Little question on meat eatting

[PARAM]

[quote=Seeker123;79490]

Nothing has been said those who eat the non-veg were pure because non-veg are tamsik. Your own posts answers the previous post, if someone is offered poisonous food and die eating it, that would not be suicide but this is victimising. Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras all are not made by birth but by Karma.

In the Ramayana, Bali was accusing Ram for various sins because Ram killed him the wrong way, this clears that Bali clarifies eating meat is sin, but this does not meant Ram or any other really ate any meat, Bali was also cremated as per Vedic rituals. During the 14 years of exile, Sita, Ram and Lakshman never ate any Tamas-gun. During Lanka war only animals were there to help Ram and no other was there, so where did they eat only satvik.

[PARAM]

If you dont believe in non vegeterianism its okay but no one can impose own decision on others.I have no knowledge of vedas but it is clearly written in manu smriti that brahmins can have meat under some condtns.

If you believe in non-vegetarianism, its okay with you. You accepted you have no knowledge of Vedas so that is good, but where Manu Samriti allows eating any Tamsik?


Anumantaa vishasitaa nihantaa krayavikrayee
Samskartaa chopahartaa cha khadakashcheti ghaatakaah

Slaying the animals, permitting it, slaughterers of animals, meat sellers, buyers, those who cook, serve, eat meat; are all murderers.
(Manusmrithi 5.51)



One more thing, all ancient Dharma Granthas, including Manu-Samriti, clearly mentions that All Varnas- Brahmins, Kshatriya, Vaishyas, Shudras are based on Karma. Laws of Vedas are equal for everyone, and no one is exempted. Those meat eaters are Asuras / Demons and not Brahmins or even Shudra.


Any translation done by unlearned like Ambedakar is not acceptable.

[Seeker123]

I am not saying Rama ate meat. Please read the translations provided in the last 2 posts:

1. 4-17-39: Clearly states some animals are edible for Brahmans and Kshatriyas. Which part of that translation is inaccurate? Is it bhakSyaa? bhakSyaa is translated as edible here
http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?t...on=SE&link=yes

2. In the Illvala-Vatapi episode it is well known that the 2 demons killed a lot of Brahmanas after they consumed ram's meat. If the brahmans were vegetarians they would have said No and the story would have ended is it not? Which part of that translation is inaccurate?

I am willing to listen if you can provide better translation for those verses.

[PARAM]

I am not saying Rama ate meat. Please read the translations provided in the last 2 posts:

1. 4-17-39: Clearly states some animals are edible for Brahmans and Kshatriyas. Which part of that translation is inaccurate? Is it bhakSyaa? bhakSyaa is translated as edible here
http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?t...on=SE&link=yes

2. In the Illvala-Vatapi episode it is well known that the 2 demons killed a lot of Brahmanas after they consumed ram's meat. If the brahmans were vegetarians they would have said No and the story would have ended is it not? Which part of that translation is inaccurate?

I am willing to listen if you can provide better translation for those verses.

1. Online translators are not a right way to translate words, there is no proper translate for even English.

You can choose any Important Dharma Grantham and you will find only one thigh. Satvic is the permitted food, Rajas is only for part time, and tamas that include meat is strictly avoided.
All Temples will also offer only Satvic food as Prasadam, no tamsic products are allowed.



2. How many times told already Brahmins or Kshatriyas or Vaishyas or Shudras, all are based on Karma. All Dharma Grantham say this. What we have today is politically corrected caste for votes and there nothing is depends on Karma, this cannot be accepted as they are telling others.

The true meaning of consuming animals is that animal product, like using animals for cultivation and for milk there is nothing for meat or bones. Bali episode is itself the proof.

Illvala-Vatapi episode is also same that eating something tamas is not allowed. Those which are translated as Demon are also in fact human and not what English translators are claiming but they are Asuras because of their Karma. Anyone who will go tamas will become tamas as Karma. If somebody eats meat unknowingly, that is not a higher crime, those Brahmin who eat unknowingly only lose their divinity, but cannot be charged for eating meat knowingly.

Take it - Hiranyakashyap is a Demon, but his descendent Mahabali is a Brahmin, why? This is all because Mahabali's Karma were similar to that of Brahmin, while Hiranyakashyap's Karma was opposite of it.

[Seeker123]

1. Online translators are not a right way to translate words,....

Then what is the correct translation for those Ramayana verses in my earlier posts?

I am not arguing for meat eating just trying to understand those verses.

[Jainarayan]

What foods could be referred to here?:

"Foods dear to those in the mode of goodness increase the duration of life, purify one’s existence and give strength, health, happiness and satisfaction. Such foods are juicy, fatty, wholesome, and pleasing to the heart." B.G. 17.8

The only foods I can think of that meet these criteria are meats. Humans were hunter-gatherers for all but the last 10,000 years of our existence. Sri Krishna was killed by a fisherman-hunter, Jara, whom he forgave. Apparently hunting was not unknown.

I do not think B.G. 9.26 is endorsing vegetarianism, however, as even Srila Prabhupada comments. I believe Sri Krishna is saying that whatever small and meager offering you give, with love and devotion to Him, be it a leaf or a flower, He will accept. I say this because virtually all of chapter 9 is about devotion to Him, not food. That comes in chapter 17, and even then, as I mentioned above, I think is ambiguous.

I'm not endorsing or condemning hunting and/or meat-eating. I'm just playing "devil's advocate", as there seem to be conflicts in scriptures between eating meat and eschewing meat-eating. Because of what I think are ambiguities, my feeling is "swim at your own karmic risk".

[PARAM]

Then what is the correct translation for those Ramayana verses in my earlier posts?

I am not arguing for meat eating just trying to understand those verses.

You have to learn Sanskrit yourself, or ask Yajvan, he is the most learned in HDF, but may fools ofthen make misuse and misguide others who are asking by mixing up his words.

[PARAM]

What foods could be referred to here?:

"Foods dear to those in the mode of goodness increase the duration of life, purify one�s existence and give strength, health, happiness and satisfaction. Such foods are juicy, fatty, wholesome, and pleasing to the heart." B.G. 17.8

The only foods I can think of that meet these criteria are meats. Humans were hunter-gatherers for all but the last 10,000 years of our existence. Sri Krishna was killed by a fisherman-hunter, Jara, whom he forgave. Apparently hunting was not unknown.

I do not think B.G. 9.26 is endorsing vegetarianism, however, as even Srila Prabhupada comments. I believe Sri Krishna is saying that whatever small and meager offering you give, with love and devotion to Him, be it a leaf or a flower, He will accept. I say this because virtually all of chapter 9 is about devotion to Him, not food. That comes in chapter 17, and even then, as I mentioned above, I think is ambiguous.

I'm not endorsing or condemning hunting and/or meat-eating. I'm just playing "devil's advocate", as there seem to be conflicts in scriptures between eating meat and eschewing meat-eating. Because of what I think are ambiguities, my feeling is "swim at your own karmic risk".

Hunting and eating is not permitted, NO SENSIBLE PERSON DO THIS. Even Valmiki have to quit hunting and eating meat to become a Rishi. Sri Krishna never allowed any such things that are Tamsik. Bhagwat Gita is not what just somebody thinks but it is Bhagwad Gita reveals the glory and importance of karma
Satvik Karma, Rajas Karma, Tamsik Karma.

Every part of life is included in it, also food Lord Krishna himself never eat any Tamsik, nor dose his followers and no devotee of Krishna, who was aware of the teachings of Bhagwad Gita eat meat or even egg. Just like Ram Temple, even Krishna Temples will also not allow tamsik products. Just because you or others "don't think", this does not means ॐ did not prohibits it.
Dharma Granthas of Hinduism strongly preaches vegetarianism, it goes against the beliefs of Islam and Christianity anti-Hindus just mock at it and this makes many Hindus to skip it and even target other Hindus because they are afraid that others will mock at their vegetarianism, and this makes them to go ahead with their own quotes in support of tamas including eating non-vegetarianism

It is not only Srila Prabhupada, but every Krishna Devotee, every Hindu Guru who supports vegetarianism, that is because they understand what the Dharma Granthas actually teaches them.. Bhagwad Gita is the words of ॐ himself in the form of Krishna, never try to make him supporting Tamas things which he prohibits.


Nobody killed Krishna, it was Bali who become fisherman-hunter because of his deeds, but took birth in human form. Ram killed Bali by hiding while Bali was innocent against Ram, so as the law of Karma Krishna gets the same treatment. This show that no one would be saved and all have to bear the fruit of Karma. This is already mentioned both in Ramayana and Mahabharata

[Jainarayan]

Self-deleted. Not worth it.