In both Mahabharatha and Bhagavatham , and in some other sastras like Manudharma, there are discussions on animal Sacrifice and meat eating
All these scriptures agree on one point viz., " Killing animals is not a sin in sacrifice. Otherwise a great sin."
But still, we can find some statements against even animal Sacrifices which is not considered as sin.
The question that arises here is that if animal Sacrifices are sanctioned by scriptures, then why there are conflicting statements which oppose animal Sacrifices ?
statements which sanction animal Sacrifices
https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07064.htm
Of rigid vows and always engaged in due performance of sacrifices, countless animals, desirous of going to heaven, used to come to him of their own accord. 2 So large was the number of animals sacrificed in the Agnihotra of that king that the secretions flowing from his kitchen from the heaps of skins deposited there caused a veritable river which from this circumstance, came to be called the Charmanwati.
https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07064.htm
The sacred fire is fond of animal food,' this saying has come down to us. And at sacrifices animals are invariably killed by regenerate Brahmanas, and these animals being purged of sin, by incantation of hymns, go to heaven. If, O Brahmana, the sacred fire had not been so fond of animal food in ancient times, it could never have become the food of any one
ŚB 6.4.9, ŚB 10.69.35, ŚB 10.58.15-16
https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01229.htm
"Then those foremost of car-warriors (Krishna and Arjuna), riding in their cars and placing themselves on opposite sides of that forest, began a great slaughter, on all sides, of the creatures dwelling in Khandava"
"The birds that took wings to escape from that conflagration were pierced by Arjuna with his shafts, and cut into pieces, they fell down into the burning element below. Pierced all over with Arjuna's shafts, the birds dropped down into the burning forest, uttering loud cries."
https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-mahabharata-mohan/d/doc826441.html
The audition is heard that animals were created for sacrifice. They who eat flesh in any other way are said to follow the Rakshasa practice.
Bhishma said, Listen to me as I tell you what the ordinance is that has been laid down for the Kshatriyas. They do not incur any fault by eating flesh that has been acquired by expenditure of prowess. All deer of the wilderness were dedicated to the deities and the Pitris in days of old, O king, by Agastya. Hence, the hunting of deer is not censured.
statements which oppose animal Sacrifices
https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12b092.htm
Wine, fish, honey, meat, alcohol, and preparations of rice and sesame seeds, have been introduced by knaves. The use of these (in sacrifices) is not laid down in the Vedas. The hankering after these arises from pride, error of judgment, and cupidity. They that are true Brahmanas realise the presence of Vishnu in every sacrifice. His worship, it has been laid down, should be made with agreeable Payasa.
https://sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12c037.htm
The Rishis said, The opinion entertained by us, O king, is that sacrifices should be performed with grain. The deities, however, maintain that sacrifices should be performed with animals. Do thou judge between us and tell us which of these opinions is correct.'
"Bhishma continued, 'Learning what the opinion was that was entertained by the deities, Vasu, moved by partiality for them, said that sacrifices should be performed with animals. At this answer, all the Rishis, endued with the splendour of the Sun, became very angry. Addressing Vasu who was seated on his car and who had (wrongly) taken up the side of the deities, they said unto him,--Since thou hast (wrongly) taken up the side of the deities, do thou fall down from heaven.
And those hardcore hindutwa vadis who argue that vedas or scriptures didn't sanction meateating . They argue that verses were mistranslated.
They also say that some britishers polluted and twisted the scriptures with interpolations and mistranslations.
Note : Only persons with good knowledge of scriptures are welcome. Quoating with references is appreciated.
This question is not for brainwashers who do not show any references.
Thank you
Replies
He enlightened hippies. very good. But he didn't dare to go to Arabia to enlighten demons called muslims. We kknow what these demons will do if he dared to go there. But even if he went there and successfully returned with life, the fact is that he was deluded when he says a demon muhammad as a saktyavesa avatar, a great vaishnava, a great acharya.
Hare Krsna
You are trying to spread the same hatred which offenders share. Offenders such as you are not allowed here. Please go somewehere else and offend
Hare Krsna
Hare Krsna
But he didn't dare to go to Arabia
Srila Prabhupada followed instructions given by his guru and Krsna.
he was deluded
This statement shows who was deluded. Who is in illusion. You are not required here. You have no place in these forums.
Hare Krsna
Oh, did his guru say, you don't go to Arabia as muslims are very dangerous ?
https://krishna.org/a-call-to-the-muslims-of-the-world-from-a-group...
Here the author of this article, Madhudvisa dasa describes all the evil acts of muhammad. (That means you people already knew that mlecha muhammad was a wicked wight)
One person commented " If islam is so evil, why prabhupada said Islam is bona fide,"
.For this question, reply of Madhudvisa dasa is " So Mohammad has preached according to the time. He is representative of Krishna, he has taught the people to chant the name of God as they know it, to offer prayers, etc. He is preaching in a very primitive culture so there are some rough edges on the people, what to do? But he got them to chant the name of God, offer prayers to the Lord. And he did teach some moral principles, etc."
Instead of acccepting that Prabhupada committed a mistake, he starts covering up. Firsly, he said that muhammad was a pedophile, raped many widows after killing their husbands. Next for covering up Prabhupada's mistake, he is saying that this pedophile muhammad is a representative of Krishna."
Whom you people want to fool ? You expect people to accept murderers, rapists ,pedophile to be holymen ?
According to time if a mlecha says that oh, This mullah is god or this pullah is god", while commiting all kinds of sinful activities, still you say, he is a representative of Krishna ?
Why do you not say gengis khan a holy man. Bcz he is not a goood actor like muhammad. He could not pose like a holyman saying " There is a pullah or kullah " But this evil muhammad manufactures a god called allah and perpetrates all kinds of evil activities in the name of his imaginary god. (Mental speculation in your language).
Now this mentally speculated god allah is Krishna. and this rapist and,pedophile is great vaishnava according to Prabhupada. This is the perfect example of mental speculation and delusion. I feel that, somehow bcz of entering into the lands of mlechas and pashandis, Prabhupada was bewildered though he is a good devotee. So, instead of covering up Prabhupada, you should agree that he committed a grave mistake.
I don't expect it, bcz u don't have the habit of accepting the truth.
Oh, did his guru say, you don't go to Arabia as muslims are very dangerous ?
Hare Krsna
You are NOT welcome here, Please go away
Hare Krsna
Ya, I am not required here. Bcz, you people require people who just nod their heads.
You r not at all interesred in truth. You r only interested in person worship.
Do u know that Muhammad was a pedophile ? Do you know that no pious man marries widows that too forcefully ?
A man who marries widows is a shameless man. Lo, Prabhupada praises this shameless man.
According to you, persons who praise mlechas, murderers and rapists, cow killers, temple demolishiers are not deluded.
If a person says " Oh there is a god , His name is some mulla or pulla "
Oh, that's it. Oh, He believes that there is god. So, he is a great holyman.
You don't care how many men he killed. how many women he raped. how many temples he demolished.
If mahummad is present today, the first thing he would do is demolish all Krishna's temples, kill all male devotees and enslave all female devotees.
.
It is highly surprising that you praise cow murderers while praising cows at the same time.
You are not angry with mlechas who are mass murderers, who imprisoned and raped women. Moreover you praise them.
You know what happened to ISKCON in Bangladesh. Still, you are not angry.
But you are very angry with some vedic persons just for thinking that god has no form.
The mentality of humans is that they always criticize harmless people. But never dare to condemn dangerous people evenif they are evil.
This is what prabhupada did when he condemns advaitins and prases muslims
Look, if there is some fault in your guru, you should condemn it.
Bhishma condemned Parasurama's arrogance, and fought with Him even when Parasurama is god himself.
If prabhupada was very afraid of muslim demons, he must have kept quiet. What is the need to praise a demon ?
Bhavishyapurana says that Muhammad was famous tripurasura rakshasa himself.
Accepting the mistakes is the trait of a goodman. Not accepting the truth is trait of an evil man.
Prabhupada was a good devotee. But he made a mistake out of fear or delusion.
It is understandable, as we know that muslims are demons.
Why are you not accepting it ? Yes, our guru made a mistake. This should be the honesty.
Hare Krsna
If mahummad is present today, the first thing he would do is demolish all Krishna's temples, kill all male devotees and enslave all female devotees.
We are not interested in your muhammad prohecy.
Hare Krsna
Hare Krsna
You r not at all interesred in truth. You r only interested in person worship.
No we are highly interested in the Supreme Personality of Absolute truth- Sri Krsna Yes we worship Krsna.
What we are not interested is the poison in your heart that you are trying to spread. Sorry no takers here. Nobody wants it here. Please find some other place.
But you are very angry with some vedic persons just for thinking that god has no form.
Yes, Because calling Krsna as formless is also blaphemy.
Why are you not accepting it ? Yes, our guru made a mistake. This should be the honesty.
No. But we are happy to accept that you are balsphemous and deserve to be banned from these forums.
Hare Krsna
Actually, you should be happy, Since prabhupada is a devotee of Krishna, I am just criticizing his views .
If it is someone else who praises this mlecha muhammad knowing all about his character, I would spit on the face of that shameless man.
Any person who praises this wicked wight muhammad, is a mlecha or ignorant or a shameless man