Meat eaters and Shiva

[SomeRandom]

Hi. Sorry if this topic was discussed already but I saw something recently that confused me.

I grew up Hindu and I was always taught to abstain from meat on days when I was to go to temple or on religious holy days (Diwali etc.)

However I recently saw a TV Show on Ma's Indian Satellite TV thing called Mahedev (I think, my Hindi is awful.) it is said to be based directly on Shiva Scriptures, though as we are not Shivites (sp?) my Ma and me are not really familiar with them. Anyway on the show Lord Shiva was testing Mata Parvati, to ensure she is pure for marriage. She is set the task of performing a Puja in his honour. Circumstances happen and Lord Shiva disguises himself as a sage and with other sages stars to perform a puja. He picks up meat and Parvati chides him. However the disguised Shiva responds by saying that God needs a healthy strong body as well and the non meat rule was man made, the Shiva shrine accepts his meat and does not accept Parvatis offering of flowers. She neither passes nor fails but Shiva is still impressed with her dedication (phew!)
I know that Thininan (sp?) was a warrior and due to his extreme devotion Lord Shiva accepted meat from him. But is this like a thing? Is it man made or Holy to abstain from meat when worshipping Lord Shiva?

 

[Vinayaka]

This story and many like it, although rare and disputable, are used to justify meat eating. Personally, I think it has a lot more to do with someone addicted to meat finding some sort of justification for his (deplorable?) behaviour. I'll stick with what Tiruvalluvar said, thank you. He lived amongst the ancient Saivites, and was most likely one himself.

Abstaining from Eating Meat - Thirukural

Hitler also used the Bhagavad Gita to justify his ideas about war and genocide. Does that make Hitler right?

But if you want to eat meat, go for it. Nobody can stop you.

 

[SomeRandom]

Well I do eat meat (not addicted to it though) I was just curious as to the validity of the story in question. I know in offering to Mata Kali, a goat is often brought to her alter and killed (hopefully humanely geez.) I remember attending such an event in Fiji when I was a little one. Just unfamiliar with Lord Shiva is all.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes it's a story, and it's out there, in the Puranas. But many Hindus, including me, don't view the Puranas in the highest light, in part because of all the anthropomorphising going on. When I think of Shiva, it's either an image of Nataraja, or the peace and sannidhya I get from sitting in front of an ancient lingam. I rarely, if ever, think of Shiva and Parvati as some sort of people like Gods. Gods are not just people with powers.

So all these stories are there. Many of the Saiva Saint (Nayanar) stories are worse. Whether or not they are considered worthy of merit or study is another one of those things best left to the individuals studying them. So again, it's your decision whether or not to eat meat.

 

[ShivaFan]

There are meat eaters out there, even in the most veg based sects, but my observation is Saivas have as many if not more vegetarians than Vaishnavs. Generallly it would be Shaktas the most in non-veg.

There is some confusion here, Shiva sometimes has to "stop" emanations of Parvati from drinking the blood and killing ALL the demons. Why? Because sometimes, some demons are His friend and He is Sadashiva and doesn't necessarily want every lunatic dead since He likes some lunatics too. Even I, a human, like some bad characters and lunatics who have been hopalongs in some fantastic Hindu adventures. So too, some demons have a role (sooner or later, and actually not all are "that bad" if you know what I mean - like the low class gun slinger who steals the church money but in the end you sort of love him when he saves the hero in the end).

So it's complicated. But think about it, is not Garuda a GREAT devotee of Vishnu?

BUT He eats snakes! A meat eater.

So.... depends.

But just because Garuda eats snakes, should YOU eat snakes?

And would Garuda fly down and pluck on off those snakes off of Shiva's neck and say "hey, I was hungry?" NO, of course not.

And what about those snakes? Don't they eat mice? Yes. But would one of Shiva's eat Ganesha's rat? No.

Anyway, I heard Shiva never offered Parvati actual meat, it was a dried bird's nest, the kind you find on rock cliffs. That's a fact. But this got translated into and then corrupted into "meat" by some bad Brahmins, which I guess you could say it is, but it is actually bird spit.

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

I don't know if you can look for answers about whether it is okay to eat meat from a story like that. These are the kinds of decisions that have to be considered on an individual basis.

The question you should ask, therefore, isn't, "Does this story make it okay to eat meat?". (Nothing outside you can give you permission or excuse you from your behavior. We are all responsible for the choices we make) How many stories of Shiva eating/accepting meat would it take to "make it okay"? One? Five? A dozen? The Question should be, "Why am I so interested in getting "permission" to do something?" Do you feel it is wrong, but feel tied to the habit and are looking for an easy way to justify what you do? Are you trying to understand the conflicting messages in scripture?

All scriptures have conflicting messages. This is probably the product of thousands of years of different people sticking their noses into it periodically and making adjustments to suit their ideals. That is why (IMHO) you can't rely on scripture alone. You have to go inward. All the answers lie there anyway. Scripture is nice as a guidepost - a place to get started. But at the end of the day you are responsible for you.

As someone who still eats some meat (Chicken and fish) I am aware of the inherent hypocrisy of avoiding Beef and other mammals for moral reasons. I also accept my flaws and humanity and I know I have a long way to go. Knowing that keeps me from being paralyzed by my flaws. It allows me to continue to improve, albeit slowly, over time, rather than languish in my mistakes.

If you do not feel eating meat is wrong, then forcing yourself not to eat it will only confuse and frustrate you. You can't accept something on a deeper level until you are ready to. Educate yourself, yes, but do not fool yourself into thinking you can believe something that you don't actually feel is true at a deep level. Progress will come with time.

 

[Chakra]

Shiva Purana is not authoritative and most of the stories in that Purana are not accurate representations of what happened.

 

[Poeticus]

I've wanted to say this for a long time, and I acknowledge that I risk being ostracized...but, oh well:

Okay, okay. I get it. Vegetarianism is the greatest freakin' thing on the planet. Even better than the galaxies ruled by Cat Overlords, especially the one ruled by Meow Prime. Vegetarianism blows non-vegetarianism out of the water. It's awesome and great and wonderful. It's the best thing ever. It's like better than spring and early fall. It's greater than the first snowfall of the year. But, for the love of the gods, grow strong! Be fit! Be smart and studious! Study and study! Read and workout, and be healthy and strong! I know there are veggie diets out there, therefore utilize them. Pass this on to your children, other family members, and friends. Grow the backbone that the gods of old admire and cherish. But, for all that is bloody holy, do not ever become a hippie! There. Do we have terms? Okay? Cool? Sweet. Gracias and thank you. ​

 

[Chakra]

I've wanted to say this for a long time, and I acknowledge that I risk being ostracized...but, oh well:

Okay, okay. I get it. Vegetarianism is the greatest freakin' thing on the planet. Even better than the galaxies ruled by Cat Overlords, especially the one ruled by Meow Prime. Vegetarianism blows non-vegetarianism out of the water. It's awesome and great and wonderful. It's the best thing ever. It's like better than spring and early fall. It's greater than the first snowfall of the year. ​

Damn right.

 

[Kalibhakta]

My goddess drinks and eats meat. Shiva is found of Bhang himself. I cannot strongly say that they are to be banned if it what she and he do. I know this is an extreme minority view here and I would never, ever dare to argue that is better then any other view.

That being said. What one can do, and what one should do, are two different things.

All life is sacred, but all food is waisted if it is not dedicated to God. Iman Ali, who did not ban meat, said you should not let your stomach be a graveyard for animals, and the earlier Caliphs banned eating meat on consecutive days because it was a disgusting, wasteful extravagant thing.

Please, please, please forgive me.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Is it man made or Holy to abstain from meat when worshiping Lord Shiva?

All such rules are man-made. In our community we used meat in rituals for Shiva (Shivaratri) as well as Shakti (Navaratri). Though under the influence of Vaishnavas, these practices are being abandoned, though most in our community are still non-vegetarians (Kashmiri brahmins).

Shiva Purana is not authoritative and most of the stories in that Purana are not accurate representations of what happened.

Now, now, Axlyz! That is not fair.

 

[Shantanu]

Hi. Sorry if this topic was discussed already but I saw something recently that confused me.

I grew up Hindu and I was always taught to abstain from meat on days when I was to go to temple or on religious holy days (Diwali etc.)

However I recently saw a TV Show on Ma's Indian Satellite TV thing called Mahedev (I think, my Hindi is awful.) it is said to be based directly on Shiva Scriptures, though as we are not Shivites (sp?) my Ma and me are not really familiar with them. Anyway on the show Lord Shiva was testing Mata Parvati, to ensure she is pure for marriage. She is set the task of performing a Puja in his honour. Circumstances happen and Lord Shiva disguises himself as a sage and with other sages stars to perform a puja. He picks up meat and Parvati chides him. However the disguised Shiva responds by saying that God needs a healthy strong body as well and the non meat rule was man made, the Shiva shrine accepts his meat and does not accept Parvatis offering of flowers. She neither passes nor fails but Shiva is still impressed with her dedication (phew!)
I know that Thininan (sp?) was a warrior and due to his extreme devotion Lord Shiva accepted meat from him. But is this like a thing? Is it man made or Holy to abstain from meat when worshipping Lord Shiva?

Veganism and its lesser form of vegetarianism is a holy sacrifice that we make to live harmoniously with Nature, which I feel sure is what pleases God. It is a sattvic way of living. But it is not always possible to do so when trying to live dharmically. One might be forced in some circumstances to consume animal products. And dharma is more important than any rules and regulations on specific bits of ones conduct.

When one eats meat, one must do so without attachment that it is being relished for taste or for extremely fit body. One treats eating is just the means for survival. We give up our sensual pleasures in the process of living dharmically instead. Emotions and desires go out of the window. Dharma is attained by balancing all aspects of living when conflicting issues arise to decide the righteous path forward in terms of fulfilling one's duties and responsibilities. This is the process of determining dharma through the truth path. If one is forced to eat animal products because without it one might starve or disrupt some other aspect of living, like doing ones duties to ones family, one has to go through the process of selecting animal products that are more environmentally sustainable, such as consuming honey, milk, eggs, fish, chicken, mutton, beef in decreasing order of environmental sustainability (more harmful to Nature), and therefore in decreasing order of dharma given that ahimsa is the highest dharma. Doing the right thing in fulfilling ones dharma is all one can do and we leave the rest to God to decide whether one has lived ethically.

This basis for dharma means that one is not banning things in ones life just to please God so as to get his blessing, one is simply doing the best that one can in the circumstances that one finds oneself in ones personal life. This kind of thinking assumes that God has never given any kind of code of conduct on the consumption of livestock products which if not followed will lead to eternal damnation. One decides for oneself if one is living harmoniously with Nature. We make our own rules. That rule can change from day to day in the situations that we find ourselves. It determines the truth path to dharma.

 

[Poeticus]

A tangential post, I admit, but still relevant:

The premise of this article is that since Hindus ate beef in the ancient days, they shouldn't be so squeamish, so to speak, about eating it now.

The premise is a vivid example of a strawman argument. Since Hindus ate beef during the "Vedic" days (keep in mind that's anywhere from 1500 BCE - 700 BCE, give or take), they shouldn't be so concerned about the consumption of beef by both Hindus and non-Hindus in India today (2015 CE) since they had "no beef" with eating beef. This is akin to saying that since women who were allegedly witches in Europe were burned alive, people should not be upset or whathaveyou if women today are burned alive for being witches. The analogy is different, but the logic is still the same. This strawman argument, clearly representative of leftist arbitrary selectivism of Indian "intellectuals", can be easily dismantled by the following three points (and I urge all conscious Hindus to study them, even improve upon them, and use them in future argumentative endeavors):

1. There is no proof that "Vedic religion" was a widespread, mainstream reality. It was largely confined to a certain section of a pluralistic society that guarded its ways and secrets jealously. To use, as many often do, the shrirgvedam as representative of mainstream cultural trends, uprooting it from its inherent ties to the rest of the Vedas as if it were a separate scriptural injunction of sorts, is [falsely] equivocating. Point one: Therefore, the affirmation that "Hindus ate beef during the 'Vedic' days" is incorrect, not to mention misleading.

2. The shrirgvedam, itself, has a whole sukta, ref: R.V.10.87, dedicated to lambasting the consumers of the female cow. This sukta is a scathing condemnation of the consumers of the milk-giving cow, calling the consumers not only Yatudhana-s but detailing how the God Savitur personally brings ruin upon those that eat its flesh. Point two: Therefore, even though various bovinae specimen may have, purportedly, been consumed by only a select few, since "Vedic religion" was not a monolithic, mainstream socio-religious and socio-cultural entity, the milk-giving cow (the term, cow, itself refers to milch-kine; and when Indian Hindus use the term "gau", or even "gomata", the feminine nature of the term is self-evident and clearly attests to the milk-giving cow; female variant of the bovinae) was clearly off limits.

3. Culture is, by its very nature, dynamic. Point three: Therefore, to utilize a speculated reality of 1500 BCE to downplay modern importance of bovinae amongst Hindus is to set aside the importance of the reality of cultural change. Over the centuries, importance of various things alter and change---this is a truism. Not only did the cow grow in importance over the centuries, but bovine in general. And the consumption of bovinae became not only taboo but also disfavored by most Hindus of numerous backgrounds (and the low-caste farming communities, to whom I belong, staunchly resisted the consumption of beef in general, even though we have historically been poor SOBs) over time. To use speculated and conjectured realities in order to downplay the current socio-cultural importance of something is to deny the validity of this truth (not to mention that modern cultural realities are extremely removed from those of 1500 BCE---a mere hundred years difference is more than enough to acknowledge cultural fluidity and change). ​

 

[Kalibhakta]

Is it unfair to say that "The Vedics did this, so the Hindus should too" is like "The Jews did this, so should the Christians as well" The age of the Vedas, the age of the Upanishads, the age of Puranas, the age of Tantras and the modern age of Bhakti...are all very different stages and very different world views. Is this a fair statement?

 

[Vinayaka]

Shiva is found of Bhang himself.

Not the Shiva I know.

 

[Kalibhakta]

Vinayaka, if I am mistaken, may I ask for a correction? If it is not true, then why is it said?

This is not a hostile line of questioning. I am honestly curious.

 

[Vinayaka]

It's the Puranic version of Shiva, which isn't mine. Only an anthropomorphized God could smoke. I'm a Saiva Siddhantin, and follow the Siva of the South, the God of the Saivite Tamils, most often represented by Nataraja, and the lingam. There is no history or stories of that Siva and bhang. This is entirely a North Indian Puranic story.

A journalist at the kumbh mela observed this about bhang use by sadhus. "Each time a sadhu lights up, 20 western photographers gather around to take his picture." (To get the 'real' picture, I presume. In more accurate terms sensationalism sells.) I'm saddened at this connection, actually. It's hard to dispel, as people who are pro-marijuana like to use it as a 'reason' to get stoned.

Smoky lungs, smoky mind. Clear lungs, clear mind.

But it's like meat. If you want to eat meat, go for it. Nobody is stopping you. If you want to get stoned, by all means find reasons to defend it. Go ahead. Nobody is stopping you. But in the halls of Chidambaram, the 5 elemental temples, the great sanctums at Rameswaram, Tanjore, and Madurai, you won't smell it, or see it portrayed.

Does this help? I do realise it's there ... just not in this devotee's version. And that's what I meant.

 

[Kalibhakta]

I respect you a lot, Vinayaka. I never want to ever assume anything about you or what you believe. I would never hope to offend you or anyone here. I have grown to love this place, and I would never impose my belief on anyone.

 

[Vinayaka]

Not a problem. This thread may help. We have discussed it at length. Shiva and Cannabis | ReligiousForums.com

 

[Kalibhakta]

That was an interesting read.

So many people see Left Hand Tantra and say "Oh, goodies for me!" The point of Left hand Tantra is to use what is binding to free yourself and unless you have a very special mindset it will end up destroying you. It is a path best left alone unless you are absolutely ready and have a proper guru. For every Aghori, there are a hundred broken people by the side of the road.