Re: Vegetarianism - Plants have life too. (Seek Answers)
From the Bhakti List Archives
K. Sadananda • Fri Nov 09 2001 - 04:24:29 PST
>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 ]
