[Advaita-l] Vegetarianism

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

*श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <http://www.lalitaalaalitah.com/>
lalitAlAlitaH <http://about.me/lalitaalaalitah/bio>*



2012/4/16 Rajaram Venkataramani <rajaramvenk at gmail.com>

>
>
> It is obvious. An act which causes pain is himsa. There is inadvertent
> himsa as in walking that may kill very small insects and inevitable himsa
> as in a righteous war and yajna done selflessly for greater good.
>

This definition is not going to solve problems which were posed by
abhishek's friend. So, one must find some better definition.


> I am not opposed to shAstrIya definition on ahimsa. You don't need
> shastras to define what is himsa. If I slap you, we will know it is himsa.
> We don't need dharma shastras to tell us that. We need dharma shastras only
> to tell us when himsa is allowed.
>

Only slapping happens barely. It has always some background and that plays
a part to determine hiMsA. See examples provided by vidyAsha~Nkara.

It is extremely important. None of the mandatory yajnas involve animal
> sacrifice. The yajnas that involve animal sacrifice are not mandatory. They
> involve specific rules on who can do, when, why and even how the remnants
> are to be shared. There is no room for running slaughterhouses.
>

To your surprise you must know that even nitya and naimittika karma has
adhikArI, etc. So having adhikArI, etc. can't prove vaidika-hiMsA 'bad'.
Moreover, if you accept veda-s as pramANa for nitya-karma-s, you must also
do same in the case of kAmya-karma, etc. for both are prescribed by the
same veda-s. So, either accept both type of vaidika-yaGYa-s as good, i.e,
prAmANika and hence conducive to good OR shun the validity of veda-s in
case of nitya-karma-s too as it prescribes 'bad' karma-s.


>  People eat meat because it satisfies their tongue.


That's correct.
But, that is definitely not the single cause.


> If someone tells that sastras allow that, they will accept it because it
> makes them feel less guilty.


So, do you want to say that whatever not fits your definition is a bad part
of shAstra OR the whole shAstra is bad ?
OR, Do you want to say that vAkya-s supporting mAMsa-bhaXaNa doesn't exist
at all ?

The instruction of Lord Krishna and Sankara in this matter is crystal clear.


sha~Nkara and kR^iShNa were not dealing with mAMsa-bhaxaNa in bhAShya or
gItA. So, how could you say that their view is crystal clear in this
respect ?
Rather, they were talking of validity of hiMsA which comes from veda-s and
smR^iti-s.


> Are the people who are eating meat performing yajna according to Kalpa
> sutras?


Yes. Do you think only vegetarian people know shAstra-s ?

We know they don't and as per our sastras they verily eat sin.


Many are not included in 'We'.
Don't call 'our shAstra', because you are following PETA. Say our PETA.
Again, those people are eating mAMsa allowed by shAstra-s. So, they are not
eating any sin.


> They will suffer the karmic reaction. Those of you who  mislead the
> ignorant using the respect that your position as a brahmana or sannyasi
> gets you.


Without studying shAstra-s with a competent guru and without a mind ready
to learn you can't expect to know many things.


>  If the grace of Ishwara can bring about change in the UK, have no doubts
> that it will change UP.
>

May Ishvara provide logical support to you too !!


> If at all you get mamsa as bhiksha, please start training your tongue to
> accept rice, roti, dhal etc.
>

Every word reveals your identity. Be careful.