Re: Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments Against Eating Meat
library101
Thank you for your post; Can we Research this to get exact numbers ?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have raised an important point.
I think you might be right that Vegans go only part of the way.
'Vegetarians' of Bharat may not even be able to understand this
article of yours.
They just do not understand how the application and use of all these
Industrial products have a direct one to one relationship to the
killing of animals or other living beings (including humans and
Neanderthals). Can we research this further and nail down the exact
mathematical relationships and count of how many products relate to
how many living beings on earth, etc ?
Do we have to go back all the way in history to stabilize the world
and stop the age-old practice of Killing the Only Living God on Earth
led by the Top Killers in the Middle East (Drooling Bats over
there)...
- HSN.
P.S.
Error message received while trying to 'Reply' the first time :
"The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to
this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the
Internet.
An error was encountered while trying to post, please try again
later."
On Feb 23, 4:25 pm, dh@. wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 22:20:28 GMT, use...@mantra.com and/orwww.mantra.com/jai
>
> (Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote:
> >Chapter 43: T he Meat-Free Life
>
> Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of
> wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of
> buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does.
> What they try to avoid are products which provide life
> (and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have
> to avoid the following items containing animal by-products
> in order to be successful:
>
> tires, paper, upholstery, floor waxes, glass, water
> filters, rubber, fertilizer, antifreeze, ceramics, insecticides,
> insulation, linoleum, plastic, textiles, blood factors, collagen,
> heparin, insulin, solvents, biodegradable detergents, herbicides,
> gelatin capsules, adhesive tape, laminated wood products,
> plywood, paneling, wallpaper and wallpaper paste, cellophane
> wrap and tape, abrasives, steel ball bearings
>
> The meat industry provides life for the animals that it
> slaughters, and the animals live and die as a result of it
> as animals do in other habitats. They also depend on it for
> their lives as animals do in other habitats. If people consume
> animal products from animals they think are raised in decent
> ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the
> future. People who want to contribute to decent lives for
> livestock with their lifestyle must do it by being conscientious
> consumers of animal products, because they can not do it by
> being vegan.
> From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised
> steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people
> get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well
> over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people
> get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm
> machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and
> draining of fields, one serving of soy or rice based product is
> likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of servings
> derived from grass raised animals. Grass raised animal products
> contribute to fewer wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and
> better lives for livestock than soy or rice products.
library101
More Numbers, Explanation, Connection to the Lives of People, God
needed...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are the numbers exact or estimates or just guess work ?
You need to relate this to what is done with these animal killing
numbers to (kill) the people of the world and God.
We need more details and explanation to relate everything more clearly
for everyone to be convinced. This is so far out of the popular
imagination that no one will believe this unless you can do a clearer
job of putting out the numbers and explaining the connection to the
lives of the people out there as well as to God on Earth.
More work needed, please.
- HSN.
P.S.
The 'Fuckwit' guy seems to be a loose gun in the world, anyways...
------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian, alt.food.vegan,
alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
From: George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:55:41 -0800
Local: Thurs, Feb 24 2011 3:55 pm
Subject: Re: Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments
Against Eating Meat
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Fuckwit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters, lied:
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 14:03:52 -0800 (PST), library101<h.s.nair...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Thank you for your post; Can we Research this to get exact numbers ?
> "rice farming is ~20 pound [plagiarism snipped]
I don't try to eat ethically, because I don't really care
enough to make the effort.
Goo/Fuckwit 31 July 2003 http://tinyurl.com/2v5ayqy
I would eat animals even if I thought that it was
cruel to them, and even if they gained nothing from
the deal. Is that what you want me to say? It is true.
But that doesn't mean that I can't still like the animals
also....
Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Sept 23, 1999
I am not an extremist about it, and if I thought
that all of the animals I eat had terrible
lives, I would still eat meat. That is not
because I don't care about them at all, but I
would just ignore their suffering.
Goo/Fuckwit David Harrison - Nov 29, 1999
On Feb 24, 3:38 pm, dh@. wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 14:03:52 -0800 (PST), library101 <h.s.nair...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Thank you for your post; Can we Research this to get exact numbers ?
>
> "rice farming is ~20 pound (arithmetic follows). this works out a bit
> less than two vertebrate deaths per square foot, and, again, is *quite*
> conservative. for conventionally grown rice, the gross body-count is
> *at least* several times that figure. collateral included deaths from
> 'conventional' agriculture are more inferential than from 'organic'
> production (explained later) and, although the number of deaths is fewer
> in organic v. conventional, they are far more visible in organic
> production.
>
> the vertebrate deaths come from: frogs (5+ species), toads (common
> bufo), anole lizards, shrews (3 species), voles, mice, rats, snakes, a
> couple of kinds of turtles, cats, rabbits, skunk, nutria & muskrats,
> raccoons, possums, deer (never less than a pair of fawns harvested per
> 50 acres), pheasants, quail, pigeons, cattle egrets, sparrows,
> starlings, waxwings, .... although all of these are not harvested
> *every* time, they are the 'regulars.' occasionally a canvasback, teal,
> heron, mallard, black duck, coot, spoonbill, crow, hawk, kite, eagle,
> buzzard ... is shredded, as is the occasional feral pig or lost calf,
> coyote or dog.
>
> for information, an acre has 43,264+ square feet. the vast majority of
> the deaths are (as one would imagine): frogs, toads and anole lizards;
> rodents and insectivores.
>
> - when cutting the rice, there is a - literal - green waterfall of frogs
> and anoles moving in front of the combine. sometimes the 'rain' is just
> a hard shower ( 10,000 frogs per acre) crossing the header, other times
> it is a deluge (+50,000 acre). never is it a drought; never a mist.
> sometimes, the number of frogs swimming across the cutter-bar is so
> massive, we have to reduce travel speed of the combine - there is just
> too much rice lost by being pressed into the rather thickish 'arroz con
> graciel pat ' which travels across the screens, rather than falling
> into the hopper as good grain should.
>
> these numbers may sound extreme to those who believe there is a wildlife
> de-population crisis, but considering one can easily see 10-20-30+ frogs
> (and several anoles) within the top few inches of a foot stand of rice,
> the numbers making graciel pat are trivial.
>
> most times, judging from the visible continuious population swimming
> across the header, it is somewhere between 10K & 50+K per acre
> harvested. a good, reasonable, annualised (but still conservative)
> number of amphibian and anole deaths through the combine is 35,000 of
> all species harvested per acre, combined average for two cuttings. in
> spite of these seemingly large numbers, far, far more frogs & lizards
> escape than are combined. i would guess that the 35,000 amphibian
> deaths represents less than 20% of the total population, and probably
> far less, but that is just a guess - plenty, plenty, plenty are not
> killed." - didderot
library101
There is no being in this world Higher than or 'superior to' 'The One
Living God on Earth'
- We need some questions answered to bring down the 'High Speed Gamers
of God'
(the leading killers of The One Living God on Earth)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with GP that there is an element of 'moral
superiority' (implying that 'I am (or We are) better than God')
involved in carrying any such 'fault-finding' exercises to an extreme
as it is happening all the time in this world.
However, you have to note that no one is higher than 'The One Living
God on Earth' in this world.
This is His World - all beings in the world and all inanimate objects
and matter are part of His being - His imagination. No living being or
object or matter can exist other than as part of His being and his
imagination. That may seem far-fetched on first look, but then, you
can look again and check with everyone you know and then look again to
see whether this statement makes any more sense.
Authors in this thread including MRM have also tried to carry it to
another extreme by indicating that mechanised production of
'vegetarian food' or 'prasadam rice' also involves killing of living
beings as part of the harvesting and production methods.
I think a moderate position is what is sustainable in the long run for
the world. That is that you should abstain from taking the life of
another creature without a reason. And the law is not made by anyone
other than God Himself.
I do not know whether even Manu can claim the status of being God in
the 'History' of Bharat. I do not know of any such claim in the
scriptures. The words of anyone (even the Rishis and legions of other
unknown people who contributed to the scriptures - possibly obtained
from the Air) other than those of The One God on Earth do not mean
anything much and should not be followed. You may try to interpret the
words of God in different ways too, but all those kinds of efforts are
meaningless and not to be followed.
Even the words of God Himself may change with the context He is faced
with on the ground.
Applying His words out of context would also be similar to 'sin' in
their effect on The One God on Earth. They would adversely affect Him
and therefore His World - all the beings and matter in this world.
These kinds of people are not 'with' Him and are therefore nothing but
His Killers.
See an example of a pretty detailed and exact directive (using a count
of the hairs on a slain being) from Manu (not God) excerpted below
from JM's post :
<<< ...
"If he has a strong desire (for meat) he may
make an animal of clarified butter or one of flour (and
eat that); but let him never seek to destroy an animal
without a (lawful) reason. As many hairs as the slain
beast has, so often indeed will he who killed it without
a (lawful) reason suffer a violent death in future
births." (Manu-samhita 5.37-38)
>>>
The Energy of God powers the World
-------------------------------------------------------
Having said that, we need to investigate the relationship between
animals and human and Neanderthal and other beings in this small One
World. I believe there is a parity between these creatures that is
used to control today's world by 'High Speed Gaming' or The One God on
Earth. Stock Markets (Wall Street alone - tied to all the others down
the line of control - who may not know the details of what happens
there) and Casinos and gambling houses, I believe, tie up the whole
world in one single activity - the killing of The One God on Earth. I
believe they take away the Energy of God, after killing Him, to run
the world of today - all the Power Systems, Industries, Machinery,
Trains, Automobiles, even the energy that each living being uses for
living and functioning on earth. All the world's energy comes from the
being of the One Living God on Earth.
Who are these 'High Speed Gamers of God'
- And what is the deadly game of numbers they play ?
- 'Dance of Death'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The question is what is the numerical relationship between the
different beings that is used to decide the events of the moment by
the High Speed Gamers of the world (the 'Players' - khiladis - of the
world). For example, how many fishes equal how many people ? Do cows
relate to Gypsies, one cow for each Gypsy or Bharatiya on earth ? Do
deer have a one to one relationship with Assyrians - e.g. King
Asurbanipal - or whatever they were called in History ? Do pigs and
wolves and foxes and bears relate one to one to German-Hans, German-
Anglo, French, Russians, respectively ? Do tigers relate in some ratio
of numbers to the LTTE (Lankan Tamils) of Lanka (I will use the
historic name - the latest name - Sri Lanka - I believe, is not
sustainable in the long term because it does not fit with the syntax
of names and dictionary words in the world). Do dogs (DOG - Death of
Government) represent GOD (Government of Death) in the reverse logic
used by the communicators of the world ? Cambodians or Laotians
(Hmong ?), I believe, kill dogs for meat. They should know the
relationship, if anyone does. Do Panda bears represent the Chinese ?
The animals are revered by them, to be sure. Do monkeys represent
different types of people ? We know that they played a prominent role
in the Epics of Bharat. Similarly the Garuda (We have the Garuda
Airlines today - vehicle of God ?). Who were the rats in the story of
the Pied Piper of Hamlin ? Who were the Dwarfs in the story of Snow-
White and the Seven Dwarfs ? Who was the wolf in the story of Little
Red Riding Hood ?
There are so many questions. We need these questions answered in order
to get a better handle on the mysteries of the world that are hidden
in all this symbolism. The information is spread all over the world.
So near and yet so far, from everyone's reach !
We will get it all out. One day at a time.
- HSN.
-------Included Messages Shown Below -------------------------
[[
...
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian, alt.food.vegan,
alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
From: George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:44:32 -0800
Local: Sun, Feb 27 2011 5:44 pm
Subject: Re: Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments
Against Eating Meat
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On 2/27/2011 5:24 PM, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
> Vegetarianism: Recommended in Vedic Scripture
There's only one reason, and that's to pretend you're morally
superior,
even though really you're not.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
...
On Feb 27, 5:58 pm, "M. Ranjit Mathews" <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Feb 27, 8:24 pm, use...@mantra.com and/orwww.mantra.com/jai(Dr.
>
>
>
>
>
> Jai Maharaj) wrote:
> > Vegetarianism: Recommended in Vedic Scripture
>
> > By Stephen Knapphttp://www.stephen-knapp.com
>
> > Many times there seems to be some confusion or lack of
> > clarity on whether the Vedic path condones or condemns
> > the eating of meat. Often times I hear Indians and
> > followers of the Vedic path explain that meat eating is
> > all right, that the Vedic shastras do not condemn it. Of
> > course, in this day and age meat eating includes and
> > supports the whole meat industry, which is the systematic
> > slaughter of thousands of animals on a daily basis. But
> > if we actually research the Vedic texts we will find that
> > there are numerous references in the various portions of
> > the Vedic literature which explain in no uncertain terms
> > the karmic dangers of meat-eating and unnecessary animal
> > slaughter. These indicate that meat eating should be
> > given up for one's spiritual and even material progress.
> > This means that the Vedic conclusions that some people
> > present for meat-eating are not accurate, and that they
> > have never studied their own religious books very
> > thoroughly. This is something that is important to
> > understand, so let us take a look.
>
> > VEDIC REFERENCES AGAINST MEAT-EATING AND ANIMAL SLAUGHTER
>
> > To start with, the Manu-samhita clearly and logically
> > recommends that, "Meat can never be obtained without
> > injury to living creatures,
>
> Does Manu say anything about how to obtain vegetarian food without
> injury to living creatures?
>
> > and injury to sentient beings
> > is detrimental to the attainment of heavenly bliss;
>
> In what way would your chances of heavenly bliss be affected if you
> were to offer as prasadam rice that has been obtained by taking many
> lives?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
---------------------------------------------------
...
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian, alt.fan.jai-maharaj,
alt.religion.hindu, alt.food.vegan, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
Followup-To: soc.culture.indian, alt.fan.jai-maharaj,
alt.religion.hindu, alt.food.vegan, alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
From: use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 01:24:23 GMT
Local: Sun, Feb 27 2011 5:24 pm
Subject: Re: Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments
Against Eating Meat
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Vegetarianism: Recommended in Vedic Scripture
By Stephen Knapp
http://www.stephen-knapp.com
Many times there seems to be some confusion or lack of
clarity on whether the Vedic path condones or condemns
the eating of meat. Often times I hear Indians and
followers of the Vedic path explain that meat eating is
all right, that the Vedic shastras do not condemn it. Of
course, in this day and age meat eating includes and
supports the whole meat industry, which is the systematic
slaughter of thousands of animals on a daily basis. But
if we actually research the Vedic texts we will find that
there are numerous references in the various portions of
the Vedic literature which explain in no uncertain terms
the karmic dangers of meat-eating and unnecessary animal
slaughter. These indicate that meat eating should be
given up for one's spiritual and even material progress.
This means that the Vedic conclusions that some people
present for meat-eating are not accurate, and that they
have never studied their own religious books very
thoroughly. This is something that is important to
understand, so let us take a look.
VEDIC REFERENCES AGAINST MEAT-EATING AND ANIMAL SLAUGHTER
To start with, the Manu-samhita clearly and logically
recommends that, "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." (Manu-samhita 5.48-
49)
However, it is not simply the person who eats the meat
that becomes implicated by eating the dead animal, but
also those who assist in the process. "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. There is no greater sinner
than that man who though not worshiping the gods or the
ancestors, seeks to increase the bulk of his own flesh by
the flesh of other beings." (Manu-samhita 5.51-52)
As we get further into the Manu-samhita, there are
warnings that become increasingly more serious. For
example, "If he has a strong desire (for meat) he may
make an animal of clarified butter or one of flour (and
eat that); but let him never seek to destroy an animal
without a (lawful) reason. As many hairs as the slain
beast has, so often indeed will he who killed it without
a (lawful) reason suffer a violent death in future
births." (Manu-samhita 5.37-38)
In this way, the only time to carry out the need to kill
animals for consumption is when there is an emergency
such as when there simply is nothing else to eat.
Otherwise, when there are plenty of grains, vegetables,
fruits, etc., to eat, it is only mankind's lust and
selfish desires that motivate one to kill other beings to
satisfy one's tongue by tasting their blood and flesh, or
to fatten one's wallet by making money from participating
in the distribution or the cooking of meat. Such violent
actions create opposite reactions. For this reason the
warnings are given, "He who injures harmless creatures
from a wish to give himself pleasure, never finds
happiness in this life or the next." (Manu-samhita 5.45)
'Nonetheless, there are also benefits that are mentioned
that a person can attain simply by not eating the bodies
of other creatures: "By subsisting on pure fruits and
roots, and by eating food fit for ascetics in the forest,
one does not gain so great a reward as by entirely
avoiding the use of flesh. Me he [mam sah] will devour in
the next world, whose flesh I eat in this life; the wise
declare this to be the real meaning of the word 'flesh'
[mam sah]." (Manu-samhita 5.54-55)
"He who does not seek to cause the sufferings of bonds
and death to living creatures, (but) desires the good of
all (beings), obtains endless bliss. He who does not
injure any (creature) attains without an effort what he
thinks of, what he undertakes, and what he fixes his mind
on." (Manu-samhita 5.46-47)
'Also, "By not killing any living being, one becomes fit
for salvation." (Manu-samhita 6.60)
'The earlier texts, such as the Rig-veda (10.87.16), also
proclaim the need to give up the eating of slaughtered
animals. "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."
'"You must not use your God-given body for killing God's
creatures, whether they are human, animal or whatever."
(Yajur Veda 12.32.90)
'There are also references in the Mahabharat that
forewarn the activity of eating flesh: "He who desires to
augment his own flesh by eating the flesh of other
creatures, lives in misery in whatever species he may
take his [next] birth." (Mahabharat, Anu.115.47)
'"The purchaser of flesh performs violence by his wealth;
he who eats flesh does so by enjoying its taste; the
killer does violence by actually tying and killing the
animal. Thus, there are three forms of killing. He who
brings flesh or sends for it, he who cuts off the limbs
of an animal, and he who purchases, sells, or cooks flesh
and eats it -- all these are to be considered meat-
eaters." (Mahabharat, Anu.115.40) All of these people
will also incur the same karmic reactions for their
participation in killing, distributing or eating the
flesh of animals, as explained next.
'"The sins generated by violence curtail the life of the
perpetrator. Therefore, even those who are anxious for
their own welfare should abstain from meat-eating."
(Mahabharat, Anu.115.33)
'"Those who are ignorant of real dharm 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." (Bhagavat Puraan 11.5.14)
The following verses are from the Tirukural:
How can he practice true compassion who eats the flesh of
an animal to fatten his own flesh?
Riches cannot be found in the hands of the thriftless,
nor can compassion be found in the hearts of those who
eat meat.
He who feasts on a creature's flesh is like he who wields
a weapon. Goodness is never one with the minds of these
two.
If you ask, "What is kindness and what is unkindness?" It
is not-killing and killing. Thus, eating flesh is never
virtuous.
Life is perpetuated by not eating meat. The jaws of Hell
close on those who do.
If the world did not purchase and consume meat, no one
would slaughter and offer meat for sale.
When a man realizes that meat is the butchered flesh of
another creature, he will abstain from eating it.
Insightful souls who have abandoned the passion to hurt
others will not feed on flesh that life has abandoned.
Greater than a thousand ghee offerings consumed in
sacrificial fires is to not sacrifice and consume any
living creature.
All life will press palms together in prayerful adoration
of those who refuse to slaughter or savor meat.
-From these verses there should be no doubt that the
Vedic shastra recommends that such selfish meat-eating
must be given up if one has any concern for other living
beings, or one's own future existence, or for attaining
any spiritual merit.
'In Bhagavad-gita, however, we also find similar verses
on what is recommended for human consumption. Lord Krshn
says, "If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a
flower, fruit or water, I will accept it." (Bg.9.26) This
means that not only should one be a vegetarian and eat
only fruits, water, grains, vegetables, etc., but such
items should be made as an offering to God with love. The
reason is that, "The devotees of the Lord are released
from all kinds of sins because they eat food which is
offered first for sacrifice. Others, who prepare food for
personal sense enjoyment, verily eat only sin." (Bg.3.13)
So what is offered are only those things that Krshn
accepts. That becomes prasada, or remnants of foods
offered to the Lord.
'As further elaborated in Bhagavad-gita by Lord Shri
Krshn: "O son of Kunti, all that you do, all that you
eat, all that you offer and give away, as well as all
austerities that you may perform, should be done as an
offering unto Me. In this way you will be freed from all
reactions to good and evil deeds, and by this principle
of renunciation you will be liberated and come to Me."
(Bg.9.27)
'Herein we can see that the process of preparing and
eating food is also a part of the Vedic system for making
spiritual advancement. As the Vedic literature explains,
what we eat is an important factor in the process of
purifying ourselves and remaining free from accumulating
bad karm. It actually is not so difficult to be
vegetarian, and it gives one a much higher taste in
eating and in one's spiritual realizations. The level of
our consciousness is also determined not only by what we
think and do, but also by the vibrational level of what
we put into our bodies as food. The more natural and
peaceful the food, the more healthy and peaceful will be
our consciousness. If it is further blessed and offered
to the Lord, then it becomes especially powerful and
spiritualized. This vibration goes into our own bodies
and is assimilated by our consciousness to assist us in
our spiritual upliftment. However, if we eat foods that
are the remnants of animals that were petrified with fear
before being slaughtered, or were tortured during the
slaughter process, that fear, aggression and suffering
will also become a part of our own consciousness, which
is reflected back on our own life and the people with
whom we come in contact. And people wonder why there is
not more peace in the world.
THE QUESTION OF WHETHER LORD RAAM ATE MEAT IN THE
RAMAYAAN
''Sometimes the idea comes up that the Ramayan indicates
that Lord Raam ate meat, especially while He was in exile
in the woods. However, there is no verse in Valmiki's
Ramayan that establishes that Lord Raam, Lakshman or Sita
ate meat while in or even out of exile. In fact, it seems
to show that He very much disliked the notion of eating
meat. The evidence for this is as follows: ''The verse
that comes in question in this regard in the Valmiki
Ramayan, Sundarakand, Skand 36, Shloke 41, says: "Na
mamsam Raghava bhunkte, na chaiva madhu sevate, Vanyam
suvihitam nityam bhaktamsnati panchamam."
''The literal translation of this verse is: "Shri Raam
does not take meat or honey. He partakes everyday of wild
fruits and boiled (wild) rice fully sanctioned (for an
ascetic) in the evening."
''Faulty English translations have put it as something
like this: Hanuman to Sita, "When you were away, Shri
Raam did not even take deer meat." This incorrectly
implies that Raam normally may have ate meat but did not
do so while Sita was away from Him.
''Now in this verse, the Sanskrit word bhunkte is a verb
that means strong desire for eating. It comes from the
Sanskrit bhaksha, which means voracious eating. When you
say Na bhunkte, as we see in the line that says "Na
mamsam Raghava bhunkte", it gives a complete negative
connotation, meaning that Lord Raam abhorred meat-eating.
On the other hand, if the words were "Na mamsam Raghavo
khadate", it could then mean that Raghava may have
engaged in meat eating before, but had stopped it at this
point. However, this is not what is said, but is where
some English translations present a similar confusion, or
are simply unclear about this issue. Nonetheless, by
analyzing the correct view of the proper translation, it
indicates clearly that the Valmiki Ramayan shows how Lord
Raam not only did not eat meat, but greatly disliked it.
THE PRINCIPLE OF BEING MERCIFUL
'Meat-eating and animal slaughter also disrupts and
disregards the doctrine of ahinsa, or non-violence. It is
not possible to kill animals for the pleasure of the
tongue without violence. The Padma Puraan (1.31.27)
simply says that, "Ahinsa is the highest duty."
Therefore, one must honestly ask themselves if they
intend to truly follow the Vedic tenets or not, at least
if they call themselves a Hindu, follower of Vedanta, or
a Sanatana-dharmist. If they are, then they must adopt
the ways of ahinsa.
'Ahinsa is more directly explained in Patanjali's Yoga
Sutras (2.30) wherein it is said: "Having no ill feeling
for any living being, in all manners possible and for all
times, is called ahinsa, and it should be the desired
goal of all seekers."
'It is also said in the Buddhist scripture, the
Mahaparinirvana Sutra, "The eating of meat extinguishes
the seed of great compassion."
'One of the principles that one must follow in the
endeavor to be free from acquiring bad karm and for
spiritual advancement is being merciful, based on ahinsa.
Mercy means more than just being nice. Mercy means being
kind to all living entities, not just to humans, but also
to animals, birds, insects, etc. This is because the
living entity, depending on its consciousness, can take a
material body in any one of the 8,400,000 species of
life. Therefore, to develop and maintain the quality of
mercy, one must follow the principle of no meat eating.
This includes no eating of meat, fish, eggs, or insects.
In this way, those who are serious about a spiritual path
remain free from so many unnecessary karmic reactions.
Karm means that for every action there is an opposite and
equal reaction. Killing an animal to eat is certainly an
act of violence that creates a negative reaction in the
atmosphere which returns as more violence. This comes
back to us as reversals in life which we must endure in
the future.
'It is bluntly stated that meat eating is actually the
grossest form of spiritual ignorance. To kill other
living entities for the pleasure of the tongue is a cruel
and selfish activity that requires one to be almost
completely blind to the spiritual reality of the living
being, that within the body is a soul like you, a part
and parcel of the Supreme Soul. It also causes one to
remain hard-hearted and less sensitive to the concern for
the wellbeing and feelings of others.
'As previously explained, according to the law of karm,
whatever pain we cause for others we will have to suffer
in the future. Therefore, a wise man does not even want
to harm an insect if possible, what to speak of
slaughtering an animal in order to taste its flesh and
blood. As explained in the Manu-samhita, the sinful
reaction for animal slaughter is received by six kinds of
participants, which include, (1) the killer of the
animal, (2) one who advocates or advertises meat-eating,
(3) one who transports the meat, (4) one who handles or
packages the meat, (5) one who prepares or cooks the
meat, and (6) one who eats it.
The sinful reaction shared by these six participants in
animal slaughter is serious. In fact, the Bible compares
the killing of cows to murdering a man: "He that killeth
an ox is as if he slew a man." (Isaiah 66.3) It is also
explained in the Shri Caitanya-caritamrita (Adi-lila,
Chapter 17, verse 166): "Cow killers are condemned to rot
in hellish life for as many thousands of years as there
are hairs on the body of the cow," which is also
referenced in the Manu-samhita. So an intelligent person
will try to avoid this fate.
'Some readers may say, however, that the sacrifices in
the early Vedic literature prescribed animal slaughter,
so for that reason it is all right to kill animals. But
such activities in this day and age are refuted by Shri
Caitanya Mahaprabhu in the Caitanya-caritamrita (Adi-
lila, Chapter 17, verses 159-165) which He explains to
the Chand Kazi who was a Muslim:
'"The Vedas clearly enjoin that cows should not be
killed. Therefore any Hindu, whoever he may be, does not
indulge in cow killing. In the Vedas and Puranas there
are injunctions declaring that if one can revive a living
being, he can kill it for experimental purposes [in the
ritual]. Therefore the great sages sometimes killed old
animals, and by chanting Vedic hymns they again brought
them to life for protection. The killing and rejuvenation
of such old and invalid animals was not truly killing but
an act of great benefit. Formerly there were great
powerful brahmanas who could make such experiments using
Vedic hymns, but now, because of Kali-yuga, brahmanas are
not so powerful. Therefore the killing of cows and bulls
for rejuvenation is forbidden. 'In this age of Kali, five
acts are forbidden: the offering of a horse in sacrifice,
the offering of a cow in sacrifice, the acceptance of the
[renounced] order of sannyasa, the offering of oblations
of flesh to the forefathers, and a man's begetting
children in his brother's wife.' Since you Mohammedans
[and others] cannot bring killed animals back to life,
you are responsible for killing them. Therefore you are
going to hell; there is no way for your deliverance."
'This quotation makes it perfectly clear how anyone who
participates in killing other living beings is
responsible for such acts which cause one to attain a
hellish future, or at the least, causes stifling of their
spiritual progress. We mentioned the karmic reactions for
killing the cow, but there are karmic results that one
acquires from killing other entities as well, which is to
suffer a similar pain or die in a similar way. Whatever
you do unto others will later return to you, either in
this life or in a future life. For every action there is
an equal and opposite reaction. That is the law of karm.
'We can now begin to understand how dark the future is
for someone who owns or manages something like a
hamburger or fried chicken stand. Not only is he
responsible for the animals that are killed, cooked, and
then sold by his business, but he is also responsible for
those he hires to help with it, and those who buy and eat
the dead animals. We can also begin to get an idea of the
dark collective karm of the population of a country whose
food habits are centered around the meat industry. The
violence that is generated by such a society certainly
cannot help but create adverse affects in the world.
THE BENEFIT FROM COWS
'The cow and bull are the prime targets of the meat
industry. However, cows and bulls are very important to
human civilization. Until the recent invention of the
tractor, the bull was used for helping to cultivate
fields for producing food, and the cow has always
supplied milk. A moderate supply of milk in our diet
provides the proper nutrients for developing a good brain
for understanding spiritual topics. Some sadhus in India
do not eat, but take only milk. From milk one can make
many other foods that are used in thousands of recipes
that we all appreciate, such as cheese or curd, yogurt,
kefir, butter, ghee, and so on. (However, this is not to
approve of the cruel and questionable practices of the
dairy industry as found in western countries.) This means
that, according to the Vedas, the cow is one of our
mothers and the bull is like a father for the benefit
they have done for society. To do outright harm to such
creatures is considered extremely serious. 'I have heard
Western people criticize India for not slaughtering its
cows, and talk about how there would be no more starving
children if they would just eat the cows. That is not the
cure. I have traveled all over India and have seen hungry
people there as well as in American cities, which is more
able to hide such problems. Homeless and hungry people
are found in every country. For another thing, cows are
one of India's greatest resources. They produce food,
fuel and power. Bullocks do as much as two-thirds of the
work on the average farm. They help plow the fields, hall
produce, and turn the presses. For India to convert to
machinery to do these tasks, especially in villages,
would cost as much as 20 to 30 billion dollars. For a
country like India, that is out of the question and a
waste of time and money.
'The cows also supply up to 800 tons of manure each year
for fuel. Cow dung gives a slow even heat, good for
cooking. Using coal for cooking would cost 1.5 billion
dollars a year. And besides, believe it or not, cow dung
kills bacteria and is antiseptic. And keeping cows is
cheap since they eat things like wheat stubble, husks,
and rice straw, which people cannot use.
'So why raise cattle for meat consumption when it takes
seven times more acreage for a pound of beef than a pound
of milk? Only four to sixteen pounds of flesh food is
produced for every hundred pounds of food eaten by
cattle. Ten to twenty tons of nutritive vegetable food
can be produced from the same amount of land that can
produce only one ton of beef. In one year, you can get
much more protein from a cow in the form of milk, cheese,
etc., than in the several years it takes for a cow to
mature enough to produce meat. To produce one pound of
wheat takes 25 gallons of water, whereas one pound of
beef requires 2500 gallons. And water is not always a
plentiful resource in countries like India. Obviously,
using agricultural resources for meat production is
nothing but wasteful.
'Furthermore, if we are so concerned about the starving
people in the world and the environment we live in, then
let us consider the fact that 60 million more people in
the world could be fed if Americans reduced their meat
consumption by only 10%. Plus, thousands of acres of
rainforest are lost every day in various countries, and
it is said that 50% of that is directly linked to raising
cattle for meat production. And though 76% of Americans
consider themselves concerned about the environment, only
2.8% are vegetarians (at the time of this writing). Many
Americans may say they love animals, but they still eat
them on a regular basis. Obviously, they need to raise
their consciousness about this. In any case, there are
many books on the market that present this type of
environmental information much more thoroughly.
''For those of you who would like to learn more about
what a vegetarian diet can do for you and how to cook
vegetarian meals easily, there are plenty of books
available to help you get started. Or check here on my
website for additional information and resources to get
started.
[This article available at: http://www.stephen-knapp.com ]
More at:
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/vegetarianism_recommended_in_Vedic_scrip...
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the
educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post
may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of
the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption
for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name,
current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by
others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the
article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use
of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the
copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance
the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is
believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material
as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance
with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes
by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more
information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes
of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from
the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
]]
library101
The only difference between this post and the previous one is missing
closing brackets (shown below) have been put back in after my citation
from Manu's (not God's) writings that somehow got deleted from my post
(???) enroute to the newsgroups :
...>>>
- HSN.
On Mar 1, 4:37 pm, library101 <h.s.nair...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is no being in this world Higher than or 'superior to' 'The One
> Living God on Earth'
> - We need some questions answered to bring down the 'High Speed Gamers
> of God'
> (the leading killers of The One Living God on Earth)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...>>>
>
>
> The Energy of God powers the World
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Having said that, we need to investigate the relationship between
> animals and human and Neanderthal and other beings in this small One
> World. I believe there is a parity between these creatures that is
> used to control today's world by 'High Speed Gaming' or The One God on
> Earth. Stock Markets (Wall Street alone - tied to all the others down
> the line of control - who may not know the details of what happens
> there) and Casinos and gambling houses, I believe, tie up the whole
> world in one single activity - the killing of The One God on Earth. I
> believe they take away the Energy of God, after killing Him, to run
> the world of today - all the Power Systems, Industries, Machinery,
> Trains, Automobiles, even the energy that each living being uses for
> living and functioning on earth. All the world's energy comes from the
> being of the One Living God on Earth.
>
> Who are these 'High Speed Gamers of God'
> - And what is the deadly game of numbers they play ?
> - 'Dance of Death'
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: use...@mantra.com and/orwww.mantra.com/jai(Dr. Jai Maharaj)
> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 01:24:23 GMT
> Local: Sun, Feb 27 2011 5:24 pm
> Subject: Re: Five Reasons to Be a Vegetarian, and Ten Arguments
> Against Eating Meat
> Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show
> original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
> Vegetarianism: Recommended in Vedic Scripture
>
> By Stephen Knapphttp://www.stephen-knapp.com
>
> Many times there seems to be some confusion or lack of
> clarity on whether the Vedic path condones or condemns
> the eating of meat. Often times I hear Indians and
> followers of the Vedic path explain that meat eating is
> all right, that the Vedic shastras do not condemn it. Of
> course, in this day and age meat eating includes and
> supports the whole meat industry, which is the systematic
> slaughter of thousands of animals on a daily basis. But
> if we actually research the Vedic texts we will find that
> there ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
library101
GP might be right. No animals benefit by existing. They do not know
what it means to benefit from something. All they need is to be left
alone to get their food, and money for goods and services, etc.
As far as Goober's comment about Eliminationists (AW) and others, they
have to follow what I say (The One Living God on Earth). Or else.
I ain't changing from Use of Reason, Truth and Non-Violence.
We just shoot them, and then talk to them. We visit with them and talk
to them again. And then we might give up or not give up. Who knows
what the hell happens in this World these days.
Keep cool.
- HSN.
On Mar 7, 12:52 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> Fuckwit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters, lied:
>
> > On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:48:35 -0800, George Plimpton wrote:
>
> >> Fuckwit David Harrison, criminal breeder of fighting roosters, lied:
>
> >>> There are people who like eating meat but feel so badly about doing so that
> >>> they become veg*n.
>
> >> ...that they start cooking up fuckwitted illogical bullshit rationales
> >> to justify it - like, the animals "benefit" by existing before they are
> >> killed.
>
> >> You, for example.
>
> > Some animals benefit from it
>
> No, Goober. *No* animals benefit by existing, Goober.