosperity

Suprapaanam Bhavatvaghnyaayaah
Rigveda 5.83.8
There should be excellent facility for pure water for Aghnya Cow

Yah paurusheyena kravishaa samankte yo ashwena pashunaa yaatudhaanah

Yo aghnyaayaa bharati ksheeramagne teshaam sheershaani harasaapi vrishcha
Rigveda 10.87.16

Those who feed on human, horse or animal flesh and those who destroy milk-giving Aghnya cows should be severely punished.

Vimucchyadhvamaghnyaa devayaanaa aganma
Yajurveda 12.73
The Aghnya cows and bulls bring you prosperity

Maa gaamanaagaamaditim vadhishta
Rigveda 8.101.15
Do not kill the cow. Cow is innocent and aditi – that ought not to be cut into pieces

Antakaaya goghaatam
Yajurveda 30.18
Destroy those who kill cows

Yadi no gaam hansi yadyashwam yadi poorusham
Tam tvaa seesena vidhyaamo yatha no so aveeraha
Atharvaveda 1.16.4

If someone destroys our cows, horses or people, kill him with a bullet of lead.

Vatsam jaatamivaaghnyaa
Atharvaveda 3.30.1
Love each other as the Aghnya – non-killable cow – loves its calf

Dhenu sadanam rayeenaam
Atharvaveda 11.1.34
Cow is fountainhead of all bounties

The entire 28th Sukta or Hymn of 6th Mandal of Rigveda sings the glory of cow.
Aa gaavo agnamannuta bhadramakrantseedantu

Bhooyobhooyo rayimidasya vardhayannabhinne

Na taa nashanti na dabhaati taskaro naasaamamitro vyathiraa dadharshati

Na taa arvaa renukakaato ashnute na samskritramupa yanti taa abhi

Gaavo bhago gaava indro me achhaan

Yooyam gaavo medayathaa

Maa vah stena eeshata maaghanshasah

1. Everyone should ensure that cows are free from miseries and kept healthy.
2. God blesses those who take care of cows.
3. Even the enemies should not use any weapon on cows
4. No one should slaughter the cow
5. Cow brings prosperity and strength

6. If cows keep healthy and happy, men and women shall also keep disease free and prosperous

7. May the cow eat green grass and pure water. May they not be killed and bring prosperity to us.


What more proofs does one need to understand the high esteem in which not only the cow but each living being is held in the Vedas.

The learned audience can decide for themselves from these evidences that the Vedas are completely against any inhuman practice… to top it all the Beef and Cow slaughter.

NOte the above material has been copied from http://agniveer.com/no-beef-in-vedas/

30 June 2012, 02:16 PM

The problem with this sort of thing (decontextualized quoting) is that, just as in sectarian squabbles where egos are projected onto this or that deity held up as supreme, only the quotes that seem to support the assertion are revealed.

What are we to make of all the verses that indicate the gods' consumption of meat (including cattle, though not milk-giving cows), or sanctioning and injunctions for sacrifices, the eating of the parts by brahmins, etc.

We can reasonably argue that these are all esoteric allegory alluding to internal rites - and plausibly so. But it still, in my opinion, intellectually dishonest to flat out ignore these verses and rest on the above. We have to take it fully in context. Just as we may find verses declaring this or that god supreme, we will find verses saying that other gods are supreme, or that all gods are equal in power.


30 June 2012, 02:59 PM

First of all I don't comprehend what triggered this thread.

Secondly,...... comments deleted.


30 June 2012, 03:51 PM

Secondly, I am sure we can use our intellectual capabilities in a positive way, instead of finding faults with every post and feeling compelled to make a critical evaluation without providing any proof for the alternate position taken and calling the OP 'intellectually dishonest'.

Very good advice, perhaps a less jaundiced reading of my post would reveal that it wasn't about finding fault, it was about putting the claims in perspective. As for the proof, one need only google and/or search through one's copy of the vedas. What I specifically wanted to avoid, however, was propping up decontextualized quotes on both sides of an argument, as this does little to further holistic understanding. Ved should not be reduced to resource for reinforcing preconceptions.

As noted by the OP (perhaps you did not notice in your haste to criticize...) the source is agniveer, whose practice of cherrypicking I am dubbing intellectually dishonest, as is all cherrypicking. To the extent that I am guilty of confirmation bias, I am intellectually dishonest. This is just how it is, a tendency we ought watch for in ourselves, as it plays a key role in making a corpse of the truth, limiting our capacity for experiences outside of the shell of beliefs.


Eastern Mind
30 June 2012, 04:04 PM
Vannakkam: I commend all efforts at saying to the western indologists, "Well, just wait a second here!" rather than taking their statements as is. Clearly they (not all, to be sure, but if the guys name begins with Reverend, we have a 'hint' as to his agenda) have a misguided take on our scriptures.

As for the topic of vegetarianism, it has been taken on by countless people, especially in more recent years, for all kinds of good reasons, none of which have anything to do with scriptural do's or don'ts, mostly just good old common sense.

Aum Namasivaya

30 June 2012, 04:45 PM

Be it far from me to evaluate or pass judgement on people's choices regarding their diets, smoking/drinking habits or sexual indulgences. Common non-practicing Hindus deviate from ideal choices all the time and that is fine with me. All that irks me a little is that such things are repeatedly brought to the forum with every new set of members and their validity or lack thereof per the scriptures is discussed time and again. What anyone does in the privacy of his/her home is their business. It just seems odd that a scriptural sanction is desired and looked into and then debated. Our inner conscious knows what is right and what is wrong. If it feels wrong, why look for validation. Just do it quietly and let go. No one has to know. Since Hinduism is so unstructured, everything goes, if your conscious allows. Spiritual advancement is a tough road to hoe and most of us falter, some more often than others. So, it is perfectly alright to do what makes one happy and to switch to the spiritual journey whenever one feels desirous of treading that path. Nothing contentious there.


01 July 2012, 01:03 AM
First of all I don't comprehend what triggered this thread.

well I was surfing through the net & found this
When Rama was told to go to the forest, he mournfully revealed to his mother: It has been ordained that I have to lose the kingdom, forego the princely comforts and the tasty MEAT-DISHES.
(Ayothia Kandam, 20, 26, 94th Chapters).

Manusmriti (Chapter 5 / Verse 30) says, “It is not sinful to eat meat of eatable animals, for Brahma has created both the eaters and the eatables.”

Manusmriti (5 / 35) states: When a man who is properly engaged in a ritual does not eat meat, after his death he will become a sacrificial animal during twenty-one rebirths.

Maharishi Yagyavalkya says in Shatpath Brahmin (3/1/2/21) that, “I eat beef because it is very soft and delicious.”

Apastamb Grihsutram (1/3/10) says, “The cow should be slaughtered on the arrival of a guest, on the occasion of ‘Shraddha’ of ancestors and on the occasion of a marriage.”

Rigveda (10/85/13) declares, “On the occasion of a girl’s marriage oxen and cows are slaughtered.”

Rigveda (6/17/1) states that “Indra used to eat the meat of cow, calf, horse and buffalo.”

what the hell
so I researched more & found the reality about all this false propaganda.It is quite possible that hindus might read all this **** & their belief may be shaken.(these things have been used for so many centuries by missionaries & muslims to convert hindus).so this thread was made just to get them know the truth.
so much for
decontextualized quotes

01 July 2012, 06:04 AM
Pranam Dhyandev

what the hell
so I researched more & found the reality about all this false propaganda.It is quite possible that hindus might read all this **** & their belief may be shaken.(these things have been used for so many centuries by missionaries & muslims to convert hindus).so this thread was made just to get them know the truth.
so much for

If you had researched bit more you would have found all this have been discussed and argued a lot on HDF, still i am glad you have brought this up again.
It does not hurts to reminds us why we are what we are. Why we emphasize the value of Ahimsa one off the pillar of Hindu Dharma, why it is important to follow Yam and Niyams, why we worship Go-mata.
So lets hear from you a bit more, as you have mentioned this was your first part of research so hopefully there is more to follow.

On the subject of cow there a sense of movement gathering (Devkinadan ji, currently in Vrindavan, Ramdev Swami and lot more) to declare Go-mata national Pashu, someone remarked cow is not just a Pashu but it should be declared Go mata.
That she is Mata is well recognized, yet the heart bleeds when we see her plight in Bharat that is India.

Jai Shree Krishna

01 July 2012, 10:11 AM

Prove yourself if one Veda or its verse is different from other.


Those who accepts Vedas promoting beef etc are Adharmis, even in HDF there are those done Islamic terrorist who come here by different names and give pro Muslim and anti-Hindu comments?:mad:
If they are so much eager to put their name in anti-Hindu list then a best advice for them is to use their real name.

All their comments is a copy of work done by unlearned Christians like Griffith, Piggott, Child, Max Muller etc and promoted by all Adharmis like Zakir Naik, DN Jha, Romila Thapar etc. These translations were already proved wrong in the 17th-18th century by the pundits of that time, real Hindu will no longer accept Islamic+Christian+Communist translations expect the Adharmis.

01 July 2012, 12:53 PM
If you had researched bit more you would have found all this have been discussed and argued a lot on HDF,

1.Ganesh ji,I am new to hdf.need a bit more exploring:Cool:

This post was also made so that ,in future if u are confronted on these types of issues by these mlecchas,yavans,mullas,missionaries etc,(of which there is a quite a probability) you can give them a strong reply & close there useless mouths.
Vishnu Sharma in Panchatantra (Kakoliyam) clearly states that those who perform animal sacrifice in Yajna are fools because they do not understand Vedas properly. If one goes to Heaven by animal sacrifice, what could be the path to go to Hell!
NOTE:I faced this situation before in a book fair when a mulla was arguing with with the stall owner of chaukhmba publication on meat in the puranas & especially manusmriti.stall owner beat the mulla in his own game.:D