Re: Vegetarianism - Plants have life too. (Seek Answers)
From the Bhakti List Archives
• November 9, 2001
>Why Vegetarianism? Here is article II. answers to some questions raised by one Mr. Srinivas who was a Vaishnavate slipped into some wrong habits. ---------------- Srinivas, Greetings! I am happy to read your discussion on my article. I am giving below some more thoughts for you to ponder about. Do not accept them but do not reject them either. But contemplate on them to see if they make some sense. The question of - should I be a vegetarian or not - obviously comes to only for a man who has a choice to make. In fact he has no choice but to choose. All other life forms instinctively fall within the system or blend with the nature. Only because, man stands tall in the creation with his intellect highly evolved is capable of making that choice. The other life forms have less of choice and are governed more by the instincts. In the anatomy of all life forms, the plants come the lowest with the body, if at all with a rudimentary mental development ( as shown by the Dr. Bose) and no conceivable intellect. Animals come with body and mind to some degree but with very limited intellect. (I read a story where a cat in New York ran back in to the house that was in blaze to save her kittens and in the process sacrificed her own life). Only in humans (in most of them) body, mind and intellect developed to the maximum. They understand what hurt means since they feel intensely when someone hurts them. All dharmas (doos and don'ts) that are taught in all religions are only based on these simple principles. These are universal values, irrespective of time and space. What I expect others to do to me, I should do to others - this is my dharma. I expect others to tell me truth - then telling the truth is my dharma. I expect others to be considerate, kind and forgiving my faults, not to steal my property, respect me as I am, not to hurt me by action, by word or by thought. Then these are my does. The reason is I have a value for these since I value others to follow these towards me. When I compromise my values for pleasure or for money for whatever sensuous reason or even for fear, I raise conflicts in my own mind and intellect. Feeling of guilt is due to the divergence between what my conscious (intellectual values) dictates versus what I feel like doing (mental or sensuous enjoyments). I am giving this just as a background. All dharmas or values are not for the sake of religion but only fundamentally related to keep me in a state free from conflicts, to be in peace with myself; which everyone values the most. Based on the evolutionary ladder in the life forms, all life forms are not the same, even the expression of life through the equipments are not the same. Plants operate mostly at body level, animal mostly at body and mind level and human at body, mind and intellect level. On that basis killing plants is not the same as killing an animal which is not the same as killing a human being. Even by law the last one is a no-no in any society even though human is as much as a mammalian as a cow or dog or cat or monkey. Human meat can be consumed since it solves both the food problem and the population problem. But even the notorious meat eaters repel at the thought of that- why? Only law alone can kill a human when that human behaves worse than an animal as it has happened for the Oklahoma bombing culprit. I do agree that in destroying plants you are killing the life forms too. But are you sensitive to that? My discussion pertains not just to intellectual understanding as a thought, after the belly is full. It is not understanding as a thought it should be an understanding as a fact. It is called an assimilated value. Let me give you a gross example. That I am man and not a woman is not just an intellectual understanding as a thought but understanding as a fact. There is no misconceptions any time about my identity. In the killing of animal, the understanding is without a question but the suffering of the animal is vivid to our understanding. True plant-suffering we cannot see - since our sense are not sensitive. Even though intellectually at a scientific level we understand that they are life forms too, the comprehension of their suffering is not there. Thank God for that! Otherwise we will be starving to death. Remember, I did not advocate killing of the plants either if you are truly sensitive about it. Our saastra-s have recognized this as a problem. In olden days when the plant kingdom was plenty, those that are contemplative were asked to eat only the fruits that fall from the tree and plat the seed afterwards. That is why I said, food is advised to be taken on a need basis. I have to keep this body alive till I have self-realized or God-realized (read my related article on Hinduism). Hurting my body is as much a no-no as hurting another body. So I have to eat to live. Life lives on life. Since I have a choice I should exercise the right choice to keep my body alive. Eating plants is therefore more preferable than eating animals or humans. Since there is a sacrifice of life, the scripture advice us not to eat without first offering to the Lord, who is the enlivening factor in all life forms. There is a sandhyaa vandanam - I donot know if you are brahman and had gone through upanayanam where they teach you the trikaala sandhya. It is said that sandyaavandanam is essential for a brahman ( here true brahman is one who has a satvik mind - a mind sensitive to the feeling of others - brahman charati iti brahmanaH - a contemplative student - truly it is not based on birth ) and it is said he does not gain anything by doing sandhya but if he does not do he incurs a sin. If you understand the true import of the mantras you see why it is said like that - It is the recognition of the fact that you are standing on a platform supported by your lineage(gotram), benefiting from their culture, traditions and values that have been passed on from generations and you are getting benefit from all life forms and from the very source of the life in this plant, the sun. It is a recognition of the fact and recognition of the problem and request that your sins (commissions and omissions) be forgiven. The purpose is not to chant mechanically but to make one to be sensitive to where we stand in the society in the hierarchy in the creation. It is oblations to our ancestors, oblations to the nature and oblations to creation. Before the food is taken, it is to be offered and then taken - then it becomes a prasaadam - part at least symbolically should be offered first to bhuutas - crows or other scavengers who help us indirectly. Food should be taken as prasaadam automatically imply that one cannot be greedy and only take what is needed. Before the former tills the land, he does prayer to the earth since in the tilling process he is destroying many living organisms. Before the harvest is taken, prayers are offered. These are developed to make one responsible and make one sensitive to the nature. That is why not doing is said as a sin. Jews offer prayer before they butcher an animal and then only they sell that meat as kosher meat. Now coming back to your situation, you say that you were brought up as a vegetarian, and you become non-veg because of the need. I do not see a need to become for the sake of a convenience. I came to this country in 30 years ago when there are no places that offer vegetarian food, yet I survived. We have brought up our daughter in this country and she is a student at Northwestern Medical school. She is a strict vegetarian. She used to cook rice in the microwave and eat with the pickles and yogurt, even when she was in the dorm to supplement bland so-called vegetarian food in the cafeteria. Her room became an attraction to many Indian Students who were longing for some spicy food. In your case compromise may be a better word than convenience. You say it is not religious, but if one understands the true import of so-called religious dharmas, they are taught only for making one's life simple and straight forward with peace of mind that everyone longs for. It is intellectual if one understands in their true import. Intellectual and religious are not contradictory - in fact they are the same. If we don't understand the true import of the religious manual we need to confirm, giving the benefit of the doubt, since it is intended to make us better humans. If we understand in their essence, then we don't have to confirm, we naturally follow not to the letter but to its essence. Values become mandates only if we don't assimilate them. If the value of the value is understood then it becomes our nature. We may compromise a lower value to follow a higher value. Killing is wrong, but not when you have to do to protect higher dharma. To save a life I may lie, there is no internal conflict. Krishna's teaching to Arjuna is what is called active goodness not passive goodness. You can be a non-vegetarian if that does not bother you. Obviously there is some conflict - either because of your upbringing or the values you are taught to the degree that in your subconsiousness there is a degree of sensitivity in eating meat, even though you may justify that I don't physically see the butchering of the animal. A colleague of mine used to argue that he is doing a favor to the cows since they are brought into life (in forms) because there is demand for the meat. One can use the same argument to develop humans as cattle and grow them in forms and feed them to become healthy and one day butcher them for their meat. The thought itself is repelling. One can develop any argument that sounds intellectually convincing, to justify eating meat. But in the final analysis the question boils down to: are you sensitive to it or not. Would you appreciate somebody else killing you and eating your meat? Even a notorious thief would not like that his stolen property be stolen by any other. I tried to justify killing of plants at the expense of animals or humans since one has to eat to live. Since we are not sensitive to the suffering of the plants, whatever the reason may be, we have no internal conflicts in eating vegetables. If we are carnivorous, we would not have any conflict in eating meat. The situation is that we do have a choice. That is the glory of human life. Because we have the choice, we can use the choice to evolve ourselves or damn ourselves. That is the choice we need to exercise. If you really can justify to your own satisfaction that eating meat is necessary rather than convenience or tasty then go ahead and eat - no question asked - no discussion needed. The arguments end there. All the above arguments are only if there is a question in your own mind, which you seem to have since your brought up and your value system demands that introspection. Then my advice to you is to stop justifying your self for compromises and live up to the values you believe in or grown in. Advice by Krishna is one should follow one's own Dharma - swadharma - than follow others even if it is convenient. Let us have guts to follow what is right rather than what is convenient. When one follows ones swadharma, even if it is inconvenient, there is less internal conflicts, more self satisfaction. More importantly, the mind becomes moldable for higher pursuits since you could say no to it in spite of its demands. This is the greatest asset for a human. I too went on writing, repeating myself. But I hope the thoughts are clear. I hope you make the right choice and follow it through which makes you proud of yourself. Hari Om! Sadananda -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -------------------------------------------------------------- - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- Next message: bvsheela_at_yahoo.com: "srichoorna paripAlanai- reason"
- Previous message: K. Sadananda: "Re: Vegetarianism - Plants have life too. (Seek Answers)"
- In reply to: Pattangi: "Vegetarianism - Plants have life too. (Seek Answers)"
- Next in thread: Rajaram Venkataramani: "Why Vegetarianism - Plants have life too (Some Answers)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]