Is it a Sin to kill small insects knowingly or unknowingly as per Hinduism?

[sangom]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Shri Sangom

Thank you for your reply.


When I said “scriptures of convenience”, it was not meant in degrading sense. I only meant about evolving to suit present conveniences. But that does not mean that we have to deny the past. There is nothing

wrong in accepting the way it was in the past in comparison to the way we live today in the sense of religious rituals. If it means although in the past Hindus had animal sacrifices in the yagnas in the present day’s

majority of the Hindus in general are known for their vegetarian way of living which is imo great progress indeed. When I said scriptures of convenience, although it may not sound right, I was only trying to confirm

this point of view.

Kind Regards

Smt. Amala,

I am not sure whether you have followed the sequence of discussions in this thread. In post # 11, I wrote that "our (at least, of the Brahmins) ancestors killed hundreds if not thousands of captive animals routinely during their vedic yajnas and they preached to every one around, including those hapless animals that those animals will straight away go to the heavens with their bodies shining brightly and be utilized by the Devas."
Shri HRHK contested this statement citing the interpretation of kamakoti.org and further saying that he did some research and could not find any instance of hundreds/ thousands of animals being sacrificed. Hence all these.

None of us, including Shri HRHK, I am sure, wants to go back to those yajna-days. Hope you have no objection in our continuing this discussion as to whether there is any evidence for large-scale killing of animals as part of vedic yajnas.

 

[suraju06]

Brahmanyan in post #124

"Self preservation and propagation of the species" is the first law of nature. This applies to all living beings.
All our acts revolve around these two aspects of life. For me the word "Sin" represents "guilt". Basing on this
each one has to decide whether an act of his is sinful or not.
Many a time I used to wonder how is that we are led to believe that "Ahimsa Paramo Dharmaha" and at the same time glorify killing of enemies. While Governments enact laws and spend money to safe guard the rights of individual and even animals, they have no qualms in dropping bombs to wipe out millions of innocent men, women and children. We all know war is destruction, but countries spend huge amounts of their revenue in equipping their defense machinery. This is done in the name of self preservation.

Sangaom in post #126:

I am not sure whether you have followed the sequence of discussions in this thread. In post # 11, I wrote that "our (at least, of the Brahmins) ancestors killed hundreds if not thousands of captive animals routinely during their vedic yajnas and they preached to every one around, including those hapless animals that those animals will straight away go to the heavens with their bodies shining brightly and be utilized by the Devas."
Shri HRHK contested this statement citing the interpretation of kamakoti.org and further saying that he did some research and could not find any instance of hundreds/ thousands of animals being sacrificed. Hence all these.
None of us, including Shri HRHK, I am sure, wants to go back to those yajna-days. Hope you have no objection in our continuing this discussion as to whether there is any evidence for large-scale killing of animals as part of vedic yajnas.

1)All the Vedas that we have today are those which have been handed down through generations by word of mouth because the writing technology was not well developed in the ancient times. Our ancestors had taken care to the extent possible to hand down what they knew in pure form without any additions or deletions or mispronunciation. Learning Vedas by repeating the words again and again in a particular recurring way was adopted by our ancestors to preserve its originality in pure form. The only other religion in which you come across such strenuous efforts to keep the scriptures pure is Judaism. Even today this method is followed in some of the learning centres in our country. If 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc represent the words in a sentence then it is learnt by rote by repeating 12345,23451,34512,45123….. etc. so that words are not learnt with the wrong pronunciation or intonation. In vedic Sanskrit pronunciation and intonation are very important. A wrong intonation can change the meaning of the word and sentence. After we started printing the Vedas we use symbols which indicate the intonations. In spite of these best efforts it is possible that the Vedas might have got corrupted and what we have today may be a corrupt form of veda. So while we discuss matters by quoting Vedas directly we have to make allowance for these and take the knowledge available there with adequate error margin. Where the ideas are clearly presented in the scripture in a continuous flow of information and we have some additional proof by way of cross references in other ancient literary works it will not be difficult to accept what is said. But to take just one or two stand alone sentences in which an information is contained and to go by that to reach a far reaching conclusion will be a wrong and questionable method of interpretation.

2) Even if we finally accept that there are references to animal sacrifice in Vedas, that the adhvaryus and hothas ate the pancreas of animals sacrificed in the yajna,don’t we have to take it that that was a part of the culture of those distant times? As I had mentioned elsewhere in another thread, the Hindu society at some point of time perhaps decided that different groups among them should adopt different cultural practices (includes food habits) so that such different groups over generations of evolution become adept in playing different roles efficiently for the society and its progress. Don’t we come across stories in Bible in which we find descriptions of incestual relationships in the society of ancient times and children born out of such relationships? Would it mean that incest is an accepted and normal practice in society all these years? Culture and food habits undergo changes with time. If we were meat/beef eaters in ancient times, we need not keep harping on that and say it is a commendable practice/food habit or that we should not condemn such food habits today.

3) This is the bottom line. Any killing that is done wantonly, without reason, without any benefit accruing to any one is to be avoided as it damages the eco system in which we live. Religion would say it is a sin to kill wantonly. If you are religious you have that additional reason not to kill wantonly. So ahimsa is indeed paramo dharmaha.

4) Killing of enemies, wars between countries, bombing etc are killings no doubt but are for survival of the society in peaceful condition. If there is no society there is no individual and survival itself becomes a question mark. Ahimsa paramo dharmaha will have meaning only if there is a society. So the universally accepted and recognized “good” has to go to war with evil in order to survive and indulge in ahimsa!

Cheers.

 

[tks]

Most respectful Mr. TKS,

I humbly request you to review your statement :

"It may be even better if it was not because it gets the Hindus out of thinking and fighting like followers of biblical religions."

It is neither those who claim to follow nor those who apparently follow are true followers. Those who diligently follow and are being witnesses and testimonies are the followers of any Master, precept or principle whatsoever.

I request you to refrain from jumping to hasty conclusions about followers of any faith or belief and from making generalized statements/remarks on them. If someone does not love his/her enemies then he/she is not a follower of the teacher who preached that principle.

Regards,
Iyer@Infosys

As a newbie or for that matter for anyone it is a good practice not to make assumptions (like you have done that I have hastily jumped to conclusions) unless you have read large amount of postings by me already. It is better to ask for clarification and ask questions instead for starters. I do not know what your religion is but my statement is about the theology as taught for the followers of biblical religions.

If you exhibit thoughtful posts with serious intent to engage I will be happy to engage in discussions with you and if I am proven to have reached a wrong conclusion I will correct myself. A focused discussion will be a deviation from topic here so it is best not to hijack this thread - you can start another thread if you wish.

It is true that one cannot make generalizations about a religious traditions by using examples of behavior of some practitioners.

In this case my point is different - the Abrahamic religions are based on history- centrism - the theology for followers is based on historical events.

Let me give you a references -

Dharma Bypasses

The video embedded in the link makes the case well for what I was referring to with that one line.

Much of the conflict in Middle East and the various wars in the recent few hundred years can be attributed to the underlying theology of biblical religions and their history centrism. Three major religions have deep historical significance around a small land area in and around State of Israel

My point is that epics such as Ramayana and Mahabhratha are not historical documents. It is easy to get carried away with conflicts that happen around piece of land area such as Ayodhya in the name of protecting Hinduism with artificial history centrism which is an alien concept to Hindus.

 

[Iyer@Infosys]

Dear Sri Iyer,

Interesting observations.
After going through your posts I wish to share my thoughts on the subject.
"Self preservation and propagation of the species" is the first law of nature. This applies to all living beings.
All our acts revolve around these two aspects of life. For me the word "Sin" represents "guilt". Basing on this
each one has to decide whether an act of his is sinful or not.

Many a time I used to wonder how is that we are led to believe that "Ahimsa Paramo Dharmaha" and at the same time glorify killing of enemies. While Governments enact laws and spend money to safe guard the rights of individual and even animals, they have no qualms in dropping bombs to wipe out millions of innocent men, women and children. We all know war is destruction, but countries spend huge amounts of their revenue in equipping their defense machinery. This is done in the name of self preservation.

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

Dear Sir,

I am reminded of a discussion with a friend years ago on the topic 'Nature's balancing cycle'. He mentioned how the Sea Otter's eat up the smaller crocodiles in a stream.

Among animals there are Herbivores and Carnivores. The carnivores consume a part of the other species as food. Thereby the carnivores survive and also check population explosion of the other species. This ensures that the population of a species does not overflow. If the Lions, Tigers and Cheetahs do not consume the deers and blackbucks, forests will be filled with these species. This is how Nature maintains a balance of species. This is Natural Biological Cycle. Students of Zoology learn this.

However this cycle is disturbed only when Man interferes and trespasses his boundaries. I reckon household insect are within man's boundaries.

The Law of Ahimsa may be applied to Humans and pet animals. I reckon it may not be extended to insects.

Regards,
Iyer@Infosys

 

[prasad1]

Mr. TKS,
Well said

My point is that epics such as Ramayana and Mahabhratha are not historical documents. It is easy to get carried away with conflicts that happen around piece of land area such as Ayodhya in the name of protecting Hinduism with artificial history centrism which is an alien concept to Hindus.

 

[HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA]

when fiat money is raining every month timely and adequately ,who cares about rain water..talk whatever comes to mind and pass the time.

 

[Iyer@Infosys]

As a newbie or for that matter for anyone it is a good practice not to make assumptions (like you have done that I have hastily jumped to conclusions) unless you have read large amount of postings by me already. It is better to ask for clarification and ask questions instead for starters. I do not know what your religion is but my statement is about the theology as taught for the followers of biblical religions.

If you exhibit thoughtful posts with serious intent to engage I will be happy to engage in discussions with you and if I am proven to have reached a wrong conclusion I will correct myself. A focused discussion will be a deviation from topic here so it is best not to hijack this thread - you can start another thread if you wish.

It is true that one cannot make generalizations about a religious traditions by using examples of behavior of some practitioners.

In this case my point is different - the Abrahamic religions are based on history- centrism - the theology for followers is based on historical events.

Let me give you a references -

Dharma Bypasses

The video embedded in the link makes the case well for what I was referring to with that one line.

Much of the conflict in Middle East and the various wars in the recent few hundred years can be attributed to the underlying theology of biblical religions and their history centrism. Three major religions have deep historical significance around a small land area in and around State of Israel

My point is that epics such as Ramayana and Mahabhratha are not historical documents. It is easy to get carried away with conflicts that happen around piece of land area such as Ayodhya in the name of protecting Hinduism with artificial history centrism which is an alien concept to Hindus.

Dear TKS,

I have Christian Colleagues with whom I discuss about their faith, what is written in their scriptures, what their prophets prophesied, what Messiah taught, what is revealed to them by Holy Spirit etc. You have exposed your gross ignorance of other faiths. It is very clear from your post you have not perceived their teachings as it must be perceived.

Furthermore you have made offensive, unwarranted remarks which are immaterial ("newbie", "i dont know what religion you are"). Do not underestimate others.

It is unworthy discussing with you any further on this subject, its irrelevance to this thread notwithstanding.

Regards,
Iyer@Infosys

 

[HARE RAMA HARE KRISHNA]

in bhagavat geeta and various purana stories clearly state that papa and punya is not judged by the outward action alone but by the intentions behind the action.

Actions like killing enemies in a war is cruel but if it was done to protect the righteousness as in the case Lord Rama fighting Ravanathigal, battle of kurukshetra then the Sin is very minimal and can be removed by suitable pariharams.

If the same is done out of arrogance or seeking domination it is a major sin (like hitler's role in the world war) and has no pariharams.

in geeta lord has clearly told all actions done by the impulse of Likes and Dislikes are Sin.(I think of one clause to add here , if those actions done by likes and dislikes did bring no harm and in confirmation with Dharma then it is no sin.) but if it brings harms to the majority then it is a sin. (fiat money is definetly a big sin.. imho)

In a nut shell .... Intentions driven by selfish pursuits only (here the self is vyavaharika self ) is the cause for SIN .