Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 Hi Friends, Could our learned members explain why vegetarianism is important for sadhaks. Regards Meenakshi " on the web. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 hi meenakshi, the point of being sadhaks is to open your heart to all life on earth so how we could eat the animal if we love them. rest depends on rajasic and tamsic nature so one need to develop satwic nature so we dont have trishna for stimulant food. rajinder asha trishna na mitea mer mer gaye sharier ie body --- dhoopdeep <no_reply> wrote: > > Hi Friends, > > Could our learned members explain why vegetarianism > is important for > sadhaks. > > Regards > Meenakshi > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around Lord shiva Visit your group "" on the web. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 .HARE RAM. Dear Minakshi, Please remember the ethics of our religion is as, GOD is in and at every where,so vegetarianism is not only compulsory for sadhakas but also for all the human beings and we all the human beings are sadhakas in fact. Shashi Shekhar Sharma Rajinder Nath <jinderman > wrote: hi meenakshi, the point of being sadhaks is to open your heart to all life on earth so how we could eat the animal if we love them. rest depends on rajasic and tamsic nature so one need to develop satwic nature so we dont have trishna for stimulant food. rajinder asha trishna na mitea mer mer gaye sharier ie body --- dhoopdeep wrote: > > Hi Friends, > > Could our learned members explain why vegetarianism > is important for > sadhaks. > > Regards > Meenakshi > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 Om Namah Sivaya Question : Does purity of food lead to purity of mind? Is non-vegetarian food not Sattvic? We have in the Mahabharata instances of people taking the meat of goats sacrificed to the Lord. Sri Swami Sivananda: Yes, purity of food leads to purity of mind. Aharasuddhau Satvasuddhih. Take a dose of champagne and sit for meditation. Take a dose of orange-juice and sit for meditation. You will know the difference. Different foods exercise different influences on different compartments in the brain. By taking champagne, meat and garlic, the mind will be confused and will become restless when you sit for meditation. By taking milk and fruits, you will get good concentration. Our Rishis lived on fruits and milk. The Chhandogya Upanishad says, "Pure food leads to purity of mind and then one attains Moksha". You should have dietetic discipline. Non-vegetarian food is not Sattvic. It is not good for a seeker. Live for a month on milk and fruits and see. Give up meat for one month and see. Let us be practical. Practical experience will tell you that meat-eating is bad for the mind. Question : On what grounds do you prohibit meat-eating? Sri Swami Sivananda : On medical, psychological, moral and spiritual grounds. The mind is made up of the essence of the food that a man takes. Tamasic food results in a Tamasic mind. Meat is Tamasic and hence should be avoided. When an animal is killed or butchered, a contraction of its nervous system takes place on account of fear. (And you might have felt certain disturbances in your own stomach when you have experienced fear.) This leads to the secretion of certain poisons in the liver, etc., of the animal. These poisons are cumulative in their nature and are never removed or lost during the process of boiling or cooking meat. Hence, meat-eating is poisonous and dangerous in the long run. There is no difference between you and an animal when both are considered as souls inhabiting the bodies. From whichever source you derive the right to live and enjoy in this material body, from that very same source, the souls of these animals have derived equal rights to live and enjoy in their material bodies. Hence, you do not possess the moral right to kill a single living being, however small it may be. Last. but not the least, there is One Consciousness which has expressed itself in the form of the various beings, animate and inanimate. And this makes you one with all beings. When you have known this, will you consciously hurt any being? Can you willingly and joyously cut your own fingers and cook them and eat them? Knowing this oneness alone is the purpose of your coming again and again into the mundane plane. You can know, feel and experience this oneness only when you stop injuring and hurting others and begin to love all as your own Self. Verily, the animals are thy own Self. Thou alone art residing in these animals as the individual souls and thou alone art manifest in the form of the material bodies in which these souls reside. Hence, wake up; stop meat-eating and butchering the animals. Develop love for them and promote oneness. Yogic Diet http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/practical.htm#_VPID_8 Sivaya Namah dhoopdeep <no_reply> wrote: Hi Friends, Could our learned members explain why vegetarianism is important for sadhaks. Regards Meenakshi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 Dear Minakshi jee, If this be the case, what do you have to say about the God in plants and vegetables and fruits that vegetarians eat? sure beats the "compulsory" mandate, does it not? methinks vegeterianism is really just a compromise. a compromise that minimizes cost (karma incurred) to the benefit obtained (the LEAST violent method of human sustenance for effort of soul- relaization). it is an optimized cost-benefit strategy, IMHO. Actually, the most non-violent would be to not have to take any food at all ("non-violentarian", to wit), but that is reserved for advanced yogis only. we still need to kill plants and maim fruit-laden trees for our sustenance, so let's remember that when we judge the meat-eaters. and let's say a prayer of thanks to the Almighty for the food kept on our plate before we consume it. Jai Ma! " on the web. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 welll Saw the Message well God created Human beings n gave us one more sence.. well compare to animals all other creatures we have one More sense.. but we all dont Use it in the right way.. Instd we Play in some one's Life....cheat....Kill animals for Meat.. Use thr skin.. we do all the sin's tht we can.. rather if we start thinking tht we are luckey to Have ths Birth has Human being.. so let Us Love PPl dont hate any one.. Love ths world tht God created.. so tht @ some point of our age we shld not feel the sin's tht we made.. later its tooo late yaaa well may be ths wht I feel I meditate Alwys the time for others i dont ask anythng to God for me cos wht ever I am Am Happy for tht... so i feel others need More than Me.. so i pray for thm in tht way Am Happy... Sadness is part of Life if thrs No sadness arnd us we will forgot God... so Just not to forgot God he created smthng called Sad...so Just to point out one common mistakes we all do is tht whn we are Happy No way we will think of God.. but the moment we are sad. we dont sseek any one other than God to Help out.. well Nicemeeting U Regards Ravi anu24_s <no_reply> wrote: Meenakshi and Dhruv and all friends, i am a new member and found this group web searching. Dhruv - it is so interesting what you say about Sattvic and non-sattvic food. I saw an answer given along the lines you have written by Shree Maa, a Holy saint who lives in US. This is the question - Meenakshi, please tell us if it makes sense? i am copying from the following web site: http://www.shreemaa.org/drupal/node/163 Question: Is the purpose of being vegetarian more than not harming animals? I use an animal skin as an asan. Do I have a karmic responsibility to the animal that lost its skin for my benefit? Shree Maa says: The purpose is more than not harming, although that is one of many good reasons. The primary reason is that we take the fuel according to the work we want to perform. If you put diesel in a gasoline engine, it will not function properly. If you put the food of aggressive action into the body of a meditator, it will not be easy to quiet the mind. We need all the help we can get. Hope this is useful Meenakshi. Thank you Namah Sivaya! anu , Dhruv <dhruvitime wrote: > > Meenakshi, > > I am just trying to focus on the question, there is nothing to do personally! > > Sadhna is sattvik and non-sattvik too. I have read about many non-sattvik sadhna where in-auspicious things are used to complete it. So, there won't be any problem doing non-sattvik sadhna for non-vegeterian. It does not mean either that they can't do sattvik sadhna/puja. But, it is always said and believed that while doing (especially for some time period) sattvik sadhna one must not drink liquor and must not eat non-veg never. Because, non-veg and liquor are believed ASHHUDDH for such sadhna. As per the ancient time animals were hunted and eaten. So, how can one become happy by killing or by eating one life? > > I am just a normal person as you are, I have no knowledge of vedas, granths or upnishad's. I gave answer on the base of my knowledge that, I like to read and experiment mantras and pujas and meditation. > > I won't mind to be commented for anything wrongly written or was not fair! > > Regards, > Dhruv > > dhoopdeep <no_reply> wrote: > > Hi Friends, > > Could our learned members explain why vegetarianism is important for > sadhaks. > > Regards > Meenakshi > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 Dear Friends, For spiritualism Satvic quality is essential. Vegetarianism gives Satvic quality. Actually 75% of our food intake should be fruits and vegetables. cereals only 25% dhoopdeep <no_reply> wrote: Hi Friends, Could our learned members explain why vegetarianism is important for sadhaks. Regards Meenakshi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 hi friends some people refer mata ji as she thinks that sadhana could be possible with non vegitarian too. but i think that is more a tantric pooja to controll other once it get to higher stage of sadhana food is satvik all higher class guru agree on it i think mata nirmala herself eat meat and i did went to her meetings but somehow i juat respect her as person but she is not my guru. i followed teaching of ramana mahrishi who respect all gurus and says as long as devotte is sincere the real guru always inside as it open ur heart for all living creature and you like to take care of who ever comes in your contact and never hurt any one by words deed and thinking. so ahimsa is the higher form of religion. rajinder --- Selvaratnam Selvakumar <selvauk (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: > Om Namah Sivaya > > > Question : Does purity of food lead to purity of > mind? Is non-vegetarian food not Sattvic? We have in > the Mahabharata instances of people taking the meat > of goats sacrificed to the Lord. > > Sri Swami Sivananda: Yes, purity of food leads to > purity of mind. Aharasuddhau Satvasuddhih. Take a > dose of champagne and sit for meditation. Take a > dose of orange-juice and sit for meditation. You > will know the difference. Different foods exercise > different influences on different compartments in > the brain. By taking champagne, meat and garlic, the > mind will be confused and will become restless when > you sit for meditation. By taking milk and fruits, > you will get good concentration. Our Rishis lived on > fruits and milk. The Chhandogya Upanishad says, > "Pure food leads to purity of mind and then one > attains Moksha". You should have dietetic > discipline. > > Non-vegetarian food is not Sattvic. It is not good > for a seeker. Live for a month on milk and fruits > and see. Give up meat for one month and see. Let us > be practical. Practical experience will tell you > that meat-eating is bad for the mind. > > > > Question : On what grounds do you prohibit > meat-eating? > > > Sri Swami Sivananda : On medical, psychological, > moral and spiritual grounds. The mind is made up of > the essence of the food that a man takes. Tamasic > food results in a Tamasic mind. Meat is Tamasic and > hence should be avoided. > > When an animal is killed or butchered, a > contraction of its nervous system takes place on > account of fear. (And you might have felt certain > disturbances in your own stomach when you have > experienced fear.) This leads to the secretion of > certain poisons in the liver, etc., of the animal. > These poisons are cumulative in their nature and are > never removed or lost during the process of boiling > or cooking meat. Hence, meat-eating is poisonous and > dangerous in the long run. > > There is no difference between you and an animal > when both are considered as souls inhabiting the > bodies. From whichever source you derive the right > to live and enjoy in this material body, from that > very same source, the souls of these animals have > derived equal rights to live and enjoy in their > material bodies. Hence, you do not possess the moral > right to kill a single living being, however small > it may be. > > Last. but not the least, there is One > Consciousness which has expressed itself in the form > of the various beings, animate and inanimate. And > this makes you one with all beings. When you have > known this, will you consciously hurt any being? Can > you willingly and joyously cut your own fingers and > cook them and eat them? Knowing this oneness alone > is the purpose of your coming again and again into > the mundane plane. You can know, feel and experience > this oneness only when you stop injuring and hurting > others and begin to love all as your own Self. > Verily, the animals are thy own Self. Thou alone art > residing in these animals as the individual souls > and thou alone art manifest in the form of the > material bodies in which these souls reside. Hence, > wake up; stop meat-eating and butchering the > animals. Develop love for them and promote oneness. > > Yogic Diet > > > Lord shiva Visit your group "" on the web. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 Wed, 30 Nov 1994 08:09:43 -0500 K. Sadananda Sub: Does Hinduism require one to be a vegetarian 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 quiet, it keeps 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 natures demand, it kills it 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. "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. Plants 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 your intellect directing you one way and your mind wants some baser pleasures 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 meat. 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. Do yourself a favor - eat what#you need and discard what you really donot need it. That way your make your life simple, peaceful and healthy with low cholesteral. Hari Om and Tat Sat. - Sadananda It is only a fool who does not take life seriously. It is intelligent who seriously takes life seriously. It is wise who seriously does not take life seriously. For him the life is an enchanting sport to be played to the best! Win or loose, it is a fun to play. ------------------ Parasuraman <parasu41 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote: Dear Friends, For spiritualism Satvic quality is essential. Vegetarianism gives Satvic quality. Actually 75% of our food intake should be fruits and vegetables. cereals only 25% dhoopdeep <no_reply> wrote: Hi Friends, Could our learned members explain why vegetarianism is important for sadhaks. Regards Meenakshi With Best Regards, N.S. Parasuraman Please visit my Homepage: http://www.geocities.com/parasu41 India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new. Click here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2006 Report Share Posted May 3, 2006 Hi Surya! What you say is very true. Fruit dropping off automatically would be a "less violent" state of food than fruit plucked out. Also, with regards to milk, a mother's breast produces as much as is needed. If the cow were with her calf only, the cow would produce only as much milk as needed by her calf (is that plural too or is it calves?). The mere fact that the cow now feels uncomfortable if not milked suggests that it is the after-effects of a "sustained mild violence over a period of time" on the poor cow, such that it has gotten used to be milked, and that it feels uncomfortable if not milked. While I am grateful for the milk and fruits and other food I get to sustain my dependent-on-food life, I am constantly reminded by these thoughts that my violence against the ecosystem is the same as the violence that the meat-eater does against the system; perhaps mine is to a lesser degree than the meater-eater, but who can judge that conclusively? Thinking so, I decide that while I must do some violence to sustain myself, let it be minimum and let me do these things: 1. Thank God for the food on my table. 2. Not judge a meat-eating person any more than I would an "eating" person. 3. Earnestly pray to Him to give me the goal I seek so that I can be more and more non-violent. Jai Ma! P.S.: My original post was not addressed to Minakshiji. It was addressed to some other post-er who replied to her query saying that it was "compulsory" for sadhaks to eat veg food. The way the post appears this relation in the timing of the posts is not perceivable, so I thought I will clarify. , "Mahamuni" <mahamuni> wrote: > > Yes to do without food would be best, but you don't need to maim fruit trees to get fruit. It drops off on its own of can be lightly shaken. Nothing adharmic or karmic with that, IMHO. > > Also milk is thought of in a similiar light when it is from cows that are treated with kindness, reverence and respect their whole lives. If they are not milked, they experience discomfort. So this is a nice symbiotic relationship and there is no violence, when done this way. > > Jai Maa! > - > manoj_menon > > Tuesday, May 02, 2006 9:10 PM > Re: Vegetarianism > > > Dear Minakshi jee, > > If this be the case, what do you have to say about the God in plants > and vegetables and fruits that vegetarians eat? sure beats > the "compulsory" mandate, does it not? > > methinks vegeterianism is really just a compromise. a compromise > that minimizes cost (karma incurred) to the benefit obtained (the > LEAST violent method of human sustenance for effort of soul- > relaization). it is an optimized cost-benefit strategy, IMHO. > > Actually, the most non-violent would be to not have to take any food > at all ("non-violentarian", to wit), but that is reserved for > advanced yogis only. > > we still need to kill plants and maim fruit-laden trees for our > sustenance, so let's remember that when we judge the meat-eaters. > > and let's say a prayer of thanks to the Almighty for the food kept > on our plate before we consume it. > > Jai Ma! > > > > > > > > Lord shiva > > > - ----------- > > > a.. Visit your group "" on the web. > > b.. > > > c.. Terms of Service. > > > - ----------- > " on the web. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 dear shri sadananda ji it was very well explained in this artical thank you ihave my son in law he likes budhism and ask me most of budist allow meat in thier diet and it is also a way of living as budhist believe in nirvana but not in personell god i keep my point that higher stage even for them is unity of all life and we are hurting the harmony of earth by killing other animal for food yes for protection of human life we may have to kill tiger or wild life . but rember it was thier abode first than we human tokkover the animal terotarry rajinder --- Krishna Prasad <rkrishp99 > wrote: > Wed, 30 Nov 1994 08:09:43 -0500 > K. Sadananda > Sub: Does Hinduism require one to be a vegetarian > > 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 quiet, it keeps 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 natures demand, > it kills it 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. "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. Plants 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 your > intellect directing you one way and your mind wants > some baser pleasures > 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 > === message truncated === Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around Lord shiva Visit your group "" on the web. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 Dear Members, Going by this way, even the ripe fruit fallen to the ground has seeds and seeds have life, so we cannot eat even the ripen fruit which falls on its own. The goal is to reduce the amount of harm done to the lifesource while we sustain our self. But this is upto individual and his needs. But we cannot judge this, cause there were/are some enlightended souls in the west who have a totally different philosphy to this. Also Cheese is not vegetarian, as it is made of a substance called Rennet, This rennet is made by killing a newly born baby calf, Rennet is used to ferment milk. you can double check this aspect by searching the internet on cheese making or on Rennet. Best Regards, Divakar. --- manoj_menon <ammademon > wrote: > Hi Surya! > > What you say is very true. Fruit dropping off > automatically would be > a "less violent" state of food than fruit plucked > out. > > Also, with regards to milk, a mother's breast > produces as much as is > needed. If the cow were with her calf only, the cow > would produce > only as much milk as needed by her calf (is that > plural too or is it > calves?). > > The mere fact that the cow now feels uncomfortable > if not milked > suggests that it is the after-effects of a > "sustained mild violence > over a period of time" on the poor cow, such that it > has gotten used > to be milked, and that it feels uncomfortable if not > milked. > > While I am grateful for the milk and fruits and > other food I get to > sustain my dependent-on-food life, I am constantly > reminded by these > thoughts that my violence against the ecosystem is > the same as the > violence that the meat-eater does against the > system; perhaps mine > is to a lesser degree than the meater-eater, but who > can judge that > conclusively? > > Thinking so, I decide that while I must do some > violence to sustain > myself, let it be minimum and let me do these > things: > 1. Thank God for the food on my table. > 2. Not judge a meat-eating person any more than I > would an "eating" > person. > 3. Earnestly pray to Him to give me the goal I seek > so that I can be > more and more non-violent. > > Jai Ma! > > P.S.: > My original post was not addressed to Minakshiji. It > was addressed > to some other post-er who replied to her query > saying that it > was "compulsory" for sadhaks to eat veg food. The > way the post > appears this relation in the timing of the posts is > not perceivable, > so I thought I will clarify. > > > > , > "Mahamuni" > <mahamuni> wrote: > > > > Yes to do without food would be best, but you > don't need to maim > fruit trees to get fruit. It drops off on its own > of can be lightly > shaken. Nothing adharmic or karmic with that, IMHO. > > > > Also milk is thought of in a similiar light when > it is from cows > that are treated with kindness, reverence and > respect their whole > lives. If they are not milked, they experience > discomfort. So this > is a nice symbiotic relationship and there is no > violence, when done > this way. > > > > Jai Maa! > > - > > manoj_menon > > > > Tuesday, May 02, 2006 9:10 PM > > Re: > Vegetarianism > > > > > > Dear Minakshi jee, > > > > If this be the case, what do you have to say > about the God in > plants > > and vegetables and fruits that vegetarians eat? > sure beats > > the "compulsory" mandate, does it not? > > > > methinks vegeterianism is really just a > compromise. a compromise > > that minimizes cost (karma incurred) to the > benefit obtained > (the > > LEAST violent method of human sustenance for > effort of soul- > > relaization). it is an optimized cost-benefit > strategy, IMHO. > > > > Actually, the most non-violent would be to not > have to take any > food > > at all ("non-violentarian", to wit), but that is > reserved for > > advanced yogis only. > > > > we still need to kill plants and maim > fruit-laden trees for our > > sustenance, so let's remember that when we judge > the meat-eaters. > > > > and let's say a prayer of thanks to the Almighty > for the food > kept > > on our plate before we consume it. > > > > Jai Ma! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord shiva > > > > > > > - > ----------- > > > > > > a.. Visit your group "" > on the web. > > > > b.. To from this group, send an > email to: > > > > > > > c.. Your use of is subject to > the Terms > of Service. > > > > > > > - > ----------- > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------- Divakar Tanjore, Usui Reiki Master and Teacher, Seichim Reiki Master and Teacher, Member of Distance Healing Network, Lord shiva Visit your group "" on the web. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 dear bhaktas i have not written anything while making any judgment of course life sustain on life and i am in the same boat i try myself to be less voilent to my surrounding i rember reading somewhere at slaughter home animal go for thier turn and put themself thier head on the spot as it is accepting thier end of life. i still wonder some great saint of india like ramakrishna use to eat fish.so it may not be completely compulsary to be vegitarian i hope but i feel we shoul take form of life which is only have dominant earth and water like veg/fruit not inteligent life particularly pandit ji artical real very good in explanation. --- manoj_menon <ammademon > wrote: > Hi Surya! > > What you say is very true. Fruit dropping off > automatically would be > a "less violent" state of food than fruit plucked > out. > > Also, with regards to milk, a mother's breast > produces as much as is > needed. If the cow were with her calf only, the cow > would produce > only as much milk as needed by her calf (is that > plural too or is it > calves?). > > The mere fact that the cow now feels uncomfortable > if not milked > suggests that it is the after-effects of a > "sustained mild violence > over a period of time" on the poor cow, such that it > has gotten used > to be milked, and that it feels uncomfortable if not > milked. > > While I am grateful for the milk and fruits and > other food I get to > sustain my dependent-on-food life, I am constantly > reminded by these > thoughts that my violence against the ecosystem is > the same as the > violence that the meat-eater does against the > system; perhaps mine > is to a lesser degree than the meater-eater, but who > can judge that > conclusively? > > Thinking so, I decide that while I must do some > violence to sustain > myself, let it be minimum and let me do these > things: > 1. Thank God for the food on my table. > 2. Not judge a meat-eating person any more than I > would an "eating" > person. > 3. Earnestly pray to Him to give me the goal I seek > so that I can be > more and more non-violent. > > Jai Ma! > > P.S.: > My original post was not addressed to Minakshiji. It > was addressed > to some other post-er who replied to her query > saying that it > was "compulsory" for sadhaks to eat veg food. The > way the post > appears this relation in the timing of the posts is > not perceivable, > so I thought I will clarify. > > > > , > "Mahamuni" > <mahamuni> wrote: > > > > Yes to do without food would be best, but you > don't need to maim > fruit trees to get fruit. It drops off on its own > of can be lightly > shaken. Nothing adharmic or karmic with that, IMHO. > > > > Also milk is thought of in a similiar light when > it is from cows > that are treated with kindness, reverence and > respect their whole > lives. If they are not milked, they experience > discomfort. So this > is a nice symbiotic relationship and there is no > violence, when done > this way. > > > > Jai Maa! > > - > > manoj_menon > > > > Tuesday, May 02, 2006 9:10 PM > > Re: > Vegetarianism > > > > > > Dear Minakshi jee, > > > > If this be the case, what do you have to say > about the God in > plants > > and vegetables and fruits that vegetarians eat? > sure beats > > the "compulsory" mandate, does it not? > > > > methinks vegeterianism is really just a > compromise. a compromise > > that minimizes cost (karma incurred) to the > benefit obtained > (the > > LEAST violent method of human sustenance for > effort of soul- > > relaization). it is an optimized cost-benefit > strategy, IMHO. > > > > Actually, the most non-violent would be to not > have to take any > food > > at all ("non-violentarian", to wit), but that is > reserved for > > advanced yogis only. > > > > we still need to kill plants and maim > fruit-laden trees for our > > sustenance, so let's remember that when we judge > the meat-eaters. > > > > and let's say a prayer of thanks to the Almighty > for the food > kept > > on our plate before we consume it. > > > > Jai Ma! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lord shiva > > > > > > > - > ----------- > > > > > > a.. Visit your group "" > on the web. > > > > b.. To from this group, send an > email to: > > > > > > > c.. Your use of is subject to > the Terms > of Service. > > > > > > > - > ----------- > > > > > > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around Lord shiva Visit your group "" on the web. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 hai my name is srikanth. recently i visited Triambakeshwar temple. it was wonderful. there i bought a Rudhraksha.. can any one tell me how to test it... thanking you in advance dhoopdeep <no_reply> wrote: Thank you Dhruvji and Rajinderji for your interesting responses. Regards Meenakshi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 Namaskar Pandit Arjunji, I may kindly state that your posting was quite informative. In most of the Kerala temples, a particular "Prasadam" (distribution) called 'Panchagavyam" is prepared and distributed to the devotees. The ingredients of the Panchagavya are Gomutrha (cow urine), Chanakam (cow dung), Ghee cow milk and curd. All these ingredients are mixed in a certain proportion that Panchagavya will not give you a bad taste while having it. Mostly in the morning session only this distribution will be done. Best regards, Devan K panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004 > wrote: dear shiv bhakts om namo bhagawate rudraya as suryaji said, ripe fruits fall from the trees on their own and if you eat them, you are not hurting even the trees. also having cow milk is not causing any harm to a cow. in fact shiva puran clearly states that a person cam survive only on cow urine for three days and can survive the next three days on cow milk and can survive the next three days on cow ghee and after these nine days, the next three days (i.e. 10, 11 and 12) can survive only on air. the great yoga guru ramdevji has been surviving ONLY ON FRUITS AND MILK for several years. eating fruits is the best food for any man. be it diabetics research organisation or any disease research organisation, all say that if a person eats fruits, chances are that he does not acquire any diseases. in fact most websites of these organisations promote eating of fruits saying that they would prevent diseases and for a money minded person they suggest that fruits are cheaper than medicines. most people in the cow belt (northern states) have made a habit of having cow milk every day (in urban areas buffalo milk)and most of their stamina and energy is attributed ONLY TO THIS COW MILK. the great indian batsman viredra sehwag publicly stated that the secret of his energy is cow milk. however, i request shiv bhakts to respect the cultures and climate constraints of cold countries and do not criticise their eating fish or meat. we can only say the positives of vegetarianism based on both mythological belief as laid down in holy scriptures as well as the reports of various scientific and medical organisations. in praise of lord shiva and with best wishes pandit arjun , "Mahamuni" <mahamuni wrote: > > Yes to do without food would be best, but you don't need to maim fruit trees to get fruit. It drops off on its own of can be lightly shaken. Nothing adharmic or karmic with that, IMHO. > > Also milk is thought of in a similiar light when it is from cows that are treated with kindness, reverence and respect their whole lives. If they are not milked, they experience discomfort. So this is a nice symbiotic relationship and there is no violence, when done this way. > > Jai Maa! > - > manoj_menon > > Tuesday, May 02, 2006 9:10 PM > Re: Vegetarianism > > > Dear Minakshi jee, > > If this be the case, what do you have to say about the God in plants > and vegetables and fruits that vegetarians eat? sure beats > the "compulsory" mandate, does it not? > > methinks vegeterianism is really just a compromise. a compromise > that minimizes cost (karma incurred) to the benefit obtained (the > LEAST violent method of human sustenance for effort of soul- > relaization). it is an optimized cost-benefit strategy, IMHO. > > Actually, the most non-violent would be to not have to take any food > at all ("non-violentarian", to wit), but that is reserved for > advanced yogis only. > > we still need to kill plants and maim fruit-laden trees for our > sustenance, so let's remember that when we judge the meat-eaters. > > and let's say a prayer of thanks to the Almighty for the food kept > on our plate before we consume it. > > Jai Ma! > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 Om Namah Sivaya Dear Sri Rajinder Nath, You wrote : "i still wonder some great saint of india like ramakrishna use to eat fish.so it may not be completely compulsary to be vegitarian" When Sri Ramakrishna was asked whether sould one eat what one gets. He said : "That depends upon the spiritual state. When a Jnani eats, he offers the food as an oblation in the fire of Kundalini. But for a Bhakta, it is different. A Bhakta should eat only pure food, such food as he can freely offer to his beloved Lord. Animal food is NOT for a Bhakta. At the same time I must say that if a man loves God, even while living upon pork, he is blessed; and wretched is he who lives on milk and rice but whose mind is absorbed in woman and gold." As long as we are aware of our own individuality, we should stick to the code of right conduct, it is not wise to imitate the sages who dwell in a different plane of Consciousness (beyond good and bad) from us. Sivaya Namah Rajinder Nath <jinderman > wrote: dear bhaktas i have not written anything while making any judgment of course life sustain on life and i am in the same boat i try myself to be less voilent to my surrounding i rember reading somewhere at slaughter home animal go for thier turn and put themself thier head on the spot as it is accepting thier end of life. i still wonder some great saint of india like ramakrishna use to eat fish.so it may not be completely compulsary to be vegitarian i hope but i feel we shoul take form of life which is only have dominant earth and water like veg/fruit not inteligent life particularly pandit ji artical real very good in explanation. 24 FIFA World Cup tickets to be won with Mail. Learn more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 DEAR SH.SELAVARATNAM JI THANKS FOR EXPLANATION I AGREE WITH YOU YES AFTER I MADE TRIP TO ARUNACHELA HILL EVEN DESIRE FOR MATING WITH PARNTER HAS NOT MADE SENSE TO ME. I THINK IT IS SAHAJA WHEN YOU FIND YOUR DESIRE ONE BY ONE SLIPPING AWAY YES IT IS HARD FOR NOT TO HAVE THREE MEAL A DAY OF COURSE DR RECOMEND FISH FOR PROTEEN, BUT IN NORTH INDIA WE TAKE LOT BUTTER MILK. IT IS AHABIT RAJINDER > > > > > 24 FIFA World Cup tickets to be won with > Mail. Learn more Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around Lord shiva Visit your group "" on the web. Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 Two more things to think about regarding this subject: 1. You can't eat your way to God 2. Better to be more concerned with what comes out of your mouth than what goes in it. Pranams and Blessings, Surya - Selvaratnam Selvakumar Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:26 AM RE: Vegetarianism Om Namah Sivaya Dear Sri Rajinder Nath, You wrote : "i still wonder some great saint of india like ramakrishna use to eat fish.so it may not be completely compulsary to be vegitarian" When Sri Ramakrishna was asked whether sould one eat what one gets. He said : "That depends upon the spiritual state. When a Jnani eats, he offers the food as an oblation in the fire of Kundalini. But for a Bhakta, it is different. A Bhakta should eat only pure food, such food as he can freely offer to his beloved Lord. Animal food is NOT for a Bhakta. At the same time I must say that if a man loves God, even while living upon pork, he is blessed; and wretched is he who lives on milk and rice but whose mind is absorbed in woman and gold." As long as we are aware of our own individuality, we should stick to the code of right conduct, it is not wise to imitate the sages who dwell in a different plane of Consciousness (beyond good and bad) from us. Sivaya Namah Rajinder Nath <jinderman > wrote: dear bhaktas i have not written anything while making any judgment of course life sustain on life and i am in the same boat i try myself to be less voilent to my surrounding i rember reading somewhere at slaughter home animal go for thier turn and put themself thier head on the spot as it is accepting thier end of life. i still wonder some great saint of india like ramakrishna use to eat fish.so it may not be completely compulsary to be vegitarian i hope but i feel we shoul take form of life which is only have dominant earth and water like veg/fruit not inteligent life particularly pandit ji artical real very good in explanation. 24 FIFA World Cup tickets to be won with Mail. Learn more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 4, 2006 Report Share Posted May 4, 2006 Great post and very good points! - Selvaratnam Selvakumar Thursday, May 04, 2006 10:26 AM RE: Vegetarianism Om Namah Sivaya Dear Sri Rajinder Nath, You wrote : "i still wonder some great saint of india like ramakrishna use to eat fish.so it may not be completely compulsary to be vegitarian" When Sri Ramakrishna was asked whether sould one eat what one gets. He said : "That depends upon the spiritual state. When a Jnani eats, he offers the food as an oblation in the fire of Kundalini. But for a Bhakta, it is different. A Bhakta should eat only pure food, such food as he can freely offer to his beloved Lord. Animal food is NOT for a Bhakta. At the same time I must say that if a man loves God, even while living upon pork, he is blessed; and wretched is he who lives on milk and rice but whose mind is absorbed in woman and gold." As long as we are aware of our own individuality, we should stick to the code of right conduct, it is not wise to imitate the sages who dwell in a different plane of Consciousness (beyond good and bad) from us. Sivaya Namah Rajinder Nath <jinderman > wrote: dear bhaktas i have not written anything while making any judgment of course life sustain on life and i am in the same boat i try myself to be less voilent to my surrounding i rember reading somewhere at slaughter home animal go for thier turn and put themself thier head on the spot as it is accepting thier end of life. i still wonder some great saint of india like ramakrishna use to eat fish.so it may not be completely compulsary to be vegitarian i hope but i feel we shoul take form of life which is only have dominant earth and water like veg/fruit not inteligent life particularly pandit ji artical real very good in explanation. 24 FIFA World Cup tickets to be won with Mail. Learn more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 When human eat plants and fruits, then for the plants they have done there mission in life. There mission is to be eaten, that is not killing. When you die after you have finished your mission, its okay. Thats so for the plants we eat. They want to be of use. Thats the way i see it. Read Frawleys books about the issue. Om namah shivaya. Geir , "manoj_menon" <ammademon wrote: > > Dear Minakshi jee, > > If this be the case, what do you have to say about the God in plants > and vegetables and fruits that vegetarians eat? sure beats > the "compulsory" mandate, does it not? > > methinks vegeterianism is really just a compromise. a compromise > that minimizes cost (karma incurred) to the benefit obtained (the > LEAST violent method of human sustenance for effort of soul- > relaization). it is an optimized cost-benefit strategy, IMHO. > > Actually, the most non-violent would be to not have to take any food > at all ("non-violentarian", to wit), but that is reserved for > advanced yogis only. > > we still need to kill plants and maim fruit-laden trees for our > sustenance, so let's remember that when we judge the meat-eaters. > > and let's say a prayer of thanks to the Almighty for the food kept > on our plate before we consume it. > > Jai Ma! > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.