RE: use of silk etc.,
From the Bhakti List Archives
• July 29, 1998
Sri: Srimate Sri Lakshmi Nrusimha ParaBrahmane Namaha Dear devotees, namo NArAyanA. Kindly accept adiyen's pranAmams. Parthasarati Dileepan wrote: > Further, our own > Sri Ramanuja says that animal sacrifice as in Agnishomiya > is good for the animal. Ref: Sri Rmaanuja Githa Bhashya > Chapter 2, Verse 31. Sri Mani wrote : And while Ramanuja did say this, one should ponder whether the acharya himself ever sacrificed an animal, or after doing so, ate its remains. I seriously doubt it. Ramanuja's adherence to the validity of animal sacrifice is not so much a commandment that we perform the same, but belief in the validity of the Vedic method for some purpose. Anything that can be achieved by animal sacrifice can be achieved by non- violent worship. Further, the very thought of harming even a plant, even out of "AcArya-kainkarya" (service to one's guru) would cause the venerable Kuratt-Alvan to faint. It is said that Alvan would faint at seeing someone cut down a banana tree for its leaves, in utter sympathy for the plant. Sri Dileepan wrote : > Then, we have the examples of Guhan and Dharmavyadhar. > Dharmavyadhar says, > > "The one who consumes meat after > offering it to Devas and Pithrus will > not incur any sin." We have to make a serious distinction between "no sin" and the "right thing to do". There is a difference. There are many things that are not sinful -- selfless action of any sort does not incur sin. One can kill an innocent someone without any self-interest; this may not be sinful, but it certainly isn't the right thing to do. The Gita and the Bharata can be easily misunderstood to mean that cold-blooded, calculated murder is OK, but a crime of passion is not, because the former is selfless but the latter is not! This could not be further from the truth. at lesser cost by peaceful means. Sri Dileepan wrote : > Please permit me to present another angle. Those who offer > meat to the Lord and then consume it as "prasadham" is a lot > better off than those who live as strict vegetarians without > ever touching even eggs, but have no time for perumaaL. Sri Mani wrote : What about those who engage in "bhUta-kainkarya", and avoid meat, without thinking about God too much, but those who slaughter animals mercilessly, and offer a little bit to God to appease their conscience? I would rather spend time with the former, as they are selflessly worshipping some mode of God in truth. We can talk all we want about lions, but I refuse to believe that it is the natural state of some human beings to consume meat, and that it therefore should be tolerated. There is much evidence in sAstra against such a position. Adiyen : The jIvAtmA which resided inside the body of the animal that is used in the "ya~jnA" , attains svargam . Aswamedha yAgA ( horse sacrifice ) etc have been done so many times by great Kings in the past . Infact , during srAddham ( davasam) one should offer Deer's meat etc & the BrAhmanAs should eat them . From vAlmIkI RAmAyanA one can infer that some great personalities ate meat . But , all these things are no more valid for kali yugA . Usage of meat in any Bhagavad kainkaryam is not permitted in Kali yugA due to the kali yuga dharmA . Killing of animals for Bhagavad kainkaryam has to be understood in an integrated way & not just the performance of this act . In kali yugA there is 99.9 % ( some one may be still qualified as good as a rishi of the past ) of misusing this animal sacrifice . So , in smruthi , they banned it . In general , the performer of the yAgA ( esp. when using animals etc ) has to be highly pure in body & mind . So , they were fit enough to do that & simultaneously brought elevation to the jIvAtmA that was occupying animal body . One can understand the kali yugA standards very well by themselves . There is no need to say that one shouldn't eat meat / use it for Bhagavad kainkaryam . adiyen anantha padmanAbha dAsan
- Next message: Krishna Kalale: "Re: ashtAksharam & dvayam - 4"
- Previous message: Ram Gopalaswamy: "Re: Ahimsa, Logic, and Changing with the times"
- Maybe in reply to: V. Chandrasekaran: "use of silk etc.,"
- Next in thread: Kadambi: "Re: use of silk etc.,"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]