• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

animal sacrifices by brahmins

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

nvg

0
i belong to yajur veda. though i am a vegetarian, i have no other interest in the customs and practices of brahmins. in my curiosity to know what yajur veda is really all about I happen to read some portion of english translation of vedas. It is clear from whatever i have read that brahmins were indulging in animal sacrifices. it mentions about how the sacrificial alter is to be prepared, what kind of wood should be used to place the head of the animal , how the knife should be shaped and the way to be followed for offering different parts of an animal. And this practice was prevalent in all other branches of vedas also.

At the same time i happened to read some other passages from the rigveda samhita and few passages from mahabharatha which clearly states non killing of animals and the punishment to be given to the people who kill them.

some one please clarify.
 
rama was out hunting deer. i presume this was for food and not for entertainment.

the aswamedha horse sacrifice has been chronicled in detail. including the role of the king's wife.

i presume, the brahmins conducted the yagnas. my father used to say 'konnaa paavam thinnaa pOgum'.

the concept of vegetarianism must have been gradual. the bengali brahmins still eat fish.

i think it is all in the way we are brought to think. many vegetarians, of all hues and shades, cannot stand the smell of meat cooking. most folks will find certain fish smell loathsome, even though they might not have any problem eating it.

many places in africa, they eat the night flies and cockroaches, as delicacies.

the chinese eat anything that moves.

so, all in all, it is all in the mind.
 
Animal sacrifices

In vedic period, animal sacrifices were not only very common, but they were required to propitiate different deities/devas. Besides, brahmins of those times have eaten meat also without any restraint.

In Orissa and West Bengal, fish is considered a vegetable grown in sea waters and brahmins there eat fish almost every day. They derive pride and pleasure serving cooked fish delicacies to their esteemed guests too.

As far as I understand the history, only after the advent of Buddhism and Jainism, vegetarianism stepped into Hinduism and became an integral part of the brahmins' lives and an essential qualification for being a brahmin too.
 
animal sacrifice

in kumbakonam there is a famous madam at solaiappan street called sri
Vijayendrar madam.Vijayendrar has written a work on Pista pasu mimamsa,in which he has explained quoting authorities,that sacrifice
should be done with animal images made out of flour.the apparent double-bind message in vedas,of do's and dont's has been reconciled by him.do with flour and not with flesh and blood.
 
i also read that a prominent mutt head presided over animal sacrifice at the kumbakonam place, a couple of years ago.

it was whispered among the blog posts.

i searched for it in the news item in the internet, but could not find any.

is there such thing as smoke without fire?
 
Last edited:
Hi ppl,

Let me introduce myself as S. Rajagopalan. I am an Iyengar. According to my elders Vaishnavism strictly prohibits animal sacrifices. There is an instance in which the Jeer of the Ahobila Madam refused to travel to a temple near Pasupatinath temple in Nepal as animal sacrifices are still carried out there. So it is said that even symbolic representation of scarifices like breaking of egss, applying kumkum to lemons after cutting them are prohibited. I am not excatly sure how right it is. The advent of vegetarianism started after Budha. In India in olden times we have heard that Brahmins used to have meat, Agastya for one (remember the Ilhanan, Vathapi story).

Personaly I am against non vegetarinism, it is so because when we can not create life, we do not have the right to destroy another.

I did not mean to offend anyone, but if my replies have offended anyone,I would like to apologize.

Regards,
Rajagopalan

The temple in question here is the Dakshin Kali temple...
 
Last edited:
sura said:
Hi ppl,

Let me introduce myself as S. Rajagopalan. I am an Iyengar. According to my elders Vaishnavism strictly prohibits animal sacrifices. There is an instance in which the Jeer of the Ahobila Madam refused to travel to a temple near Pasupatinath temple in Nepal as animal sacrifices are still carried out there. So it is said that even symbolic representation of scarifices like breaking of egss, applying kumkum to lemons after cutting them are prohibited. I am not excatly sure how right it is. The advent of vegetarianism started after Budha. In India in olden times we have heard that Brahmins used to have meat, Agastya for one (remember the Ilhanan, Vathapi story).

Personaly I am against non vegetarinism, it is so because when we can not create life, we do not have the right to destroy another.

I did not mean to offend anyone, but if my replies have offended anyone,I would like to apologize.

Regards,
Rajagopalan
Click to expand...


I just stumbled on this post, because I searched the term Pashupathinath temple..

Yes pashupathinath temple is very particular about this, cos they are particular about maintaining their traditions, and hence any visitor has to hand over their supposed leather wallets/belts/wrist watches at the cloak room, for a very small fee..

Yes, I do agree,the country is so poverty sticken, and they get their basic proteins from animals.. Survival of the fittest..And we can see the slaughtering in every blood littered streets, on festival days..

btw,just curious, whats the point you are trying to drive here.
 
Dear Sri Rajagopalan Ji,

Please do not apologize for expressing your views in a very logical cogent way. Your personal views, put in the way you did are most welcome in this Forum.

But that does not mean everyone would or should agree with those views!:)

Thanks.

Regards,
KRS
 
sapr333 said:
I just stumbled on this post, because I searched the term Pashupathinath temple..

Yes pashupathinath temple is very particular about this, cos they are particular about maintaining their traditions, and hence any visitor has to hand over their supposed leather wallets/belts/wrist watches at the cloak room, for a very small fee..

Yes, I do agree,the country is so poverty sticken, and they get their basic proteins from animals.. Survival of the fittest..And we can see the slaughtering in every blood littered streets, on festival days..

btw,just curious, whats the point you are trying to drive here.
Click to expand...

Nothing great, but just to drive in the point that animal sacrifices were carried out and will be carried out and it is just perception of the individual(s) whether or not they support animal sacrifices.
 
I belong to Tiruvarur where the famous Manu Needi Chola ruled. Even the great Kings those days have rendered justice to a Cow. Chola king, who is suppose to be Kshatriya rendered justice to a Cow by sacrificing his own son and Lord Thyagesa appeared & restored the life of the prince as well as calf. There is no sanctity in sacrifying animals for our personal benefit
 
Here are the explanations on animal sacrifices by Maha Periaval In His book Hindu Dharma:

The Purpose of Sacrifices
(HinduDharma: The Vedas)

Why is it that religion alone has the rites called yajnas or sacrifices?
If a crop grows in surplus in our place we trade it with what is available in plenty in another and is not produced in our own. The carpenter, the blacksmith and other artisans make useful articles and serve us in many ways. In return we give them what they need for their upkeep. We feed the cow grass and it yields us milk. We pay the government taxes and it gives us protection. The affairs of the world are conducted on the basis of a system of exchange. Similarly, we conduct an exchange even with worlds other than our own. Engineers and other experts can canalise water obtained from the rains but they cannot produce the rains. If we want the rains to come, we have to despatch certain goods to the abode of the celestials. It is this kind of exchange that the Gita speaks of:
Devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah
Parasparam bhavayantah sreyah param avapsyatha
It means: " You keep the devas satisfied with the performance of sacrifices. And let them look after your welfare by producing rain on earth. Thus, helping each other, be more and more prosperous and happy. "

Regards,
KRS
 
Last edited:
More on Animal Sacrifice By Maha Periaval in Hindu Dharma:

One is enjoined to perform twenty-one sacrifices. These are of three types:pakayajna, haviryajna and somayajna. In each category there are seven subdivisions. In all the seven pakayajnas as well as in the first five haviryajnas there is no animal sacrifice. It is only from the sixth haviryajna onwards (it is called "nirudhapasubandha") that animals are sacrificed.
"Brahmins sacrificed herds and herds of animals and gorged themselves on their meat. The Buddha saved such herds when they were being taken to the sacrificial altar, " we often read such accounts in books. To tell the truth, there is no sacrifice in which a large number of animals are killed. For vajapeya which is the highest type of yajna performed by Brahmins, only twenty-three animals are mentioned. For asvamedha (horse sacrifice), the biggest of the sacrifices conducted by imperial rulers, one hundred animals are mentioned.
It is totally false to state that Brahmins performed sacrifices only to satisfy their appetite for meat and that the talk of pleasing the deities was only a pretext. There are rules regarding the meat to be carved out from a sacrificial animal, the part of the body from which it is to be taken and the quantity each rtvik can partake of as prasada (idavatarana). This is not more than the size of a pigeon-pea and it is to be swallowed without anything added to taste. There may be various reasons for you to attack the system of sacrifices but it would be preposterous to do so on the score that Brahmins practised deception by making them a pretext to eat meat.
Nowadays a large number of animals are slaughtered in the laboratories as guinea-pigs. Animal sacrifices must be regarded as a little hurt caused in the cause of a great ideal, the welfare of mankind. As a matter of fact there is no hurt caused since the animal sacrificed attains to an elevated state.
There is another falsehood spread these days, that Brahmins performed the somayajnas only as a pretext to drink somarasa (the essence of the soma plant). Those who propagate this lie add that drinking somarasa is akin to imbibing liquor or wine. As a matter of fact somarasa is not an intoxicating drink. There is a reference in the Vedas to Indra killing his foe when he was "intoxicated" with somarasa. People who spread the above falsehoods have recourse to " arthavada" and base their perverse views on this passage.
The principle on which the physiology of deities is based is superior to that of humans. That apart, to say that the priests drank bottle after bottle of somarasa or pot after pot is to betray gross ignorance of the Vedic dharma. The soma plant is pounded and crushed in a small mortar called "graha". There are rules with regard to the quantity of essence to be offered to the gods. The small portion that remains after the oblation has been made, "huta-sesa", which is drunk drop by drop, does not add up to more than an ounce. No one has been knocked out by such drinking. They say that somarasa is not very palatable. .
The preposterous suggestion is made that somarasa was the coffee of those times. There are Vedic mantras which speak about the joy aroused by drinking it. This has been misinterpreted. While coffee is injurious to the mind, somarasa cleanses it. It is absurd to equate the two. The soma plant was available in plenty in ancient times. Now it is becoming more and more scarce: this indeed is in keeping with the decline of Vedic dharma. In recent years, the Raja of Kollengode made it a point to supply the soma plant for the soma sacrifice wherever it was held.

Regards,
KRS
 
More on animal sacrifices by Maha Periaval in Hindu Dharma:

Animal Sacrifice in the Age of Kali
(HinduDharma: The Vedas)

An argument runs thus: In the eons gone by mankind possessed high ideals and noble character. Men could sacrifice animals for the well-being of the world because they had great affection in their hearts and were selfless. They offered even cows and horses in sacrifice and had meat for sraddha. As householders, in their middle years, they followed the karmamarga (the path of works) and performed rites to please the deities for the good of the world. But, in doing so, they desired no rewards. Later, they renounced all works, all puja, all observances, to become sannyasins delighting themselves in their Atman. They were men of such refinement and noble character that, if their brother, a king, died heirless they begot a son by his wife without any passion in their hearts and without a bit detracting from their brahmacharya. Their only motive was that the kingdom should not be plunged in anarchy for want of an heir to the throne.
In our own Kali age we do not have such men who are desireless in their actions, who can subdue their minds and give up all works to become ascetics and who will remain chaste at heart even in the company of women. So it is contended that the following are to be eschewed in the Kali age: horse and cow sacrifices, meat in the sraddha ceremony, sannyasa, begetting a son by the husband's brother. As authority we have the following verse:
Asvalambham gavalambham sanyasam palapatrikam
Devarena sutotpattim kalau panca vivarjayet
According to one view "asvalambham" in this verse should be substituted with "agniyadhanam". If you accept this version it would mean that even those sacrifices in which animals are not killed should not be performed. In other words it would mean a total prohibition of all sacrifices. The very first in the haviryajna category is agniyadhana. If that were to be prohibited it would mean that, apart from small sacrifices called "pakayajnas", no yajna can be performed.
According to great men such a view is wrong. Sankara Bhagavatpada, whose mission in life was the re-establishment of Vedic dharma, did not stop with the admonishment that Vedas must be chanted every day ("Vedo nityam adhiyatam"). He insisted that rites imposed on us by the Vedas must be performed: " "Taduditam karma svanusthiyatam. " Of Vedic rites, sacrifices occupy the foremost place. If they are to be eschewed what other Vedic rites are we to perform? It may be that certain types of sacrifices need not be gone through in the age of Kali.
If, according to the verse, agniyadhana is interdicted, and no big sacrifice is to be performed in the age of Kali, why should gavalambha (cow sacrifice) have been mentioned in the prohibited category? If agniyadhana is not permissible, it goes without saying that gavalambha also is prohibited. So, apart from certain types, all sacrifices are to be performed at all times.
According to another verse quoted from the Dharmasastra, so long as the varnasrama system is followed in the age of Kali, in however small a measure, and so long as the sound of the Vedas pervades the air, works like agniyadhana must be performed and the sannyasasrama followed, the stage of life in which there is no karma. The prohibition in Kali applies to certain types of animal sacrifices, meat in sraddha ceremonies and begetting a son by the husband's brother.

Please refer: http://www.kamakoti.org/newlayout/sitemap.html

Regards,
KRS
 
I think we have come out of VEDIC AGE. Now we are far away from Vedas. If we follow strictly what are all said in vedas, then the question of ANIMIAL SACRIFIES holds good. Else.... I regret we(Brahmins) going back to the older periods and taking the role of BUTCHERS.

In LALITHA SAHASRANAMAM, it is said that, devi is pleased when she is offered "TODDY". Do we offer her this these days??
 
shekharsesshathri said:
I think we have come out of VEDIC AGE. Now we are far away from Vedas. If we follow strictly what are all said in vedas, then the question of ANIMIAL SACRIFIES holds good. Else.... I regret we(Brahmins) going back to the older periods and taking the role of BUTCHERS.

In LALITHA SAHASRANAMAM, it is said that, devi is pleased when she is offered "TODDY". Do we offer her this these days??
Click to expand...

Vid = knowledge, of anything, of the spirit, science, maths, astronomy, etc.

Vedic age simple means knowledge based economy or society. Vedic age never ends..as long as man has 'intelligence', it continues...

All cultures evolve, they absorb changes of time and give up something, take in something. Doesn't mean anyone needs to live a 2nd century life in the 21st century...
 
To All: No right for the human being to kill any animal,bird or other creatures in the name of God or religion. Every birth there is Athma within so no one hasright to kill any thing. Animal sacrifices is a foolish thing and Moodanambikai. In our scriptures most of the words having so many meaning for one word,some one misunderstood some word and explained to the people and the started the cruelty to the helpless animals,killing a man is called Murder and law punishes, but there is no law for animals to go the court of law for their resque.s.r.k.
 
The Yajur Veda is all about sacrifices and it describes in detail how the sacrifice is to be done.Not only in Pasupathinath but even in Kamakhya and kalghat sacrifices take place
 
vegetarianism

Vegetarianism is an ideal which not every one in the society can possibly follow. Hindu religion is very practical in that it does not preach the same ideals for all sections of the society and measure all by the same yardstick. What you should eat depend on what you do physically. For those who toil hard physically and for those whose duty is to fight and kill for the welfare of the society, it is not correct to prescribe vegetarianism.

But, even for these who partake of non-vegetarianism, there are times when it is restricted. Thus, his craving for that food is softened and he is slowly getting accostomed to a life style, devoid of meat eating. That is how many non-brahmins who are used to meat eating graduate themselves to strict vegetarianism. They become vegetarians not out of any compulsion, but of conviction. It is not born out of a rigid dogma; but as a result of quiet realisation about the virtue of leading a satwic life.

Our dharma never enforces a particular life style but affords an opportunity for all to learn the lesson and practise it at ones own terms.
 
Last edited:
apunathan said:
Vegetarianism is an ideal which not every one in the society can possibly follow.
Click to expand...

My apologies but the above is simply not true. There are many athletes, and hard physical workers who remain vegetarian. Everyone could follow it without any dire consequences. All the necessary energy comes from carbohydrate, not protein. Professional soccer or hockey players load up on pasta, not meat, before games. This is another excuse, or myth propogated by meat eaters and perhaps the meat industry.

However not everyone chooses to.

I have nothing against people who choose to eat meat. It really is a person's choice. I am not in any way trying to suggest restriction of freedom of choice. There is only one situation where the above is true, and that is in far northern climates where a few people are still surviving on hunting and gathering. Even those people knew enough to eat the stomach partly digested food of caribou, etc.

Aum Namasivaya
 
apu,

i tend to agree with eastern.

physical strength is a result of constant care and build of the body.

doing weights, exercises specifically meant for the muscles and above all a determination to maintain this rigour. all this contribute to physique.

in some jobs involving manual labour, this comes as a side result.

mental strength is a different category altogether, and has no relationship to physical strength.

the weakest and smallest human can stand up, if he has courage and conviction of his stand, to any number of bullies.

i don't think it would be appropriate for me, at this point, to justify into finding excuses why TB youths, as a rule, do not wish to stand up and fight.

it is my wish, that we should face the bullies, risk a broken nose or rib, and in doing so earn respect. the word for the otherwise behaviour is 'cowardice'.

i blame our parents for inculcating timidity in our boys. the girls appear to be the tigers unleashed, as no one has coached them the meaning of intimidation.

something to think about, i feel.
 
Eastern Mind said:
All the necessary energy comes from carbohydrate, not protein. Professional soccer or hockey players load up on pasta, not meat, before games. This is another excuse, or myth propogated by meat eaters and perhaps the meat industry.
Click to expand...

Sorry eastern mind, i disagree.

Athletes need a lot of protein to help replace, build or repair worn out tissue or muscle: http://www.rice.edu/~jenky/caryn/protein.html

Soccer / hockey players eat carbs before a match, bcoz it helps give them a burst of energy. For the same reason, athletes also consume energy drinks to help sustain energy levels during a match or training session.

And yep, i also disagree with apunathan that veggie food results in satwik life. Wonder what makes veggie ppl as much corrupt as non-veggie ppl....
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top