Beef Eating in Hinduism

[The Unnamed]

on topic, sell everything in public supermarkets in india. for non muslims there should be a non halal certification too.

happy as clams.

 

[Black Mamba1]

You can't be an "atheist Hindu" bro. It is either that you are an atheist or a Hindu. The central point of Hinduism is the belief in the existence of Bhagwan (God) who is manifested in various forms and in various times and the worship of Bhagwan by certain rituals including Sathsangh. Atheism is the denial of the existence of God

Why not!!! Atheism is an accepted stream of Hindu philosophy. Great ancient philosophers like Sankhya, Panini was atheist and nastik. Charbaks were complete atheist. They believed that there is nothing beyond this life so complete all the unfinished wishes in this life only as there is nothing beyond it. They were also Hindus.

"The central point of Hinduism is the belief in the existence of Bhagwan (God) who is manifested in various forms"-----this is a very myopic view of Hinduism. You have to study more and look beyond rituals before coming to such conclusion.

 

[blood]

Listen mate. you simply are a selective secular.

funny isn't it and these seculars call us as fanatics and backward while silently support these barbaric practices .

 

[ExtraOdinary]

Listen mate. you simply are a selective secular.

Yeah, I got a GPA of 4.4/10 in the secularism test from my Uni

 

[Biplab Bijay]

Yeah, I got a GPA of 4.4/10 in the secularism test from my Uni

Does not matter. you have no guts to mock religious sentiments of muslims. But you can mock our sentiments as you know that you will stay alive.

funny isn't it and these seculars call us as fanatics and backward while silently support these barbaric practices .

They are selective and gutless pigs. They have no guts to mock religious sentiments of muslims as they know that they will be killed. but they can mock us.

 

[Star Wars]

The utter lack of empathy for the feeling of the person from another religion is mind boggling . Apparently atheism and secularism in our country means doing everything exactly opposite to what Hindus hold close to their heart . Apparently killing and consumption of a living being when a clear alternative is available is a good thing .

 

[ExtraOdinary]

Does not matter. you have no guts to mock religious sentiments of muslims. But you can mock our sentiments as you know that you will stay alive.


They are selective and gutless pigs. They have no guts to mock religious sentiments of muslims as they know that they will be killed. but they can mock us.

Not my mistake that you hav'nt been paying attention, neither does name calling win you an argument

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Lately there is a high interest in meat debates on Pakistan defence and less on Military

I know defence stuff is low these days , so people need time pass but suprised at low quantity of reasonable debates

 

[anonymus]

Had your ancestors not hunted mammoths 10,000 years ago, we would have gone extinct. Humans are an omnivorous species.

Not correct sirjee.

Mammoths were herbivore and did not posed any danger to Humans. As far as hunting them for food is concerned, only Amerindians were dependent on mammoth as food. In Eurasia, Reindeer was favorite animal of primitive hunting tribes during ice age.

 

[Star Wars]

@Cherokee - This country belongs to the Hindus as well and they deserve the same same rights as anyone else , and one should learn to respect the traditions and customs of others and not act like a complete douche bag just because your atheistic believes permit you to .

 

[Black Mamba1]

Credits :Indian Quotes

Hindu mythology is famous for its diverse art forms and classical literatures but the most famous myth is about beef or killing of cows. According to the myth propagated by Hindu nationalists, cows are worshipped in ancient India and it was the invaders, both muslim and christian, who brought beef-eating to India. But, facts and religious scriptures prove that it was the vedic-hindus who were among the world's first urban consumers of beef. This was even before Jesus Christ was crucified and 1000 years before Islam was formed.

1)Mahabharata, 500 B.C.: King Rantiveda slaughters 2,000 cows a day in his royal kitchens and distributed beef along with grain to apparently grateful Brahmins, the Hindu priests.

2)Charak Samhita, 100 B.C.: Flesh of cow is prescribed as a medicine for various diseases. It is also prescribed for making soup and advised as a cure for irregular fever, consumption, and emaciation. The fat of the cow is recommended for debility and rheumatism.

3)Taittiriya Brahman , 500 B.C.: Verily the cow is food.

4)Yajnavalkya, one of the most popular hindu sages: ''Some people do not eat cow meat. I do so, provided it's tender.''

5)Sacrificial offering for Indra, the rain God and Agni, the fire God, are bulls and cows. (Perhaps that is why we are having less rain, as we stopped sacrificing cows.)

6)Vedas have mentioned 250 animals out of which at least 50 are fit for sacrifice and human consumption.

7)Manusmriti did not prohibit the consumption of beef.

In many states of India, beef consumption is legally banned, because of a false religious myth. This cow worship is not done out of animal love, as the same 'God' that exists in cows also exists in cockroaches. By this logic, we should be worshiping insects too. The central focus of cow worship is to show Muslims as anti-hindus and to create a universal symbol for upper-caste hindu identification. What is not a myth is that, the so-called holy cow is used for un-holy purposes.

Source:1)hindu.com/2001/08/14/stories/13140833.htm2)nytimes.com/2002/08/17/books/holy-cow-a-myth-an-indian-finds-the-kick-is-real.html

This is a good discussion. I want to go beyond cow and want to tell that there was no concept of vegetarianism in ancient Hinduism.

Show me a single holy Hindu scripture where vegetarianism is pampered and which is written before Buddhism and Jainism came. I am sure you will find none. But I can give you several instances where Lord Rama, Krishna , Sita enjoyed meat of various animals.

The concept of vegetarianism in India is an influence of Buddhism and Jainism. It has no link with ancient Hinduism. I am not in favour of vegetarian and non-vegetarian food. I am only telling that there was no link with Hinduism and veg food. If you do not like non veg don't eat but do not link it with Hinduism and do not get false satisfaction thinking that that you are abiding by any directive of God written in Vedas.

 

[anonymus]

pretty much the same thing .

Certainly not.

Sufi muslim card is overplayed. You cannot be an atheist and Sufi muslim.

FYI, If you regard talibaboons as terrorists, Sufis have largest number of terrorists Jihadis, both in absolute and per capita terms.

 

[Star Wars]

This is a good discussion. I want to go beyond cow and want to tell that there was no concept of vegetarianism in ancient Hinduism.

Show me a single holy Hindu scripture where vegetarianism is pampered and which is written before Buddhism and Jainism came. I am sure you will find none. But I can give you several instances where Lord Rama, Krishna , Sita enjoyed meat of various animals.

The concept of vegetarianism in India is an influence of Buddhism and Jainism. It has no link with ancient Hinduism. I am not in favour of vegetarian and non-vegetarian food. I am only telling that there was no link with Hinduism and veg food. If you do not like non veg don't eat but do not link it with Hinduism and do not get false satisfaction thinking that that you are abiding by any directive of God written in Vedas.

It is mentioned in Manu Smruti, the law book of Hindus, in chapter 5 verse 30

"The eater who eats the flesh of those to be eaten does nothing bad, even if he does it day after day, for God himself created some to be eaten and some to be eater."

48. Meat can never be obtained without injury to living creatures, and injury to sentient beings is detrimental to (the attainment of) heavenly bliss; let him therefore shun (the use of) meat.

49. Having well considered the (disgusting) origin of flesh and the (cruelty of) fettering and slaying corporeal beings, let him entirely abstain from eating flesh.

50. He who, disregarding the rule (given above), does not eat meat like a Pisaka, becomes dear to men, and will not be tormented by diseases.

51. He who permits (the slaughter of an animal), he who cuts it up, he who kills it, he who buys or sells (meat), he who cooks it, he who serves it up, and he who eats it, (must all be considered as) the slayers (of the animal).

52. There is no greater sinner than that (man) who, though not worshipping the gods or the manes, seeks to increase (the bulk of) his own flesh by the flesh of other (beings).

53. He who during a hundred years annually offers a horse-sacrifice, and he who entirely abstains from meat, obtain the same reward for their meritorious (conduct).

 

[Biplab Bijay]

Not my mistake that you hav'nt been paying attention, neither does name calling win you an argument

Hmm. I know. I know.

 

[Black Mamba1]

It is mentioned in Manu Smruti, the law book of Hindus, in chapter 5 verse 30

"The eater who eats the flesh of those to be eaten does nothing bad, even if he does it day after day, for God himself created some to be eaten and some to be eater."

48. Meat can never be obtained without injury to living creatures, and injury to sentient beings is detrimental to (the attainment of) heavenly bliss; let him therefore shun (the use of) meat.

49. Having well considered the (disgusting) origin of flesh and the (cruelty of) fettering and slaying corporeal beings, let him entirely abstain from eating flesh.

50. He who, disregarding the rule (given above), does not eat meat like a Pisaka, becomes dear to men, and will not be tormented by diseases.

51. He who permits (the slaughter of an animal), he who cuts it up, he who kills it, he who buys or sells (meat), he who cooks it, he who serves it up, and he who eats it, (must all be considered as) the slayers (of the animal).

52. There is no greater sinner than that (man) who, though not worshipping the gods or the manes, seeks to increase (the bulk of) his own flesh by the flesh of other (beings).

53. He who during a hundred years annually offers a horse-sacrifice, and he who entirely abstains from meat, obtain the same reward for their meritorious (conduct).

ManuSmriti is a post Buddhism and post Jainism scripture. "It is attributed to the legendary first man and lawgiver, Manu. In its present form, it dates from the 1st century BCE." ( Reference http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/363055/Manu-smriti). Buddha born in between 4th to 6th century BCE

" 52. There is no greater sinner than that (man) who, though not worshipping the gods or the manes, seeks to increase (the bulk of) his own flesh by the flesh of other (beings)." -- If this is true then-

a. Lord Rama is a Sinner. He ate animal meats in many place
b. Lord Kirishna is also a Sinner for same reason.
c. "Ashamedha" act is also a Sin act

"The Ashvamedha, the highest expression of royal authority, is a soma sacrifice and incorporates other important sacrifices. The Ashvamedha is intended to secure prosperity for the kingdom and its subjects. It is a bloody sacrifice in which the domestic animals are killed and non-domestic animals are set free. It ends with a further sacrifice of twenty one cows. Gifts are then given to the officers, culminating in the gift to the priests of the four wives of the king or their attendants." It is directed in the slokas that which part of that sacrificed horse should be eaten by which queen.
Please show me a Hindu scripture written before Buddhism/Jainism came into existence eg Vedas, Ramayana, Mahabharata, Gita etc where vegetarianism was considered as a holy act.