Srila Prabhupada on the two defects of modern civilization

[Guest guest]

1) sudras, fourth-class men, are on the government executive

 

2) maintaining large scale slaughterhouses

 

(conv, 1/3/74)

[Guest guest]

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, Bhakti Vikasa Swami wrote:

>

> 2) maintaining large scale slaughterhouses

>

> (conv, 1/3/74)

 

See a shocking new development in modern India:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3152508.stm

 

MDd

[Guest guest]

achintya, mpt@u... wrote:

>

 

>

> See a shocking new development in modern India:

>

 

At least it's better than slaughtering them:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2945020.stm

 

Note: "Scientists at the Centre for Medicinal Plants in Lucknow say

distilled cow urine enhances the effects of any medicine and is used

in traditional Indian medicine along with dung and fat."

[Guest guest]

achintya, mpt@u... wrote:

>

> On Thu, 9 Oct 2003, Bhakti Vikasa Swami wrote:

> >

> > 2) maintaining large scale slaughterhouses

> >

> > (conv, 1/3/74)

>

> See a shocking new development in modern India:

>

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3152508.stm

>

> MDd

 

Whats shocking about it ?

 

These cows are being taken to outskirts of the city. They will be

kept at

some place where they will feed on hay or grass rather than plastic

bags and other metropolitan waste. Its actually good for them. They

ain't gonna be slaughtered. So whats shocking ?

 

Also, i am from delhi and it just doesn't looks good that cows are

roaming openly on the roads and streets. They cause traffic problem

and often accidents. They also get injured. So in that way its better

to

put them away.

 

And regarding cow slaughter, India being a secular country where

religion is seperate from state or atleast its suppose to be seperate

from state, we can't impose such restrictions based on values and

belief

of a certain religion. This will not be fair for people practising

other

religions and of course against the secular premise of our

constitution

and preamble. Please lets not press for every social and political

organisation to be based on vedic principles because thats far from

happening. Let only us live with those principles. Lets be real, and

practise according to modern days in a way suited to todays world.

You cannot have a varna asrama based society today.

 

for example:

 

na sudra-rajye nivasenn-adharmikajanavrte

 

" Let him (a brahmana) not dwell in a land that is governed by

sudras."

(Manu 4.61)

 

All land is governed by sudras mostly. So where will one go ?

 

or consider this one:

 

Srimad Bhagavatam (11.17.47)

 

sidan vipro vanig-vrttya

panyair evapadam taret

khadgena vapadakranto

na sva-vrttya kathancana

 

"If a brahmana cannot support himself through his regular duties and

is

thus suffering, he may adopt the occupation of a merchant and

overcome his destitute condition by buying and selling material

things. If

he continues to suffer extreme poverty even as a merchant, then he

may adopt the occupation of a ksatriya, taking sword in hand. But he

cannot in any circumstances become like a dog, accepting an ordinary

master."

 

So we can't work for christian beef eating mleccha masters in US nor

in

their companies in india ........ neither can we work for those

hindus

who are ordinary in vedic sense.

 

nadyac chudrasya vipro'nnam

mohad va yadi kamatah

sa sudra-yonim vrajati

yas tu bhunkte hy-anapadi

 

"A brahmana should never eat food cooked by a sudra. If other than in

an emergency one either willingly or mistakenly does eat food cooked

by a sudra, then as a result of eating such food he is born as a

sudra."

(Kurma Purana)

 

According to this we can't go anywhere and eat especially those

places

where people ain't krishna conscious like us and this includes homes

of

many modern day hindus in india.

 

 

 

 

Your Servant Always

Sumeet.

[Guest guest]

I'm not involved in politics, and I think in general devotees should

not be. However, that does not preclude us from having views on

things, so I will express mine here, hopefully without inviting a

debate on BJP/Congress party politics.

 

achintya, "sumeet1981" <sumeet1981> wrote:

> achintya, mpt@u... wrote:

 

> And regarding cow slaughter, India being a secular country where

> religion is seperate from state or atleast its suppose to be

seperate

> from state, we can't impose such restrictions based on values and

> belief

> of a certain religion. This will not be fair for people practising

> other

> religions and of course against the secular premise of our

> constitution

> and preamble.

 

"Secularism" and "democracy" are foreign concepts to India, which for

thousands of years has always been ruled by enlightened kshatriyas.

Today, there are few if any enlightened kshatriyas, but I still get

the sense that people are ready for a strong leader even though they

themselves do not have any idea what such a person's qualifications

can be.

 

The fact that murderers and even gangsters can be elected to office

in India is proof positive that democracy is not working there. Srila

Prabhupada often spoke out against democracy, for the very fact that

unqualified people cannot hope to elect a qualified person just

because they do so in a majority.

 

Please lets not press for every social and political

> organisation to be based on vedic principles because thats far from

> happening. Let only us live with those principles. Lets be real,

and

> practise according to modern days in a way suited to todays world.

 

Saying that we should respect other people's rights does not appear

to include the rights of cows. If someone is a Muslim or Christian,

and wants to eat beef, why I must I respect his right to eat beef,

and not the right of the cows to continue to live?

 

The slaughter of cows, besides being cruel and unfettered by

morality, is also environmentally unsound. There is a quote in

Satyaraja dasa's _Higher Taste_ book from a Harvard scholar which

stated that cows produce more food in the form of milk when left

alive than they do when slaughtered for meat. This refutes the idea

that keeping cows alive has somehow led to famine, which is actually

a British propaganda (in fact, it was actually the British conversion

of Indian farm-land into non-consumable cash crops like cotton which

contributed to famine).

 

Cows have a right to live. But more importantly, not protecting them

will not lead to any good. People will become more and more degraded

by this disgusting practice, and the world will continue to be more

inhospitable for devotees.

 

And I say all this also, realizing that these cow-slaughter bans are

going to be laws in theory only, since it is a fact that many laws in

India are not enforced. Nevertheless, protecting cows can only be a

good thing, and if we don't speak out in its favor, who will?

 

> You cannot have a varna asrama based society today.

 

I don't agree with this, nor do I think such a thing follows from the

quotes you have provided below. I do agree that society today does

not follow varnaashrama, but even Krishna-consciousness can be spread

to mleccha countries, why is it difficult conceptually to try to do

the same (and simultaneously reform the varnaashrama system) in

India?

 

Even if there could be no varnaashrama in India, I am still not clear

on why we must give up on trying to protect cows. It is the

government's duty to protect cows. That they don't do it, or any

other duty which is shaastrically enjoined upon them, does not

require us to avoid insisting upon it.

 

> for example:

>

> na sudra-rajye nivasenn-adharmikajanavrte

>

> " Let him (a brahmana) not dwell in a land that is governed by

> sudras."

> (Manu 4.61)

>

> All land is governed by sudras mostly. So where will one go ?

 

Precisely. There is nowhere else to go now. All we can do is work for

the upliftment of society as it is now.

 

> or consider this one:

>

> Srimad Bhagavatam (11.17.47)

>

> sidan vipro vanig-vrttya

> panyair evapadam taret

> khadgena vapadakranto

> na sva-vrttya kathancana

>

> "If a brahmana cannot support himself through his regular duties and

> is

> thus suffering, he may adopt the occupation of a merchant and

> overcome his destitute condition by buying and selling material

> things. If

> he continues to suffer extreme poverty even as a merchant, then he

> may adopt the occupation of a ksatriya, taking sword in hand. But

he

> cannot in any circumstances become like a dog, accepting an

ordinary

> master."

>

> So we can't work for christian beef eating mleccha masters in US nor

> in

> their companies in india ........ neither can we work for those

> hindus

> who are ordinary in vedic sense.

 

This is true, but what does this have to do with speaking out or not

speaking out against cow slaughter?

 

> nadyac chudrasya vipro'nnam

> mohad va yadi kamatah

> sa sudra-yonim vrajati

> yas tu bhunkte hy-anapadi

>

> "A brahmana should never eat food cooked by a sudra. If other than

in

> an emergency one either willingly or mistakenly does eat food

cooked

> by a sudra, then as a result of eating such food he is born as a

> sudra."

> (Kurma Purana)

>

> According to this we can't go anywhere and eat especially those

> places

> where people ain't krishna conscious like us and this includes homes

> of

> many modern day hindus in india.

>

 

Again, I am not sure what this has to do with cow protection. We

shouldn't speak out against whatever good our shuudra governments

actually manage to do ("good" here being defined according to Vedic

examples). Banning cow slaughter will only be a good thing. An even

better thing would be if they actually enforced it. Who cares about

sentiments of "secularism" and the like? Such secularist sentiments

do not keep the natural vices of conditioned living entities in

check. By giving people "freedom," you also give them freedom to be

seduced by maayaa. There is no reason to give people freedom to kill

cows, especially in a country that traditionally reveres them. Those

who want to kill cows can go elsewhere; they need not stay in India.

Cow-killing is such a grievous sin that it is actually our duty to

speak out against it, so that ignorant people do not continue to do

this.

[Guest guest]

achintya, "krishna_susarla"

<krishna_susarla@h...> wrote:

 

> "Secularism" and "democracy" are foreign concepts to India, which

for

> thousands of years has always been ruled by enlightened kshatriyas.

> Today, there are few if any enlightened kshatriyas, but I still get

> the sense that people are ready for a strong leader even though

they

> themselves do not have any idea what such a person's qualifications

> can be.

 

You are right that secularism is foreign to india. These terms are of

western origin.So is the concept of seperation of church and state

govt. For the past 1000 years india hasn't been ruled by enlightened

kshatriyas.It was muslim rule and then british rule. People will

definately be interested in a strong ruler. But to people, strong

means someone who can ensure economic progress of the country. And he

should have a good foreign policy so that india enjoys warm

international relations with others. He doesn't have to be qualified

in the vedic sense. In fact majority out there don't know what is

qualifications as per vedic standards.

 

 

>

> The fact that murderers and even gangsters can be elected to office

> in India is proof positive that democracy is not working there.

 

This is true only in case of india and doesn't holds true that much in

the west especially.

 

>Srila Prabhupada often spoke out against democracy, for the very

fact that

> unqualified people cannot hope to elect a qualified person just

> because they do so in a majority.

 

Well in modern days where society is not religion based, democracy is

the best approach. In india we can't have a section of vaishnavas or

brahmins elect the leader. To people out there qualification means

education. They don't know the purpose of the world is to prepare

yourself to get back to god. The world is full or mudhas or more

appropriately naradhamas. SP in his BG commentary says that at this

point 99.9% of world population is naradhama and i don't dispute that

point at all.

 

> Please lets not press for every social and political

> > organisation to be based on vedic principles because thats far

from

> > happening. Let only us live with those principles. Lets be real,

> and

> > practise according to modern days in a way suited to todays

world.

>

> Saying that we should respect other people's rights does not appear

> to include the rights of cows. If someone is a Muslim or Christian,

> and wants to eat beef, why I must I respect his right to eat beef,

> and not the right of the cows to continue to live?

 

Well these are the kind of arguments that animal right people come up

with. But these will hardly affect the poeple and govt. Non-Vedic

religions don't bother to call animal killing bad. Both bible and

Quran approves of meat eating etc..... So they have different life

style as us. Animal protection is good as long as the animals are in

jungle or sanctuaries. Or people get concious about animal protection

when they see a particular species nearing extinction. Animals raise

in poultry are raised for meat etc....... The point is quran treats

animals as bounty of God to man. They constitute lawful food and can

be consumed by man. Now if we say that killing animals is bad and not

allowed and thereby make it a law, people and human rights activists

will come and charge indian govt. with infringing on others religious

rights by imposing on them hindu values. Other religions allow meat

eating. Bottomline is we can't argue on basis of vedic scriptures,

because in the world veda are hardly accepted as authority.

 

> The slaughter of cows, besides being cruel and unfettered by

> morality, is also environmentally unsound. There is a quote in

> Satyaraja dasa's _Higher Taste_ book from a Harvard scholar which

> stated that cows produce more food in the form of milk when left

> alive than they do when slaughtered for meat. This refutes the idea

> that keeping cows alive has somehow led to famine, which is

actually

> a British propaganda (in fact, it was actually the British

conversion

> of Indian farm-land into non-consumable cash crops like cotton

which

> contributed to famine).

 

Slaughter of any animal is bad on moral reasons. but then same people

say that killing of plants is also bad.

 

 

> Cows have a right to live. But more importantly, not protecting

them

> will not lead to any good. People will become more and more

degraded

> by this disgusting practice, and the world will continue to be more

> inhospitable for devotees.

 

Unfortunately this is realized in this way by followers of vedic

religion, while go to others they can tell you how much they love

steak, and number of tasty dishes which can be prepared using beef or

pork shrimp etc..... they don't think about that as disgusting. The

reason being they are situated in lower gunas and can't see what is

what. Religion is only realized by he whose buddhi is predominantly

sattvik. Others have their own version.

 

 

> And I say all this also, realizing that these cow-slaughter bans

are

> going to be laws in theory only, since it is a fact that many laws

in

> India are not enforced. Nevertheless, protecting cows can only be a

> good thing, and if we don't speak out in its favor, who will?

 

Well we can speak as much as we want to, but taking into account the

way modern world runs and the values it considers important this will

not happen. Christians, Muslims want non veg food because its

allowable according to their religion. Sikhs love it too. Now days

hindus love it too. So no rule will be passed. Non veg food is

condemned by Vedas only. I repeat Quran and Bible don't condemn it.

And yes to live you have to kill something else and live by feeding on

it. Such is the typical mindset of these people. If you kill plant or

animal its equal.

 

 

> > You cannot have a varna asrama based society today.

>

> I don't agree with this,

Well its true prabhu ji. Varna asrama based society cannot be

established today. One can't convince everyone to follow the codes of

varna asrama. If that was true Sriman Mahaprabhu would have

established that society in india back in 15-16th century.

 

>nor do I think such a thing follows from the

> quotes you have provided below. I do agree that society today does

> not follow varnaashrama, but even Krishna-consciousness can be

spread

> to mleccha countries, why is it difficult conceptually to try to do

> the same (and simultaneously reform the varnaashrama system) in

> India?

 

How many hindus simply in mleccha desha follow Gaudiya Vaishnavism ?

Hardly few. Back in india how many people follow GV, very few compare

to population of india. Establishing varna asrama will require that

entire societies in the world and the human community be re organized

in light of vedic principles. This looks possibile theoretically but

can it work practically ? Only an empowered incarnation of Sri Krishna

can make it happen. No one else.How many hindus who visit iskcon

temples and bow down to krishna, actually follow something like

garbhadhan samskar and perform all 10 samskar during pregnancy.

 

 

> Even if there could be no varnaashrama in India, I am still not

clear

> on why we must give up on trying to protect cows.

 

Why protect cows only and no other animals ? Or why protect animals

and prohibit meat eating. such vedic principles no matter how morally

correct and ethically appealing can't be enforced since the country is

secular. Such principles are only supported by hindu dharma and no

other religion.

 

 

>It is the

> government's duty to protect cows.

 

According to vedas it is govt. duty to protect cows, but according to

modern day secular world govt. and religion need to stay seperate. As

hindus only thing we can do is not eat cows or beef anywhere in the

world. Nothing more than that.

 

>That they don't do it, or any

> other duty which is shaastrically enjoined upon them, does not

> require us to avoid insisting upon it.

 

We can say any thing and infact VHP keeps on appealing to govt. but

this can't be done. Neither can india be declared as vedic land.

 

 

The quotes i provided just tells how difficult it is to establish

varna asrama. Remember no one will give up their religion or religious

principles simply for GVs. Muslims can be sudra according to us, but

according to their shastra they are going to heavens and allah is

happy with them. So how will u convince everyone of who is sudra snd

who is not. Without proving other religions wrong we can't establish

our dharma. We can't reconcile with others values. Neither can we

interpret it in light of vedic religion.

 

> > for example:

> >

> > na sudra-rajye nivasenn-adharmikajanavrte

> >

> > " Let him (a brahmana) not dwell in a land that is governed by

> > sudras."

> > (Manu 4.61)

> >

> > All land is governed by sudras mostly. So where will one go ?

>

> Precisely. There is nowhere else to go now. All we can do is work

for

> the upliftment of society as it is now.

>

> > or consider this one:

> >

> > Srimad Bhagavatam (11.17.47)

> >

> > sidan vipro vanig-vrttya

> > panyair evapadam taret

> > khadgena vapadakranto

> > na sva-vrttya kathancana

> >

> > "If a brahmana cannot support himself through his regular duties

and

> > is

> > thus suffering, he may adopt the occupation of a merchant and

> > overcome his destitute condition by buying and selling material

> > things. If

> > he continues to suffer extreme poverty even as a merchant, then

he

> > may adopt the occupation of a ksatriya, taking sword in hand. But

> he

> > cannot in any circumstances become like a dog, accepting an

> ordinary

> > master."

> >

> > So we can't work for christian beef eating mleccha masters in US

nor

> > in

> > their companies in india ........ neither can we work for those

> > hindus

> > who are ordinary in vedic sense.

>

> This is true, but what does this have to do with speaking out or

not

> speaking out against cow slaughter?

 

 

i haven't produced that verse in context of cow slaughter but rather

in context of the point that varna asrama can't be established today.

If we will go to our bosses and try to make them understand that they

are fallen because they eat this and live like this and consider this

as their life principles. they or people will simply ask us to mind

our own business and stop interfering in their life.

 

in ravans lanka you cannot have varna asrama until you somehow

convince ravana to change or kill him and install bhakta like

vibhishana.

 

we can't convince everyone of vedic principles. In theory it is

possible but practically it isn't. so varna asrama can't be

established practially or in reality.

 

 

> > nadyac chudrasya vipro'nnam

> > mohad va yadi kamatah

> > sa sudra-yonim vrajati

> > yas tu bhunkte hy-anapadi

> >

> > "A brahmana should never eat food cooked by a sudra. If other

than

> in

> > an emergency one either willingly or mistakenly does eat food

> cooked

> > by a sudra, then as a result of eating such food he is born as a

> > sudra."

> > (Kurma Purana)

> >

> > According to this we can't go anywhere and eat especially those

> > places

> > where people ain't krishna conscious like us and this includes

homes

> > of

> > many modern day hindus in india.

> >

>

> Again, I am not sure what this has to do with cow protection. We

> shouldn't speak out against whatever good our shuudra governments

> actually manage to do ("good" here being defined according to Vedic

> examples). Banning cow slaughter will only be a good thing. An even

> better thing would be if they actually enforced it. Who cares about

> sentiments of "secularism" and the like? Such secularist sentiments

> do not keep the natural vices of conditioned living entities in

> check. By giving people "freedom," you also give them freedom to be

> seduced by maayaa. There is no reason to give people freedom to

kill

> cows, especially in a country that traditionally reveres them.

 

This country belongs to hindus, muslims, christian etc etc equally. We

can't have hindu dharma rules established for everyone to follow.

 

We can't float an idea Vedic Republic of India like middle east and

other theocracies have Islamic Republic of so and so.....

 

In medivial europe, church brutally repressed people and thats how we

have the concept of seperation of state and church. How can you say

that in Vedic india there won't be any repression in name of religion.

See iskcon itself, established by a transcendentalist and itself being

krishna organization there is so much of politics and also recently

abuse suits and charges filed in various courts against ISKCON.

 

Vedic religion can only be established in a place where there is

monarchy and the king who has all powers and last say on everything is

a strict follower of vaishnava principles like Arjuna, Maharaj Janaka

etc........ No where else you can have vedic religion.

 

> Those

> who want to kill cows can go elsewhere; they need not stay in

India.

> Cow-killing is such a grievous sin that it is actually our duty to

> speak out against it, so that ignorant people do not continue to do

> this.

 

Prabhu ji this is not simply possible.Mahaprabhu had the power to drag

all cow killers out of india but he didn't. Maharaj Parikshit took a

sword in his hands to protect cow, but Mahaprabhu didn't. He simply

infused devotion in Chand Kazi a cow eater. So following in his

footsteps we can infuse devotion in others. And in turn cause them to

follow vedic principles. Earlier, Krishna consciousness followed from

varna asrama now varna asrama will result of krishna consciousness. SP

once said " let them eat meat and have their koran but some how make

them chant hare krishna" He was following Mahaprabhu who through his

own devotion infused devotion in kazi. We have to follow this way

only. No other way is possible.

 

 

Your Servant always

Sumeet

[Guest guest]

I'm not all that clear as to what our difference is here. I will just

repeat a few important points to clarify what I was saying:

 

1) That other religions condone animal killing is not disputed by me.

However, this is besides the point. Absolute truth means absolute

values. A wise government should not bow down to the misguided values

of mleccha religions just to appease their followers. If animal

killing is wrong, then it is wrong, period. Muslims and Christians

may disagree, but that is moot.

 

2) We as devotees should always be in favor of cow-protection,

whatever the (hopefully non-violent) method. Saying we "can't" have

this or that is just giving up. I'm not saying we need to take up

signs and demonstrate; I am saying that at least intellectually we

should be in favor of cow protection rather than speaking out against

those who would make it a reality. Cow-protection is an absolute

principle, not a Hindu principle. It should be taken as such, and we

should not be ashamed that other religions do not agree. They are the

ones who are wrong on this point, and we shouldn't be afraid to say

so. Certainly Srila Prabhupada did not excuse someone from being

vegetarian simply because he was Christian.

 

3) Killing of cow (and animals in general) is environmentally

unsound. There are many good environmental and health arguments one

can give in favor of animal protection in general and cow protection

in particular, so one can maintain this position on secular grounds

if one wishes.

 

4) All animals should be protected, but the cow deserves special

protection for obvious reasons. Cow are dear to Lord Krishna, their

milk provides more food to support the population than their

carcasses do as meat, and they are the traditional basis of Vedic

economy.

 

5) Trying to imitate the "secular" lifestyle of the West is

pointless. For one thing, Western countries are not truly secular -

why do they give day off on Christmas but not on Diipaavali? It is

hypocrisy. All countries, regardless of their presumably secular

stance, have a religious basis to their values. It is a well known

fact that America in particular was influenced by Judeo-Christian

values.

 

6) Indian government is hopelessly corrupt, demonic, and useless. But

if they do one good thing, such as enacting cow protection, it should

be encouraged. This is not the same thing as saying we will accept

the government as saintly. It just means we accept that this one

principle is good and should be done. Don't confuse "bad government"

with "bad values." Although one presupposes the other, if the bad

government actually does something good, it should be accepted.

Chanakya Pandit says that one should accept a cintamani stone from a

dust bin, or a beautiful and chaste wife even from a low class

family. I think you get the idea.

 

7) Enacting laws that are based on Sanaatana-dharma will go far to

raising awareness of these issues. Saying it can't be done will

negate the possibility that anyone will ever get around to caring

about it. At least in India, people should understand that cow-

protection is important to people there.

 

I'm not very politically involved, and I hope I don't sound like a

BJP/VHP propagandist. As Vaishnavas, I think we ought to at least

agree on the necessity of cow-protection instead of giving up on it.

If we don't insist on it - no one else will. Actually, by saying the

above, I don't mean to imply that you do not agree with it. Where I

think we disagree is whether or not a government can theoretically

enforce a Vedic set of laws in this day and age, or if it must be

somehow be on the same level as the governments of previous Yugas.

While I agree that leaders should be of stainless reputation, I don't

see why such a prerequisite is required for cow protection.