to be a vegitarian or not?

[Guest guest]

Since there is some taking place on the list, I had sometime wrote reply to

a questioner who wanted to know if one has to be a vegetarian to be a hindu.

It came in alt.hindu I guess and I presenting it here without any

alterations for those who have not seen it. For those who have already read

they can skip this mail. There was also a related question on whether

belief in god is a requirement for being a Hindu. If any one interested I

will post that too.

Hari OM!

Sadanadna

------------------

Recently two questions were asked - Does Hinduism require one to believe in

God? Does Hinduism require one to be a vegetarian? In a recent article, I

have addressed the first question. Here I will provides some thoughts for

the second question.

 

In relation to the first question, I have discussed what Hinduism stands

for and who is truly a Hindu. In essence, Hinduism is Sanatana Dharma, and

that Dharma is from time immemorial - it involves pursuit for Moksha.

Therefore the one who is seeking for Moksha is a true Hindu, irrespective of

the nationality, caste, creed or gender. With that catholic

understanding, one can see that Hinduism becomes a way of life because the

pursuit of the essential purpose of life is the goal of the Hindu life.

 

With that perspective, it is easier to analyze all other questions

including whether Hinduism requires one to be a vegetarian. Since the

purpose of life is securing liberation or Moksha, until we reach that we

need to live. Only death is the death of the ego that happens in the

spiritual awakening. Hence, keeping the body alive by nourishment is the

our Dharma. That means one has to eat to live (not the other way - living

for eating sake!)

 

Life lives on life. That is the law of nature. Whether I eat an animal or

plant I am destroying a life. Among all life forms Man is different from

the rest of the life kingdom. He has the capability to discriminate the

right from wrong. That also gives him the freedom of choice. Plants have

just body and perhaps a rudimentary mind. Animals have both body and mind to

express feelings and suffering, but rudimentary intellect. Man has not

only body, mind but also well developed intellect to discriminate, decide

and to choose. He always has three choices - Karthum sakhyam, Akartum

sakhyam and anyatha karthum sakhyam - he can choose to do, not to do and do

it other way. For animals and plants there is no freedom of choice. They

are instinctively driven. Cow does not sit down before meals, and inquire

whether it should be a vegetarian or non-vegetarian. So is a tiger. For a

Man the discriminative intellect is very evolved. Plants and animals do not

commit sin in their actions because there is no will involved in their

actions. For a human, the story is different. You may wonder why I brought

sin in the argument. Let me explain.

Sin is nothing but agitations in the mind. It is these agitations that

prevent me in my journey to Moksha. Mind has to be pure (meaning

un-agitated) for me to see the truth as the truth. (Bible also says

Blessed are those whose minds are pure). To define sin more scientifically

- it is the divergence between the mind and intellect. Intellect knows

right from wrong - but we feel like doing things even though we know they

are wrong - that is, the intellect says something, but mind which should be

subservient to intellect rebels and does whatever it feels like. This

divergence is sin. After the action is performed - there is a guilt

feeling, because intellect, although was overruled, does not keep quite, it

keep prodding " I told you it is wrong. Why did you do it?" With peace of

mind gone Man goes through a "Hell". Man is not punished for the sin, he

is punished by the sin. - Think about it.

 

All yogas, if you analyze clearly, are bringing this integration between

the body, mind and intellect. For a Yogi - What he thinks, what he speaks

and what he does are in perfect harmony or alignment (Manasaa vacha

karmana). In our case, we think something but have no guts to say what we

think, our lips says something different from what are thinking - if you

watch the lips and the actions that follow, they are again different! -

There is no integration any where. We live a chaotic life. Besides

deceiving others, most pathetic is we deceive ourselves, and the worst

thing is we don't even realize that.

 

Now, when a tiger kills and eats, it does not commit a sin. Because its

intellect is rudimentary, and it does not go through any analysis before it

kills - should I kill or not to kill - Should I be a non-vegetarian or

should I be vegetarian". When it is hungry, to fill the nature's demand,

it kills its pray and eats what it needs and leaves the rest when it is

full. It is not greedy either. That is its Swadharma. It follows a

beautiful ecological system.

 

It is only man who destroys the ecology by being greedy. Greediness is

going after what you don't really need. "Should I be a vegetarian or

non-vegetarian?" is asked only by a man. Why that question comes? Because

man has discriminative intellect, and he does not want to hurt others to

fill his belly. He learns what `hurt' means because he surely does not want

others to hurt him. Plats are life forms too, should one hurt them?. You

may ask. If one can live without hurting any life forms that is the best,

but that is not possible. Life lives on life - that is the law of

nature. My role as a human being with discriminative intellect is to do

the least damage to the nature for keeping myself alive. At least, I am

not consciously aware of suffering of the plants. That is why eating to

live and not living to eat is the determining factor.

 

In Bhagawad Geeta, Krishna emphatically says that a Sadhaka (one who is in

pursuit of Moksha) should have a compassion for all forms of life - Sarva

Bhuta HitErathAha. In the spiritual growth, one develops subtler and

subtler intellect (Sukshma Bhuddhi in contrast to TeeKshna Buddhi, i.e.

sharper intellect). That is, the mind is becoming quieter, calmer and

self-contended. Your sensitivity to suffering of others also grows. Hence

it is advisable to be a vegetarian.

 

Even the traditional non-vegetarians repel against eating dogs and cats or

other human beings! Why? Meat is a meat after all! But with familiarity

grows a compassion.

 

There are many two legged animals in human form with rudimentary intellect.

They behave like animals. But in the evolutionary ladder one develops

subtler and subtler intellect, then it is advisable to be a vegetarian -only

taking from nature what it needs to keep the body going. One should

not hurt any life forms to satisfy the craving of ones tongue.

 

Should Hindu be a vegetarian? Since such a question already arose in your

mind, you have a degree of sensitivity not to hurt other living forms to

satisfy your belly. Then you may be better off not eating meat and you will

be at peace with yourself. Since you are sensitive to this the intellect

directing you one way and your mind wants some baser pleasure and directing

you the other way. When you go against your own intellect you commit sin.

That is against your SWADHARMA as Krishna puts it.

 

Besides, now, even the traditional non-vegetarians are choosing

vegetarianism not because of any compassion to other animals but they are

recognizing that it is not good for their health.

 

I have already mentioned that Hinduism has no doos and don'ts, but you

determine your own doos and don'ts based on your intellectual values,

culture, education and primary goal in life. You will find that following

your Swadharma makes you comfortable with yourself. It is not others to

judge, it is for you to judge. If you are agitated, that means you are

loosing peace of mind for these and that is a sin! Imagine your self that

chicken or cow that you are eating. Would you not advice the guy who is

eating you to be a vegetarian instead and spare its life. Do not say you

are not killing the animal yourself, and killing will go on whether you eat

or not. If you don't eat, one animal is spared. This is the demand and

supply. I may not be stealing my self, but if I buy the stolen property

knowing that it was stolen, it is a crime! Is it not? Now there are

imitation meats too - so why the crave for a dead meet. Why do you want

your stomach to be a burial ground for a dead animal.

>From Hinduism point, it does not really care. All it wants is for you to

pursue the path towards the Sanatanadharma. So do what is needful to keep

your mind calm and un-agitated. Purification of the mind is the means for

attaining salvation, and that is the goal of human life. Since by willful

actions we got ourselves into this mess of Samsar, it is by willful Sadhana

only we can get out of it. Lord has given us the intelligence to accomplish

this - Krishna declares - you are better off following your swadharma than

paradharma. Swadharma (is not just what caste you belong or what religion

you belong) in the final analysis it is what your intellect or conscious

dictates. Because, after the action is performed, it is your mind that has

to settle accounts with your intellect. Decision should be based on not

what somebody did somebody did not do - Like one netter says - Swami

Vivekananda ate and so on. The situation he was in is different from the

situation you are in now. That is why one should follow Swadharma not

paradharma. You will be more at peace with yourself that way.

Do yourself a favor - eat what you need and discard all the weeds from your

need. That keeps your mind green and peaceful. Hari Om and Tat Sat. -

Sadananda

 

 

 

 

_____________

Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

[Guest guest]

Dear Sadanandaji / Prov. Krishnamurthyji:

 

Thank you both for the excellent and thought provoking articles on

vegetarianism.

 

I am a vegetarian. I also would like to present my view points on this

subject.

 

My definition of vegetarianism: "I DO NOT EAT ANYTHING THAT CAN MOVE ON THIS

EARTH". Movement is provided to them because they wanted to escape from

their predator. I have never come across any animal that has willingly

offered itself to be killed for food. Animals, birds, fish etc. can move.

Given a chance they will always escape from harm. How could we take any

life, when it wants to live?

 

Long back when I was very young, I questioned my late grand father on why

our family is vegetarian. My grand father told me a story. "Once upon a

time all beings went to the GOD's court and requested his permission for a

longer life. He granted movement to animals and multiplicity to the plants.

He ordered the animals to escape with the help of the movement. He also told

animals, if they can't move he can't give guarantee for their life. He told

the plants to keep their life by giving leaves and grains to others. We

believe in God's law, that is why we are vegetarians. A tiger can kill only

an old deer, a deer that is young can always run and escape a tiger. These

are all the acts of God to keep the ecological balance. We as humans are

not supposed to kill. If one starts killing a living being for food, at one

point of time he might not even hesitate to kill a human because the act of

killing is the same. Taking life is easy, but giving life is impossible".

 

I am a human and I do eat in order to live. For that, I eat leaves of

plants and live on plant related products. Then one might question, "even

plants have got life! how could you kill plants?". My answer is: "NO! I

don't *kill* plants to eat. I eat the leaves of the plants." Consider the

following points:

 

* Cut one of the legs of any animal... It will live for its rest of the

life as handicapped. It can never grow that leg again!... Cut the branch

of a tree... it not only grows that branch again but also many more

branches. So loosing a branch is never really considered as harming the

life of the plant! Also plants have got plenty of leaves, taking a few will

not really harm them.

 

* Rice, wheat and other grain plants have got limited life. They got a life

cycle of a couple of months, after which we harvest the grains and eat them.

Even If we don't harvest, the plant will anyway die. So, it is not that you

are killing them.

 

Sincere Regards,

Madhava

P.S: I am writing a paper on vegitarianism based on the above points. So I

would request you to inform me, in case anybody would like to

cross-post/publish the points of this article anywhere.

[Guest guest]

namaste.

 

Shri Madhava's case for vegetarianism is well made, although I am not

sure I agree with the mobility theory. I am also a vegetarian and I

like to add the following points in support of vegetarian food.

 

1. The SELF or Consciousness does not require any food, vegetarian or

otherwise. It is only the superimpositions on the SELF (the jeeva is the

SELF + the the superimpositions) that require food for sustenance.

Vegetarian food is sAttvic food. We (right from the gross annamayakosha

right through to the Anandamayakosha) are the food we eat. People have

to eat sAttvic food in order to have sAttvic antahkaraNa and a sAttvic

manas, buddhi, dhr^ti are essential for jnAnam (BhagavadgItA, ch. 18).

 

2. I even go to the extent of saying that plants are the supreme type

of life on the Earth. They essentially give and not take (tena tyaktena

bhunjhIthA, Isa u. 1) which is a symbol of the superior nature of life.

By eating such supreme food, the humans develop sAttvic nature, and

understand enjoyment of renunciation. Thus vegetarian food is favoured

over the rajasic meat foods.

 

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

------