pranava, women and meat - to Shankara Menon

[Guest guest]

93

> All these strict rules came during the times of brahminical

dominance. And they interpolated enough references to lend authority.

 

Yes. Dharma of Vedas is much different from that of later period. Much

shitty stuff was invented by brahmans in order to keep their authority

and make use of ppl. Tantras reestablished some vaidika practices and

views, thou in general they are said to be opposite to vaidika-dharma.

Thus we may admit that "vaidika" in tantric context means not dharma

of Vedas in ancient times but current version of it of 8-12 centuries.

> They say "vaideeka" pranava is there. Is it OM? if so will someone

explain where in Vedas pranava as "OM" is mentioned? I did ask this

question earlier, the great Vaideeka pundits never gave an answer.

> I also pointed out that the vaideeka pranava was "IM" and not "

OM". there too there was no answer.

 

I'm not sure about pranava in samhitas of 4 Vedas.

In Krishna-yajurvedic version of Shatarudriya there is a verse

starting from OM namo bhagavate rudrAya etc. However it is not present

in Shukla-yajurveda.

Where have U seen pranava as IM? Interesting... In Tantras IM is

called Kamakala-bija or Govinda-bija and can be met in

Narasimha-mantras. Never heard it to be called "pranava".

In Kashmiri Shaivism in place of OM is used SAUH. About HRIM, my guru

called it shakta-pranava, but i haven't seen any reference for it in

Tantras as i remember.

> As far as I know "OM" is NOT mentioned in the 4 Vedas. They are

first referred to in the Upanishads.

 

In Brahmanas it is also. See given reference to Krishna-yajur-veda,

Taittiriya-samhita.

> Shankara in his Tarka Kaarika says Yoga and Tantra are Veda baahya.

But then Shankara would be unacceptable to the vaideekas and they will

say "Shankara is wrong" and it's his "personal opinion".

 

Same is opinion of some Puranas. And of Svami Dayananda Sarasvati as

well.

> Similarly on meat eating:

> This story implies

>

> 1. That meat eating was not taboo till Shankara came and established

vegetarianism to ounter Buddhist influence;

 

Exactly. There is no prohibition of meat-eating either in Vedas or in

smriti. Manu-smriti says that "there is no sin in eating meat,

drinking wine and sexual act". We may see that hindus in Nepal and in

Bali still eat meat without any problem.

The two reasons of spreading of vegetarianism - buddhist influence is

the first, second one is applying some yogic rules to everyone.

Non-ritual eating of meat as far as i remember is prohibited for yogi,

for brahmana (at least cow-meat is sure prohibited) and brahmachari

(in smartic sense of this word).

 

God bless!

 

A.

[Guest guest]

, "Arjuna Taradasa"

<bhagatirtha@m...> wrote:

> 93

>

> > All these strict rules came during the times of brahminical

> dominance. And they interpolated enough references to lend

authority.

>

> Yes. Dharma of Vedas is much different from that of later period.

Much

> shitty stuff was invented by brahmans in order to keep their

authority

> and make use of ppl.

 

 

 

Nonsense talk. Baseless speculations. You have no proof for that.

 

 

>Tantras reestablished some vaidika practices and

> views, thou in general they are said to be opposite to vaidika-

dharma.

> Thus we may admit that "vaidika" in tantric context means not

dharma

> of Vedas in ancient times but current version of it of 8-12

centuries.

 

 

Speculations. And baseless ones.

 

>

> Exactly. There is no prohibition of meat-eating either in Vedas or

in

> smriti. Manu-smriti says that "there is no sin in eating meat,

> drinking wine and sexual act". We may see that hindus in Nepal and

in

 

Does it say specifically that meat eating drinking wine and sexual

act is not sin?

 

Many smriti clearly says what kind of meat should be eaten and what

kind of meat should not be eaten. Not sure about wine.

 

> The two reasons of spreading of vegetarianism - buddhist influence

is

> the first, second one is applying some yogic rules to everyone.

 

It is surprising that even after all this buddhist influence they

maintain that meat is to be used in yagas.

Buddhist influence is there but more than that I see yogic influence.