Little question on meat eatting

[PARAM]

some months ago , I think sahasranama qouted some scriptures about meat eating, in favor of it. Please try to find it.

Did you check KD Gupta's replies and my reply in that thread? We already answered him, and he changed his stance.

Who are the learned and unlearned? And who is to judge who is learned or unlearned?

Dharma scriptures are the Judges, those who go with them are learned and those who go against them are unlearned. Now I do not need to add that D.K.Jha and Romila Thapar are unlearned, they take claims of too much, support AIT and Beef in Hindu texts, but no proof they have, on the other hand Saideo and BM are learned with rational thoughts.

[OjasM]

I am a Hindu. In my community we eat meat, particularly on festivals. My Kshatriya neighbours do so too. We have been Hindus since the religion came into existence.

Why do you say that in Hindu dharma we don't eat meat?

It is only a few sects of Hindus which prohibit meat but unfortunately it is only these sects that you see in the Western countries and not the real Hindus.

Yes even I was thinking the same. Most of the Hindus in India do eat meat i.e. chicken mutton fish also eggs. It was prohibited only to brahmanas and those who want to have spiritual development. Now a days many brahmanas have also lost shame and eat meat and also support it. Sad to say a very less proportion of people are meaningfully vegetarian

[PARAM]

Yes even I was thinking the same. Most of the Hindus in India do eat meat i.e. chicken mutton fish also eggs. It was prohibited only to brahmanas and those who want to have spiritual development. Now a days many brahmanas have also lost shame and eat meat and also support it. Sad to say a very less proportion of people are meaningfully vegetarian

The truth is it is only a few sects of Tantrikism which was originally formed from Buddhism supports eating meat, supporters of Non-vegetarians are only polluting Hinduism for the sake of their illusion, there are sects of anti-Hindus which blames Dharma Granthas for supporting eating the tamsic which are strictly forbidden.

People are making claims in their forms and put themselves as proof, this is a tamsik way.

If you want to eat meat, your own choice, we can't do anything to make you understand, but you should not blame Dharma Granthas in any form for supporting any tamsic deeds including meat eating, your personal choice is not what a Satvic eating should be.

[Seeker123]

The truth is it is only a few sects of Tantrikism which was originally formed from Buddhism supports eating meat, supporters of Non-vegetarians are only polluting Hinduism for the sake of their illusion, there are sects of anti-Hindus which blames Dharma Granthas for supporting eating the tamsic which are strictly forbidden.

Recently I was reading the Ramayana by Kamala Subramaniam (Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan publication). In the Vali episode Vali asks Rama why he killed him since the "5 toed animals?" are not eaten by Brahmanas and Kshatriyas. There was another episode in which sage Agastya was invited for a feast Vaataapi-Ilvala episode where he consumed meat. Do you think the translation is incorrect?

[PARAM]

Recently I was reading the Ramayana by Kamala Subramaniam (Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan publication). In the Vali episode Vali asks Rama why he killed him since the "5 toed animals?" are not eaten by Brahmanas and Kshatriyas. There was another episode in which sage Agastya was invited for a feast Vaataapi-Ilvala episode where he consumed meat. Do you think the translation is incorrect?

These translations are incorrect, all scriptures already points that flesh and flesh products are tamsik and cannot be consumed. Anti-Hindus have their own way to make incorrect information.

True translation of Bali episode if you are mentioning [4-17-40] -
Why I am killed when sensible people will not use my skin and bones, nor they will eat meats from my body, such as I am a five-nailed animal.

This clearly says no kind of meat was eaten by anyone who is sensible.



Agastya's fest is also wrong translated because it is clearly mentioned in ancient Granthas that he ate what his devotees offered him, and he was unaware what was offered to him. Read the entire story, when Agatsya come to know the truth, he immediately destroyed those demons with his divine power for offering him meat.

You will not find even a single Hindu Temple where eating tamsik food is permitted, non-veg are never offered as prasadam. Only the tantrik section eats meat but not a real Hindu temple allows this anywhere. Real translations of Ramayana are other Itihas and Dharma Granthas are available in libraries of different Hindu temples.

[Seeker123]

For Vali's comments to Rama the reference is 4-17-39 and 4-17-40 below:

पंच पंच नखा भक्ष्या ब्रह्म क्षत्रेण राघव |
शल्यकः श्वाविधो गोधा शशः कूर्मः च पंचमः || १-१७-३९
39. raaghava = oh, Raghava; brahma kSatreNa = by Brahmans, Kshatriya-s; shalyakaH = a wild-rodent with defensive quills; shvaavidhaH = a kind of boar that kills dogs, wolves etc; godhaa = a lizard with unimaginable grip; shashaH = hare; pancamaH kuurmaH ca = fifthly, tortoise, also; panca = five [kinds of]; panca nakhaa = five nailed animals; bhakSyaa = are edible.
"Raghava, five kinds of five-nailed animals, viz., a kind of wild rodent, a kind of wild-boar, a kind of lizard, a hare and fifthly the turtle are edible for Brahmans and Kshatriya-s. [4-17-39]

and then 4-17-40:

चर्म च अस्थि च मे राजन् न स्पृशन्ति मनीषिणः |
अभक्ष्याणि च मांसानि सो अहम् पंच नखो हतः || १-१७-४०
40. raajan = oh, king; maniiSiNaH = sensible people; me carma ca asthi ca = my, skin, also, bones, also; na spR^ishanti = will not, touch; maamsaani ca = meats, also a bhakSyaaNi = not, to be eaten; panca nakhaH = five, nailed one; saH aham hataH = such as I am, I am killed.
"Sensible people will not touch my skin and bones, oh, king, nor meats from my body are to be eaten, such as I am, a five-nailed animal, I am killed. [4-17-40]
'There appears to be no reason as to why a five-nailed animal like me is to be killed, when there is no reason for political, religious, hunting, or food purposes. Then this act of yours shall have an ultimate purpose isn't it....'

[Seeker123]

On the question of Agastya and Illvala and Vatapi episode see below the verses before Agastya enters the picture:

iha ekadaa kila kruuro vaataapiH api ca ilvalaH |
bhraatarau sahitau aastaam braahmaNaghnau mahaa asurau || 4-11-55

55. ekadaa iha braahmaNa ghnau= once, here, Brahmans, killers of; kruuraH vaataapiH api ca ilvalaH= cruel ones, Vaataapi, even, also, Ilvala; bhraatarau mahaa asurau sahitau aastaam kila= brothers, dreadful demons, together, they were here, they say.
"Once upon a time verily cruel demon brothers Vaataapi and Ilvala were here together, and they the dreadful demons, they say, used to be Bhraman-killers. [4-11-55]

dhaarayan braahmaNam ruupam ilvalaH sa.mskR^itam vadan |
aama.ntrayati vipraan sa shraaddham uddishya nirghR^iNaH || 4-11-56

56. dhaarayan braahmaNam ruupam= disguising, Bhraman's, semblance; ilvalaH= Ilvala; sam skR^itam vadan= sophisticatedly, speaking; aamantrayati vipraan= invite, Brahman; sa shraaddham uddishya= obsequial ceremony, purpose of; nir ghR^iNaH= pitiless ones.
"Disguising in Bhraman's semblance and speaking sophisticatedly that Ilvala used to invite Brahmans for the purpose of obsequial ceremonies, where Brahman are fed after usual ceremony to appeases their manes. [4-11-56]

bhraataram sa.mskR^itam kR^itvaa tataH tam meSa ruupiNam |
taan dvijaan bhojayaamaasa shraaddha dR^iSTena karmaNaa || 4-11-57

57. tataH= then; meSa ruupiNam= in ram's, form; tam bhraataram= that, brother [Vaataapi,] is; sam skR^itam kR^itvaa= perfecting, made to [cooked deliciously]; tataH shraaddha dR^iSTena karmaNaa= then, according to obsequial rites, and deeds; taan dvijaan bhojayaamaasa= them, Brahman, he was feeding.
Then Ilvala used to make his brother Vaataapi into a ram, perfect that ram's meat into deliciously cooked food, and used to feed Brahmans according to obsequial rites and deeds. [4-11-57]

tato bhuktavataam teSaam vipraaNaam ilvalo abraviit |
vaataape niSkramasva iti svareNa mahataa vadan || 4-11-58

58. tataH teSaam vipraaNaam bhuktavataam= then, those, Brahmans, when surfeited; ilvalaH mahataa svareNa vadan= Ilvala, with loud voice, shouting; vaataape niS kramasva iti abraviit= oh, Vaataapi, you exit, thus, he said [use to say]
"When those Brahmans are surfeited with that ram's meat, then Ilvala used to shout loudly, "oh, Vaataapi, you may come out." [4-11-58]

tato bhraatur vacaH shrutvaa vaataapiH meSavat nadan |
bhittvaa bhitvaa shariiraaNi braahmaNaanaam viniSpatat || 4-11-59

59. tataH vaataapiH bhraatuH vacaH shrutvaa= then, Vaataapi, brother's, words, on listening; nadan meSa vat= bleating, like, a ram; bhittvaa bhitvaa= tearing, tearing; shariiraaNi braahmaNaanaam= bodies, of Brahman; vi niS patat= used to lunge out.
"Then on listening his brother's words Vaataapi used to lunge out bleating like a ram, tearing and rending the bodies of those Brahmans. [4-11-59]

braahmaNaanaam sahasraaNi taiH evam kaama ruupibhiH |
vinaashitaani sa.mhatya nityashaH pishita ashanaiH || 4-11-60

60. taiH [taabhyaam]= by those two brothers; pishita ashanaiH= raw meat, eaters kaama ruupibhiH= them, thus, guise-changers; [or, pishita aashayaa= for flesh, greedy ones]; braahmaNaanaam sahasraaNi= Brahman, thousands; evam vi naashitaani samhatya nityashaH= this way, are ruined, together, always.
"This way they the guise changing demons always ruined thousands of Brahmans together, greedy for raw-flesh as they are. [4-11-60]

[OjasM]

Namaste.



Could you tell me the verse? The reason I ask is because I haven't found anything like that. I would like to know, for discussion's sake.

I've found is "I enter into each planet, and by My energy they stay in orbit. I become the moon and thereby supply the juice of life to all vegetables." 15.13 Only vegetables are mentioned, so my assumption is that Sri Krishna is endorsing a vegetarian diet.

And in Gita Mahatmya Chapter 8, "In the South is an important town of the name Amardhkapur in which one brahmana of the name Bhavasharma lived, who had taken a prostitute as his wife. Bhavasharma enjoyed eating meat, drinking wine, stealing, going with other's wives; and hunting. One day, that sinful Bhavasharma was invited to a party, where he drank so much alcohol that it started to come out of his mouth." I'm reading this to mean that eating meat is sinful.

Thanks.

Here it is very important to note that he was a brahmana. They(Brahmanas) were completely prohibited from these acts not others.

[OjasM]

Well in the back-drop of kurukshetra war, there were more important things to discuss than diet.

No, diet has been briefly discussed in last chapters of Bhagwad Geeta

[OjasM]

You are just another type of man who have no Knowledge of Vedas but boast too much just like other anti-Hindus. Your personal choice is to believe and spread unvedic things in the name of Vedas.

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.