[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: An instance of malicious interpretation of the Atharvaśirā upaniṣad

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Sunilji,



On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Sunil Bhattacharjya
sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com [advaitin] <advaitin at yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> The statement "They say animal sacrifices are not actual animals but only
> Pashus made
> of vegetarian grains" may not be (I repeat <may not be>) without some
> valid points.
>
It is said that even in shrAddha karmas, meat was an offering earlier;
instead, now, there are vegetarian substitutes used, which is a must based
on sampradAya. For example, traditionally, in shrAddha, we have brinjal and
an udad/ black gram dish as more or less a must.


> It is believed that the sacrificed pashus (obviously the non-vegetarian
> pashus) will take revenge on the sacrificer by eating the flesh of the
> latter (sacrificer), in the next birth and Manu also seems to have
> indicated this.
>
I don't remember having come across this in Manusmriti regarding
sacrifices. Please quote the reference. In fact, the dharmashAstras define
hiMsA as that which is done outside Vaidika sacrifice. Offering an animal
sacrifice as part of the ritual is dharma and cannot have phala of adharma
as per Manu 5.31-32, 39, while 5.40 guarantees a higher birth for all
herbs, plants, birds and animals offered in sacrificial rituals.


> This can possibly be obviated if the sacrificed pashu itself is a
> non-carnivorous animal or if vegetables like Kushmanda are sacrificed as
> Bali. The flesh eaters among the Hindus, eat the meat of the
> non-carnivorous animals.It is also believed that eating meat of
> non-vegetarian pashus (i.e., carnivorous animals) will make the mare
> aggressive and brutal.
>
This categorisation seems contrary to the any dharmashAstra. For example,
Manu Smriti 5.38 says that an killer of on an animal [accept for sacrifice]
dies similar violent death as many times as there are hair strands of the
animal! As for making one aggressive and brutal is true about any
non-vegetarian food, whether in this life or next. Such a person is said to
be born in a "more conducive" body to prey on other animals.


> However, Vishwamitra is said to have taken dog's meat to save his life,
> when there was a famine, but I do not recollect the reference at this time
>
Eating food which someone has begun consuming or prohibited food in order
to save one's life overrides the rules of dharmashAstra in during daily
living.

Kind rgds,
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
[Br.Up. 4.5.15] */