Choose Life - Go Vegan!

[Vinayaka]

Maybe I'll start a second thread on this scripture. Editted ... it's been done. http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/hinduism-dir/152002-human-law-law-manu.html

 

[ratikala]

no side steping vinayaka ji

we are discussing the laws of manu relating to food , what is eatable and what is not !

we are not entering into a general discussion on the laws of manu ,

we can do that later :namaste


you take issue with , .....53 , 42 , 27 etc

ok lets look a them please explain where you take issue ?

 

[Vinayaka]

They all deal with animal sacrifice, which I'm opposed to. 53 suggests sacrificing a horse gets the same benefit as being a vegetarian. Why then practice vegetarianism? Why not just go slaughter a poor horse, and offer it to a temple that will accept it, if you can find one these days? Or better yet, do both?


Most of them I do agree with, BTW.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram :namaste

may we please clarify these points which are being missunderstood , ... any one studying the vedas will have come across reference and explanation of asvamedha

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).

Asvamedha ; horse sacrifice is an ancient vedic ritual performed by kings ....(providing the minds of those performing the ritual are completely pure , a horse sacrificed in this way is imidiately liberated)
, although due to the impurity of our minds it is not considered suitable for this age .

but verse 53 explains clearly that ... he who entirely abstains from meat, obtain the same reward for their meritorious (conduct).

this abstainance can be performed by anyone in any age , therfore is most wonderfull as any one practicing it can atain liberation . .



42. A twice-born man who, knowing the true meaning of the Veda, slays an animal for these purposes, causes both himself and the animal to enter a most blessed state.

as explained above if the sacrifice is carried out with entire purity of mind both the performer of the sacrifice and the animal gain liberation .

but only those with entirely pure motivation may perform this . the laws of manu clearly state that we have the alternative of abstinance which is equaly effective :namaste



27. One may eat meat when it has been sprinkled with water, while Mantras were recited, when Brahmanas desire (one's doing it), when one is engaged (in the performance of a rite) according to the law, and when one's life is in danger.

when such an offering has been perfectly performed (which is rare to nonexistant in this age) then and only then may one partake of that which has been offered , .....or when ones life is in danger , which means when there is no other source of food , which again is a very rare occurance .

 

[ratikala]

They all deal with animal sacrifice, which I'm opposed to. 53 suggests sacrificing a horse gets the same benefit as being a vegetarian. Why then practice vegetarianism? Why not just go slaughter a poor horse, and offer it to a temple that will accept it, if you can find one these days? Or better yet, do both?

you are not an ancient king in the house of the Ikshvaku dynasty .

so you just stick to being vegetarian

Most of them I do agree with, BTW.

Oh good there is hope
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikshvaku_dynasty

 

[ohhcuppycakee]

I am Muslim and I am vegan.

 

[Vinayaka]

namaskaram :namaste

may we please clarify these points which are being missunderstood , ... any one studying the vedas will have come across reference and explanation of asvamedha

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).

Asvamedha ; horse sacrifice is an ancient vedic ritual performed by kings ....(providing the minds of those performing the ritual are completely pure , a horse sacrificed in this way is imidiately liberated)
, although due to the impurity of our minds it is not considered suitable for this age .

but verse 53 explains clearly that ... he who entirely abstains from meat, obtain the same reward for their meritorious (conduct).

this abstainance can be performed by anyone in any age , therfore is most wonderfull as any one practicing it can atain liberation . .



42. A twice-born man who, knowing the true meaning of the Veda, slays an animal for these purposes, causes both himself and the animal to enter a most blessed state.

as explained above if the sacrifice is carried out with entire purity of mind both the performer of the sacrifice and the animal gain liberation .

but only those with entirely pure motivation may perform this . the laws of manu clearly state that we have the alternative of abstinance which is equaly effective :namaste



27. One may eat meat when it has been sprinkled with water, while Mantras were recited, when Brahmanas desire (one's doing it), when one is engaged (in the performance of a rite) according to the law, and when one's life is in danger.

when such an offering has been perfectly performed (which is rare to nonexistant in this age) then and only then may one partake of that which has been offered , .....or when ones life is in danger , which means when there is no other source of food , which again is a very rare occurance .

All this was not unknown to me, but thank you anyway. Any book of law is probably accurate for the age it was written in. But since now is now, and then was then, I don't like the idea of anyone using the laws that were meant for a different time, using them today. There was a time when slavery was legal, etc. and I shudder to think how our world would be if it can't evolve, and be current. Imagining a horse sacrifice, whether by king or sanctioned, these days is well ... not imaginable by me.

But with that, I'm out. There is no further point to nitpicking as we're both vegetarians anyway.

 

[ratikala]

All this was not unknown to me, but thank you anyway. Any book of law is probably accurate for the age it was written in. But since now is now, and then was then, I don't like the idea of anyone using the laws that were meant for a different time, using them today. There was a time when slavery was legal, etc. and I shudder to think how our world would be if it can't evolve, and be current. Imagining a horse sacrifice, whether by king or sanctioned, these days is well ... not imaginable by me.

But with that, I'm out. There is no further point to nitpicking as we're both vegetarians anyway.

Rta dosent change

 

[ratikala]

I am Muslim and I am vegan.

jai jai :namaste

and also you quote the gita , ...

"The humble sage, by virtue of true knowledge, sees with equal vision a learned and gentle brahmana, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater [outcaste]."
- Bhagavad Gita 5:18

jai jai :namaste and welcome :namaste

 

[Knight of Albion]

I am Muslim and I am vegan.

Good for you. Respect to you for that.

I am vegan too.

 

[Poeticus]

The reviewers show a westerner's disdain for Hinduism as well as the undue importance put upon Manu.

Are you talking about how the majority of the reviewers disagreed with the unnecessary importance Doniger applied to the LOM?

 

[Knight of Albion]

Thank you for posting the full transcript, dear Ratikala.

I was 'introduced' to the Laws of Manu in the book 'The Extended Circle'. The editor has selected only the most compassionate verses for inclusion. I notice that there are some verses 27, 42 and 53 - as Vinayaka has already highlighted - that contradict the compassionate ones...

Whilst I accept differing cultural views and traditions, I personally can never accept the notion of animal sacrifice. I believe animals have souls. I believe in reverence for all creation. I believe in compassion. I believe in the Law of Love.
I also believe that what the Divine requires is not a blood sacrifice, but a love sacrifice (i.e. Service).

 

[illykitty]

I am Muslim and I am vegan.

That's great, I can only manage being a wannabe vegetarian. (I slip up with seafood and fish.) I'd love to be vegan someday as I see it being the ideal for me to pursue, pure love and ahimsa! :hug:

 

[Knight of Albion]

namaskaram :namaste

may we please clarify these points which are being missunderstood , ... any one studying the vedas will have come across reference and explanation of asvamedha

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).

Asvamedha ; horse sacrifice is an ancient vedic ritual performed by kings ....(providing the minds of those performing the ritual are completely pure , a horse sacrificed in this way is imidiately liberated)
, although due to the impurity of our minds it is not considered suitable for this age .


42. A twice-born man who, knowing the true meaning of the Veda, slays an animal for these purposes, causes both himself and the animal to enter a most blessed state.

as explained above if the sacrifice is carried out with entire purity of mind both the performer of the sacrifice and the animal gain liberation .

(Not seeking to argue, just making observation)

If one had a truly pure heart, if one was truly spiritual, would one want to hurt or kill anything?

What sort of a god would it be who delighted in killing and bloodshed?

The all-important thing is motive. All spiritual acts should be selfless and performed with a pure heart, or they are meaningless.

The king may be acting earnestly according to his beliefs, but no-one has asked the horse!

 

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

I think an unbiased, neutral, and frank opinion about this topic is needed at this point of time.

Well.."BORING"

I take this back. Thanks guys for juicing up the subject. Got all my attentions now!

## and best wishes to "Hindu Explorers" wanting to make Devas into "erstwhile sages" or rigthing Manu who has been wronged and again wronged..


Exploring Hinduism?
Really?
Really??

 

[ratikala]

dear knight of albion ... namaskaram :namaste

(Not seeking to argue, just making observation)

thank you your observations are both understandable and welcome , may I please make a coment before I procede , this is not an easy principle to explain and is one often missconstrued .
please bear in mind that I will give a vaisnava perspective , (other hindu denominations may choose to dissagree as these are not points considered relevant within their traditions and also that some do not hold such strict regulations regarding diet )

If one had a truly pure heart, if one was truly spiritual, would one want to hurt or kill anything?

no , no pure being would , and it would be incorrect for anyone to do so unless there was a valid reason .

any one familiar with the bhagavad gita will understand that it is a discourse between sri krsna and his deciple /friend the kashatriya prince arjuna , arjuna is perplexed , being a rightious person he canot understand the need that he should go to war with his own kinsman , arjuna understands the principle of duty and is torn between fulfilling that duty and bringing about the death of his contemporaries and relatives , the entire discourse explains ones own relationship with the supreme and explains the process of life and death liberation and rebirth .

it takes eighteen chapters to explain that this life is temporary and to an extent illusuory and that we are eternal beings whos eventual destination is to be reunited with god , .....that we are part and parcel of god but estranged by ignorance of our constitutional position .

durring this discourse sri krsna explains that allthough the body may be killed our soul is eternal , and allthough the boddy may be killed the soul caanot be destroyed . .....this does not justify needless killing but it puts death into a fresh perspective .

What sort of a god would it be who delighted in killing and bloodshed?

there is no delight in death , only death where death is appropriate . where it is a part of the playing out of karma (a string of actions and inescapable reactions)

The all-important thing is motive. All spiritual acts should be selfless and performed with a pure heart, or they are meaningless.

where ever killing occurs or is needfull , it is done without any personal motive , it is a selfless action commited as an act of duty .

The king may be acting earnestly according to his beliefs, but no-one has asked the horse!

although it may be hard to understand , .... and I am nort advocating asvamedha , (humanity in this yuga is too impure for such sacrifice and it is deemed un appropriate for this age) , ...however if a horse were correctly sacrificed in such a way it would attain imidiate libberation from future birth , which is the ultimate goal for all beings .

in this age of kali as I have allready quoted from the laws of manu complete abstinance is prescribed .

and allthough most hindu are vegetarian some have not noticed that the dairy industry in its attempt to run as a comercial enterprise breaks one important principle (law) .........8. not to take ''The milk of a cow (or other female animal) within ten days after her calving, that of camels, of one-hoofed animals, of sheep, of a cow in heat, or of one that has no calf with her,''

not only does the dairy industry take the calf from the mother it sends at least 50% to slaughter

so in my eyes and in my heart , the laws of manu where it relates to diet are still perfectly valid . and it continues to amaze me how people turn a blind eye to that which they do not want to consider .
a wise person does not take these laws so litteraly but applies them to the prevailing situation

thus when I learnt the extent of the abuse within the dairy industry I turned strictly vegan.

 

[ratikala]

All this was not unknown to me, but thank you anyway.

yes of course you know this , so why is verse 53 , 42, 27 ... etc not clear to you?

Any book of law is probably accurate for the age it was written in. But since now is now, and then was then, I don't like the idea of anyone using the laws that were meant for a different time, using them today.

please read carefully and apply with aplication applicable to the situation that is prevelant today .

There was a time when slavery was legal, etc. and I shudder to think how our world would be if it can't evolve, and be current. Imagining a horse sacrifice, whether by king or sanctioned, these days is well ... not imaginable by me.

now you are muddying the waters by bringing in other peoples laws

But with that, I'm out. There is no further point to nitpicking as we're both vegetarians anyway.

this is not nitpicking on my behalf it is a discussion :namaste

you are vegetarian , I am vegan .....'pure vegan' no onoins , no garlic , nothing grown in impure places.... just as manu advises

 

[Jainarayan]

now you are muddying the waters by bringing in other peoples laws

It doesn't matter whose law it is. There is no separate morality for African-American who were slaves and Hindus. There is no separation of Sanātana Dharma based on country of origin. It applies to all sentient creatures. I see a lot of cherry-picking from the LOM. I challenge and dare anyone to agree that these are to be followed today:

“In childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, and when her lord is dead, to her sons; a woman must never be independent.”

“A father sins unless he marries his daughter off when she reaches puberty.”

“Women do not care for beauty, nor is their attention fixed on age; they give themselves to the handsome as well as to the ugly just for the fact that he is a man.”

“A husband should be worshiped as a God.”

“Even in the home nothing should be done by a child, a young or even an old wife (woman) independently.”

“A wife, a son, and a slave, these three are declared to have no property. The wealth which they earn is acquired for him to whom they belong.”

“Women, shudra (or sudra, lowest of four castes), dog and crow embody untruth, sin and darkness.”

“Women must particularly be guarded against evil inclinations, however trifling they may appear to be; for, if they are not guarded, they will bring sorrow on both the families. Considering it the highest duty of all castes, even wealthy husbands must strive to guard their wives....lest the seed of others be sown on your soil.”

“It is the nature of women to seduce men in this world, for that reason the wise never remain unguarded in the company of female.”

“A woman should not go to a meeting place; and they should not dance like the young, but sit at their proper places.”

“This is the first law...A wife cannot be dismissed from the marriage by a slave, separation or abdication.”

“A man can leave a barren woman after eight years and one who only gives birth to daughters.”

“A virtuous wife who after the death of her husband constantly remains chaste, reaches heaven, though she have no son, just like those chaste men.”

&#8220;If a woman should happen to merely to overhear recitations of Vedic mantras by chance, hot molten glass should be poured into her ears.&#8221; <-- this one is a real humdinger! Ladies... you are banned from temple!

 

[Knight of Albion]

dear knight of albion ... namaskaram :namaste

thank you your observations are both understandable and welcome , may I please make a coment before I procede , this is not an easy principle to explain and is one often missconstrued .
please bear in mind that I will give a vaisnava perspective , (other hindu denominations may choose to dissagree as these are not points considered relevant within their traditions and also that some do not hold such strict regulations regarding diet )


no , no pure being would , and it would be incorrect for anyone to do so unless there was a valid reason .

any one familiar with the bhagavad gita will understand that it is a discourse between sri krsna and his deciple /friend the kashatriya prince arjuna , arjuna is perplexed , being a rightious person he canot understand the need that he should go to war with his own kinsman , arjuna understands the principle of duty and is torn between fulfilling that duty and bringing about the death of his contemporaries and relatives , the entire discourse explains ones own relationship with the supreme and explains the process of life and death liberation and rebirth .

it takes eighteen chapters to explain that this life is temporary and to an extent illusuory and that we are eternal beings whos eventual destination is to be reunited with god , .....that we are part and parcel of god but estranged by ignorance of our constitutional position .

durring this discourse sri krsna explains that allthough the body may be killed our soul is eternal , and allthough the boddy may be killed the soul caanot be destroyed . .....this does not justify needless killing but it puts death into a fresh perspective .


there is no delight in death , only death where death is appropriate . where it is a part of the playing out of karma (a string of actions and inescapable reactions)

where ever killing occurs or is needfull , it is done without any personal motive , it is a selfless action commited as an act of duty .



although it may be hard to understand , .... and I am nort advocating asvamedha , (humanity in this yuga is too impure for such sacrifice and it is deemed un appropriate for this age) , ...however if a horse were correctly sacrificed in such a way it would attain imidiate libberation from future birth , which is the ultimate goal for all beings .

in this age of kali as I have allready quoted from the laws of manu complete abstinance is prescribed .

and allthough most hindu are vegetarian some have not noticed that the dairy industry in its attempt to run as a comercial enterprise breaks one important principle (law) .........8. not to take ''The milk of a cow (or other female animal) within ten days after her calving, that of camels, of one-hoofed animals, of sheep, of a cow in heat, or of one that has no calf with her,''

not only does the dairy industry take the calf from the mother it sends at least 50% to slaughter

so in my eyes and in my heart , the laws of manu where it relates to diet are still perfectly valid . and it continues to amaze me how people turn a blind eye to that which they do not want to consider .
a wise person does not take these laws so litteraly but applies them to the prevailing situation

thus when I learnt the extent of the abuse within the dairy industry I turned strictly vegan.

Beautifully put. You have my respect, my sister.

 

[Jainarayan]

I am wondering... does veganism apply to not taking light prasad at aarati, or as offered by the priest? The lamp contains ghee. Does one not take food prasad that has been made with yogurt or milk? Isn't it disrespectful to refuse food blessed by God? And because commercial milk and honey are used in abhishekams, does a vegan avoid attending them and taking prasad? I am most confused.