Protection of Cows

[Asha]

Unfertilized eggs are not, nor ever will be sentient beings, or jivatma. They are a biological by-product of the existence of chickens and other female birds. Hens of any bird species will lay eggs with or without the presence of a male. The issue is not the egg itself; exploiting the chicken and inducing it to lay more eggs than it naturally would is the issue. Dairy products should then be avoided too because the cow is exploited to produce more milk than she naturally would.

If one does not eat eggs, it should be for the reason of harm to the chicken because of the way they are raised and treated, not to a biological by-product that is not nor ever will be alive. We have to keep the facts in mind and set our sights properly. What to eat or what not to eat is a person's choice and should not be foisted upon another by referring to this scripture or that guru or such, or saying that one will come back as such-and-such animal they ate. That is also himsa to another person. We can't be selectively dharmic.

Dear Sir

You have taken me a little out of context here !

actualy I said.....

Namaste

There are many things to be careful about in this life, yes I am aware of course that there are many animals that some humans choose to eat.
And although I am a Vaisnava who like many Hindu treat the cow as our mother and regard her as sacred, we are usualy very strict in that we are what is often refered to as Pure Vegetarian, which means we do not eat any other sentient being, this includes eggs.
We do this as all sentient life contain the same jivatma, therefore eating living beings is eating the equal of ourselves.

And yes you have the choice to do what you like, but you must aceppt the Karmic concequences.

Actualy there is also another reason not to eat the egg, if it is not fertilised it is un clean and considered Rajasic, these unclean foods (flesh included) are considered to be in the mode of darkness, I.E. Ignorance, and all aspiring devotees follow the Satvic diet followed by most Brahmans, I.E. the preistly classes, because this is a pure diet in the mode of goodness, as it is the diet which promotes health and clarity and is condusive to meditation.

Yes certainly you are free to do as you like, as a lay Hindu no one is telling you what to do, but that dosent exempt you from the reactions of Karma. but if one wants to progress along a spiritual path there comes a time to take vows and follow these recomendations very seriously.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes, vegetarian diet is the diet of the Vedas. However, I'm a Vegan atm solely because of the brutality of the dairy industry in the USA. Is there a really bad dairy industry in Canada? What about India? I always thought that in India milk was taken by hand right?
Regards

"Operation Flood is a project of the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) which was the world's biggest dairy development program which made India, a milk-sufficient nation, the largest milk producer in the world, surpassing the USA in 1998, with about 17 percent of global output in 2010–11, which in 30 years doubled the milk available per person, and which made dairy farming India’s largest self-sustainable rural employment generator. All this was achieved not merely by mass production, but by production by the masses." Operation Flood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But we need more. However, I doubt if vegetarianism was the diet of Vedas, it is sure the diet of Puranas.

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

Slightly off-topic but I just found out about a cow sanctuary/sustainable dairy farm here in PA! They are run by ISKCON, and seem to be growing slowly. About Us | Gita Nagari Yoga Farm

:camp:

 

[Aupmanyav]

Just wondering why do some people do Cow-pray. A cow who cannot save herself, how will she save others ?

Chinu, cows already give us so much, right from milk to dung. If they cannot save themselves, it behooves on us to save them. A prayer to cows is considered a prayer for plenty and security of the family. Of course, you can say that we Hindus are dumb.

 

[Chakra]

"Operation Flood is a project of the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) which was the world's biggest dairy development program which made India, a milk-sufficient nation, the largest milk producer in the world, surpassing the USA in 1998, with about 17 percent of global output in 2010–11, which in 30 years doubled the milk available per person, and which made dairy farming India’s largest self-sustainable rural employment generator. All this was achieved not merely by mass production, but by production by the masses." Operation Flood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But we need more. However, I doubt if vegetarianism was the diet of Vedas, it is sure the diet of Puranas.

I think that there were verses from Vedas that prohibited meat eating. I think ratikala ji has posted some of them.
Regards

 

[Sb1995]

I think that there were verses from Vedas that prohibited meat eating. I think ratikala ji has posted some of them.
Regards

I thought it only mentions prohibition of beef eating.

 

[Chakra]

I thought it only mentions prohibition of beef eating.

I guess you may be right about that sir, but the Mahabharata and Puranas are clear that meat is to be avoided. A quick visit to the nearby slaughterhouse will tell you that God does not approve of this.
Regards

EDIT: I will like to correct myself. The Vedas also prohibit eating of all meats, as shown by ratikalaji's response.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram SB ji

I thought it only mentions prohibition of beef eating.

there are so many refferences the problems seem to occur in the translations and in the inference , .....

I will start with a few of many , ....

''You must not use your God-given body for killing God’s creatures, whether they are human, animal or whatever'' ......Yajur Veda, 12.32

to me as to many ''animal'' means more than cow , it means all sentient life forms ...

''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 '' .......Manu Smriti 5.48

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] The earlier texts, such as the Rig-veda , also proclaim the need to give up the eating of slaughtered animals[FONT=Arial, Helvetica].....

“One who partakes of human flesh, the flesh of a horse or of another animal, and deprives others of milk by slaughtering cows, O King, if such a fiend does not desist by other means, then you should not hesitate to cut off his head.” [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica] ........[/FONT]Rig-veda 10.[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]87.16[/FONT]

a different translation of the same verse ...

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]“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. Having well considered the disgusting origin of flesh and the cruelty of fettering and slaying corporeal beings, let him entirely abstain from eating flesh.” [/FONT].....Manu-samhita 5.48-49

and on purity ..

''When one’s food is pure, one’s being becomes pure'' .......Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.26.2


the gita , mahabarata and many other texts speak of the purity of the sattvic diet ....


''Sattva food increases the duration of life, purifies one’s existence and gives strength, health, happiness and satisfaction… Such foods are wholesome and pleasing to the heart '' ...... Bhagavad Gita , ch ..17 v ...8

please read on through ch ..17 .....


''Sattva – lucidity…full of joy, something of pure light which seems to be entirely at peace'' .....The Laws of Manu 12.27



the Mahabarata speaks also of Abstention ...


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]''What necessity be said of those innocent and healthy creatures gifted with love of life, when they are sought to be killed by sinful wretches living by slaughter? Therefore, O King, know that the discarding of meat is the highest refuge of religion, of the celestial region, and of happiness. Abstention of injury [to others] is the highest religion. It is, again, the highest penance. It is also the highest truth from which all duty emanates. ''.........Mahabarata ...115.21-23[/FONT]





[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]“Those who are ignorant of real dharma and, though wicked and haughty, account themselves virtuous, kill animals without any feeling of remorse or fear of punishment. Further, in their next lives, such sinful persons will be eaten by the same creatures they have killed in this world.” [/FONT]Bhagavata Purana ...11.5.14




I could go on listing but prehaps others would like to add or discuss the inturpertations given , to me it is more than clear .

 

[Poeticus]

The Vedas also prohibit eating of all meats, as shown by ratikalaji's response.

Not really. No offense to Ratiben, but there were times in the ancient days when even the Brahmins couldn't go past a day without the consumption of the bull, ox, and lamb. This isn't something to be alarmed about, but rather it is something that we should acknowledge. Please keep in mind: 'twas different times/yuga-s, different ethics, different protocols. Plus, today there are numerous Brahmins in South India that are voracious consumers of seafood (especially fish), and many of them are from the most orthodox (shrauta) of Hindu communities.

 

[Chakra]

Not really. No offense to Ratiben, but there were times in the ancient days when even the Brahmins couldn't go past a day without the consumption of the bull, ox, and lamb. This isn't something to be alarmed about, but rather it is something that we should acknowledge. Please keep in mind: 'twas different times/yuga-s, different ethics, different protocols. Plus, today there are numerous Brahmins in South India that are voracious consumers of seafood (especially fish), and many of them are from the most orthodox (shrauta) of Hindu communities.

"in the ancient days when even the Brahmins couldn't go past a day without the consumption of the bull, ox, and lamb. "

Ancient days. Do you mean Sat-yuga? And I have not heard of Brahmins eating the bulls. Vedas certainly don't approve of this.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by the 2 different yugas/2 different ethics thing. What do you mean?
Regards

 

[Poeticus]

"in the ancient days when even the Brahmins couldn't go past a day without the consumption of the bull, ox, and lamb. "

Ancient days. Do you mean Sat-yuga? And I have not heard of Brahmins eating the bulls. Vedas certainly don't approve of this.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by the 2 different yugas/2 different ethics thing. What do you mean?
Regards

I apologize for the confusion; and I should have used the word, ethos, instead of ethics. Also, the Veda-s aren't scriptures that sanction approval. In actuality, they are Sound; they are Shruti. In regards to my reference to the "ancient days", I utilized two categorizations: time and/or yuga. The former is for those that do not believe in yuga-s and instead abide by the B.C.E. and C.E. time frame. The latter, on the other hand, is for those that believe in yuga-s. In either case, the application of dharma and karma (in regards to action/conduct) varied in context from how it applies today. During the "Vedic period", yajna-s involved sacrifices of various animals. In regards to daily dietary means, there were only three types of flesh that were not consumed nor deemed appropriate for consumption: man-flesh, horse-flesh, and the flesh of the milk-giving cow. The flesh of bulls was offered in yajna-s every now and then, though I do not recall its frequency. The Brahmana-s (which are a part of the Shruti) along with the Shrautasutra-s detail various yajna-s wherein the flesh of various animals are offered (and consumed). Even the Jaimini Sutra (the Purva Mimamsa Sutra-s of Rishi Jaimini) mentions the offering of meat dishes during yajna-s. In many of these yajna-s, the flesh was consumed by the priests. This shouldn't be alarming (not saying that you are alarmed by these statements of mine); the certain karma-kanda type of dharma that dominated the theological framework of those times kind of demanded it. And then there is that story about Trishanku.

 

[Aupmanyav]

You are right Poeticus. RigVeda 10.87.16 talks about three kinds of flesh, cow, horse, and human; and that raw-meat should not be eaten, 10.87.2. But there are many brahmin communities who are traditionally non-vegetarians. Vegetarianism is accepted by all Hindus to be better, but non-vegetarians also are part of it. IMHO, it is wrong if one is trespassing his/her traditions.

 

[Vinayaka]

One of the appeals of Hinduism is that it can change. It's not so dogmatic. It doesn't disagree with science. So if a particular substance traditionally used in pujas is found to be poisonopus by modern science, then we can quite easily discontinue it's use without breaking tradition.

Nutrition is another area where we can learn and change, and that alone is enough reason to switch to a vegetarian diet. Still, some mental things are hard to change. Take tobacco addiction, for instance.

Last night in a conversation, we were discussing sambrani smoke, and my discussion mate went on about how healthy it was. Me, well, I'm not so sure.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Last night in a conversation, we were discussing sambrani smoke, and my discussion mate went on about how healthy it was. Me, well, I'm not so sure.

Dhoop, loban smoke. How long is it used! For a few minutes. Except perhaps in people sensitive to it, it has never caused any problems (Bengali use it during Durga Puja celebrations). These days, what we get in India would hardly ever be pure. We survive many more dangerous things - chemicals in vegetables and poultry, vehicle smoke, etc.

 

[Vinayaka]

Dhoop, loban smoke. How long is it used! For a few minutes. Except perhaps in people sensitive to it, it has never caused any problems (Bengali use it during Durga Puja celebrations). These days, what we get in India would hardly ever be pure. We survive many more dangerous things - chemicals in vegetables and poultry, vehicle smoke, etc.

I was the person who carried it around the temple for awhile, and each night I went home with a headache. But you're right. Anything in relatively small quantities is quite harmless.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Perhaps it was the strain of helping in long rituals, friend. I understand you would be tired. Wish all the best for the Kumbham ceremony at your temple.

 

[Vinayaka]

Perhaps it was the strain of helping in long rituals, friend. I understand you would be tired. Wish all the best for the Kumbham ceremony at your temple.

It was the smoke, because in my earlier days I had worked in a smoke filled room (tavern), and the headache was similar. Campfire smoke will do the same thing. Personally, I don't think any smoke is good for the lungs/body.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram poeticus ji

Please keep in mind: 'twas different times/yuga-s, different ethics, different protocols. Plus, today there are numerous Brahmins in South India that are voracious consumers of seafood (especially fish), and many of them are from the most orthodox (shrauta) of Hindu communities.

Agreed there was a time when the preist and the king were pure enough to slaughter and sacrifice an animal and by so doing liberate it , ...the veiw of many is simply that this is not aplicable in this yuga as the putity is no longer there , therefore we should no longer perform these sacrifices .

and also the Kashmiri Brahmins who also eat meat , this is a cultural habit which I wont argue with , ...I will just stick with the rules and dictates of my sampradaya which say it is no longer aplicable , ...therefore it is not aplicable for me .

 

[Vinayaka]

When it boils down to it, I don't really care what other people do, or have done. I feel healthier, physically, emotionally, and spiritually, from not eating flesh of other creatures. So all the Brahmins in India could be eating beef, and I still wouldn't change.

This whole argument reminds me too much of ... "Well, other people do it, why shouldn't I?" about speeding, cheating on taxes, and much more. Whatever happened to thinking for yourself?

Of course, Ratikala, I'm with you. My sampradaya doesn't eat meat or eggs either. But even if the guidelines were changed, I wouldn't.

 

[Vinayaka]

I agree, Poeticus.