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
And this hater of honesty who believes in word jugglery will soak in the love of liars, cow murderers and rapists with utmost flexibility
So many devotees here have tried to put sense in your deranged mind but alas! you are incorrigible.
Stooped in mode of ignorance , blessed with superb cheating mentality,dveshi (your top 3 qualities),there is no stopping to your swift march to hellish planets.
Hare Krishna,
I don't get it? What is the question actually? Are u in the favor of killing animals or are you against it?
Killing animals is not a sin in sacrifice ..otherwise a great sin? Do I AGREE TO THIS OR NOT?
Ya kill animals for appeasing demigods is not a sin as per vedas ( in olden times).
Now also these muslims kills bakri for pleasing their god. ( as if they have a seperate god).
For Krishna-- Kill LUST, ANGER, GREED in you and appease HIM.
Maybe for demigods - they want animal sacrifices. ( well how can any god be pleased thats a big question)... except the tantric gods. ( kali, durga, chamundi, chinnamasta etc.) these tantric sadhanas are generally done to get some benefit in return.
For our Little Krishna.- all He needs is your love for HIM. You can show love by offerig a small flower, fruit or leaf or little bit of makkhan ( didn't he tell us in BG clearly what He wants )
patram puspam phalam toyam
yo me bhaktya prayacchati
tad aham bhakty-upahrtam
asnami prayatatmanah (9.26 BG)
If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit a water, I will accept it.
If he would have just added non veg will please me. Then surely we also like our muslim bhai bahen will cut bakri. But our Krishna is very simple. He asked very simple things to offer.
Btw our main aim is not some benefit out of this relationship with Krishna. Our aim is kill and sacrficie the- lust greed anger in us and offer ourselves ( Atmanivedanam) to Krishna for nothing in return. ( we are not seeking gaadi, banglow or something else from krishna).
Tantriks perform these rituals for some ulterior benefits. Vedas contains some part of Tantra sadhana + mantra sadhana techniques.
We should restrict ourselves to Mantra sadhana instead of Tantra sadhana ( why? because Krishna doesn't require killing of other animals. .. all krishna requires is Killing our lust, greed and anger)
Hare Krishna
Bhishma's discourse to Yudhistira
https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-mahabharata-mohan/d/doc...
" There has never been, nor will there ever be, a gift that is superior to the gift of life. It is certain that there is nothing dearer to oneself than one’s life. Death, O Bharata, is a calamity or evil unto all creatures. When the time comes for Death, a trembling of the whole frame is seen in all creatures. "
"It is seen that even those men who are possessed of learning and who seek to achieve the highest good in the form of Emancipation, are not free from the fear of death. What need there be said of those innocent and healthy creatures endued with love of life, when they are sought to be slain by sinful wretches subsisting by slaughter."
"The life-breaths of other creatures are as dear to them as those of one’s to one’s own self. Men endued with intelligence and cleansed souls should always behave towards other creatures after the manner of that behaviour which they like others to observe towards themselves. "
My doubt is why kshatriyas do not remember these ethics while hunting deer ? why brahmins do not remember these ethics while slaughtering in yagna ?
"King Vasu, knowing that flesh is inedible, answered that is was edible, O monarch. From that moment Vasu fell down from the firmament on the earth"
ŚB 6.4.9, four-legged animals like deer and goats, as well as food grains, are meant to be the food of human beings.
https://sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu05.htm
The eater who daily even devours those destined to be his food, commits no sin; for the creator himself created both the eaters and those who are to be eaten (for those special purposes).
'The consumption of meat (is befitting) for sacrifices,' that is declared to be a rule made by the gods; but to persist (in using it) on other (occasions) is said to be a proceeding worthy of Rakshasas.
Some times they say meat is edible and other times not edible.
sastras say that god created animals for humans to eat. But they should do yagna . But the purpose of their creation itself is to kill them and eat them, whether it is godly way of yagna or rakshasa way of nonyagna.
Then why bhishma talks about compassion, fear of death, empathy, etc., ?
Whether it is yagna or butchery or hunting they feel same fear, trembling, pain etc.,
Can they gaurantee that animals don't feel fear, trembling, pain etc., during yagna ?
Hare Krsna
Your hatred, poison and malice are not required here. Offenders of Srila Prabhupada are not allowed here,
Please go away and.never return
Hare Krsna
Hare Krsna
tarko ’pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā
nāsāv ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam
dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ
mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ
Dry arguments are inconclusive. A great personality whose opinion does not differ from others is not considered a great sage. Simply by studying the Vedas, which are variegated, one cannot come to the right path by which religious principles are understood. The solid truth of religious principles is hidden in the heart of an unadulterated, self-realized person. Consequently, as the śāstras confirm, one should accept whatever progressive path the mahājanas advocate. Mahābhārata, Vana-pārva (313.117).
Hare Krsna
It would be interesting to explore whether these contradictions arise from different time periods, sectarian influences, or deeper metaphysical understandings of dharma.
SPRUNKI GAME
Hare Krsna Prabhu
All the scriptures are not the same. Some are for the mode of goodness. Some in the mode for passion. Some in the mode for ignorance. Of the Sattvic Puranas, Srimad Bhagavatam is chief. Then there is the devotee Bhagavata. There is no difference between the book Bhagavatam and the devotee Bhagavata Srila Prabhupada. Who can explain the real import of the text. Surrender to Him, because only the spiritual master can give you divine eyes to see the text in true light.
The following is the most conclusive statement regarding meat eating and it's consequences given in the Srimad-Bhagavatam and explained in perfect detail by Srila Prabhupada:
sva-praanaan yah para-praanaih
prapusnaaty aghrnah khalah
tad-vadhas tasya hi sreyo
yad-dosaad yaaty adhah pumaan
Translation
A cruel and wretched person who maintains his existence at the cost of other's lives deserves to be killed for his own well-being, otherwise he will go down by his own actions.
Purport
According to civic codes and religious principles, even the killer of an animal is to be considered a murderer because animal food is never meant for civilized man, whose prime duty is to prepare himself for going back to Godhead. In the act of killing an animal, there is a regular conspiracy by the part of sinners, and all of them are liable to be punished as murderers exactly like a party of conspirators who kill a human being combinedly. He who gives permission, he who kills the animal, he who cooks the slaughtered animal, he who administers distribution of the food stuff, and at last he who eats such cooked animal food are all murderers, and all of them are liable to be punished by the laws of nature.
Srimad- Bhagavatam 1.7.37
Hari Bol
You think Prabhupada an enlightened person and surrender to him if you want.
But he praises a mlecha Muhammad whose character is exactly like Ravanasura, as a saktyavesa avatar.
So, it is difficult for us to believe that he is enlightened .
we don't think but know Srila Prabhupada to be supremely enlightened.
It might be difficult for you to believe but it is the truth.Just like in ancient times it was difficult for some to believe that earth is round.Difficult in believing didn't make the earth flat!!
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
of 9 Next