prohibition of eating beef in hinduism

[ronki23]

What do you mean by pure? Is any race pure? Is any philosophy pure? Are any Gods pure? The Gods before Moses influenced Judaism. Judaism and Paganism influenced Christianity, Judaism and Christianity influenced Islam. Talking of 'pure' is only ego. In case of Hinduism, Aryans influenced it, Buddhism and Jainism influenced it and they were in turn influenced by Hinduism. So we have Indra as well as Shiva. All Gods and Goddesses start as local deities.

Do you not get 'Vedic only' Hinduism?

Because you say the Vedas do not talk about Vishnu,Brahma,Shiva or RamaKrishna

And you and others say Vedas prohibit meat

Yet the Aryan invasion (though this has been discredited) tells us of how aryan Hindus ate beef, and Mahabharat and Ramayan were introduced

And Buddhists,Jains and Sikhs say they are not hindus as they don't consider the Vedas

And inEast Asia, which is Buddhist, they eat all meats!!!

 

[Sb1995]

So do you also find scripture to back up this lifestyle, or is it more just because that's the way you were raised?

Meat eating and frequent Gurdwara visits was how I was raised being half Punjabi so Sikhism plays a big role in my moms side of the family. I'd say majority of north Indian's also eat meat (except beef). Regarding Buddha, I consider him an incarnation of Vishnu

 

[Aupmanyav]

Do you not get 'Vedic only' Hinduism? Because you say the Vedas do not talk about Vishnu, Brahma, Shiva or Rama/Krishna. And you and others say Vedas prohibit meat.

I have not come across 'Vedic only' Hinduism. Vishnu initially was a Vedic God; Brahma, Shiva, Rama and Krishna do not find mention in Vedas. I never said Vedas prohibited meat. Not responsible for others who say so.

Yes eating beef is not allowed in Hinduism.

I think there are Hindus who traditionally partake beef. Though I do not exactly know who among the one billion in India. Exceptions are always there.

 

[Vinayaka]

I know Hindus who eat beef, but their actions around the circumstance really indicate a great sense of guilt about it. The guilt might be worse than the meat. It's sort of like teenage rebellion over an entire adult lifetime.

 

[Kalidas]

I know Hindus who eat beef, but their actions around the circumstance really indicate a great sense of guilt about it. The guilt might be worse than the meat. It's sort of like teenage rebellion over an entire adult lifetime.

The man who introduced Hinduism to me ate Beef (not sure if he still does anymore or not) his reasoning (and mine for a long while) was that the beef prohibition had more to do with helping feed the population(a living cow feeds more people than a dead one) and less to do with religion.

 

[Jainarayan]

... the beef prohibition had more to do with helping feed the population(a living cow feeds more people than a dead one) and less to do with religion.

Probably true... a live cow or ox (basically an "educated"and castrated bull) is more valuable than a dead one. The cow can give milk as well as pull a plow; the bull can pull a plow or a cart. Plowing and sowing a field will feed more people for longer than a dead bovine will. However, I wonder if there is the taboo on eating the flesh of a bovine that died naturally.

 

[DeviChaaya]

Probably true... a live cow or ox (basically an "educated"and castrated bull) is more valuable than a dead one. The cow can give milk as well as pull a plow; the bull can pull a plow or a cart. Plowing and sowing a field will feed more people forth longer than a dead bovine will. However, I wonder if there is the taboo on eating the flesh of a bovine that died naturally.

Here we must think, Jai. What constitutes 'naturally'? I can naturally die of parasites, bacterial infection, viral infection, prions and cancer. No one dies of old age, we all die from something else and the same Iis true of animals. We do not eat animals that suddenly drop dead for fear of disease and likewise I doubt our Indian brethren would eat the beef of a cow or ox that sickens and dies.

That said, I do believe that the animals sacrificed at the massive Kali temple in Calcutta are eaten afterwards. What a waste of healthy meat otherwise.

Also, male cattle are not nearly so useful as female; one bull can service an entire herd of cattle. Males tend to be considered surplus.

 

[Kalidas]

Here we must think, Jai. What constitutes 'naturally'? I can naturally die of parasites, bacterial infection, viral infection, prions and cancer. No one dies of old age, we all die from something else and the same Iis true of animals. We do not eat animals that suddenly drop dead for fear of disease and likewise I doubt our Indian brethren would eat the beef of a cow or ox that sickens and dies.

That said, I do believe that the animals sacrificed at the massive Kali temple in Calcutta are eaten afterwards. What a waste of healthy meat otherwise.

Also, male cattle are not nearly so useful as female; one bull can service an entire herd of cattle. Males tend to be considered surplus.

What about now that we can actually clean and preserve flesh after death? We have all kind of sanitary ways to stop spread of infection.

For me personally i see no issue with it. the cow is no longer using the body so what harm will it do?

 

[ronki23]

I have not come across 'Vedic only' Hinduism. Vishnu initially was a Vedic God; Brahma, Shiva, Rama and Krishna do not find mention in Vedas. I never said Vedas prohibited meat. Not responsible for others who say so.I think there are Hindus who traditionally partake beef. Though I do not exactly know who among the one billion in India. Exceptions are always there.

I read that the Vedas defines Hinduism and that's how Hinduism differs from the other 'isms' of the East.

I hear that this caste system and beef eating came from Aryans. But what about animal sacrifice? Unless both animal sacrifice and beef eating came together.

I thought that the huge no-no to eating beef is because Krishna is Govinda

 

[Jainarayan]

Here we must think, Jai. What constitutes 'naturally'? I can naturally die of parasites, bacterial infection, viral infection, prions and cancer. No one dies of old age, we all die from something else and the same Iis true of animals. We do not eat animals that suddenly drop dead for fear of disease and likewise I doubt our Indian brethren would eat the beef of a cow or ox that sickens and dies.

Actually we can and do die of old age, as do animals. I'm sure we've all had pets that simply died in their sleep at advanced ages, not to mention human relativse. But the manner of our deaths, barring murder or slaughter, is not my question; I don't know what is done with the remains of a service animal. I read somewhere once that Gandhi (love him or despise him) even said that the remains of mother cow should be put to good use... horns, bones, skin, etc. He didn't address the flesh, however, afaik.

Also, male cattle are not nearly so useful as female; one bull can service an entire herd of cattle. Males tend to be considered surplus.

That's also not entirely true. Males are primarily used as draft animals, yoked in pairs. A small cart or plow might require only one or two animals, but a large cart could require up to 8-10 pairs of animals, almost always males because of their strength.

 

[Vinayaka]

What about now that we can actually clean and preserve flesh after death? We have all kind of sanitary ways to stop spread of infection.

For me personally i see no issue with it. the cow is no longer using the body so what harm will it do?

You're not considering the quality of the food. Dead flesh is tamasic. Have you ever heard the expression, "You are what you eat." ?

 

[Jainarayan]

You're not considering the quality of the food. Dead flesh is tamasic.

That's a good point and probably answers the question right there.

 

[Vinayaka]

That's a good point and probably answers the question right there.

The fresher the better with vegetables too. But at least a vegetable starts out being sattvic. Yumm for my garden.

 

[Jainarayan]

Yeah I know... my niece buys salad mix in bags, forgets about it and leaves it in the crisper until it turns into petroleum. Too bad I don't heat my house with oil.

 

[Kalidas]

The fresher the better with vegetables too. But at least a vegetable starts out being sattvic. Yumm for my garden.

I never said I would eat it, but if an animals makes it and died of natural causes why waste the body? I myself will be donating my organs

 

[Vinayaka]

I never said I would eat it, but if an animals makes it and died of natural causes why waste the body? I myself will be donating my organs

I don't have a problem with someone else eating it. For example, when I was a kid, we had a cow that slipped on wet ground, impaling herself on a sharp stump. My father found her still 'kicking', and our family used the meat. So it may depend on the length of time the animal had been dead.

 

[Aupmanyav]

But what about animal sacrifice? Unless both animal sacrifice and beef eating came together.

I am sure, all people at one time had animal and even human sacrifices. But slowly they were replaced by symbolic offerings made up of grains and rice. Animal sacrifices continue in many cultures, even the turkey in Thanks-giving. Indians and Aryans also were no exceptions.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I read somewhere once that Gandhi (love him or despise him) even said that the remains of mother cow should be put to good use... horns, bones, skin, etc. He didn't address the flesh, however, afaik.

All things except the flesh is used by Hindus. Buffalo meat is eaten by lower castes, I do not exactly know if some eat cow meat also. Or probably it is sold to Muslims.

 

[Jainarayan]

All things except the flesh is used by Hindus. Buffalo meat is eaten by lower castes, I do not exactly know if some eat cow meat also. Or probably it is sold to Muslims.

Thanks.

 

[Haryaksha]

I am sure, all people at one time had animal and even human sacrifices. But slowly they were replaced by symbolic offerings made up of grains and rice. Animal sacrifices continue in many cultures, even the turkey in Thanks-giving. Indians and Aryans also were no exceptions.

The Vedic people definitely engaged in animal sacrifice, but they did not sacrifice humans. To my understanding, even anti-Hindu scholars like Witzel and Doniger acknowledge that the Purushamedha was symbolic.