Guest guest Posted November 24, 1999 Report Share Posted November 24, 1999 On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, WWW: Vyapaka (Dasa) ACBSP (Montreal - CAN) wrote: > [Text 2802718 from COM] > > Are there any laws against the sale of slaughtered animal (cow)byproducts as > fundraisers for Iskcon projects? I am referring to the ghee business at New > Vrindavana. I don't know of any other project which gets funding from such > distasteful activities. First of all, I hope that New Vrndavana is not still using ghee as a fund raiser. If they are, this seems most unwise, as it would promote a situation of overbreeding. Someone has not done the proper economic analysis of profits from selling the ghee produced from one calf -- versus the cost of maintaining that calf for the next 12-20 years. But, second of all, even if it is true, New Vrndavana is hardly alone in the practice of selling ghee from unprotected cows. Whatever the actual results, at least they have an intention to protect the cows. But, in most ISKCON temples, you can walk into the gift store and see several bottles of ghee from slaughtered cows being sold to help raise money to support the temple. So I cannot say that New Vrndavana would be alone in this practice, by any means. It is simply that other temples are not engaged in this practice on the same scale. But, again -- I'm not sure that New Vrndavana is still doing large-scale ghee distribution. I thought they had stopped that several years ago. Maybe I am wrong about that. > Wouldn't the sale of such items/products contravene at least the spirit if not > the actual standards themselves? This would seem relevant since the Min. of > Ag/H.K.d.d. has singled out the Saranagati project which isn't even an Iskcon > project. [if Saranagati is not an ISKCON farm project, why is it listed in Back to Godhead? Prabhupada Village, where the Bhaktivedanta Archives is located, is not listed in Back to Godhead. Also, Saranagati has by no means been "singled out" by anyone. As mentioned many times, there are very serious allegations of cow abuse at Mayapura, Vrndavana and New Vrndavana as well as other places. The devotees at Saranagati are certainly not being "singled out" for their alleged shortcomings in the matter of cow protection. We are hoping to rectify our past mistakes in cow protection throughout our ISKCON society. This is not for the purpose of attacking different projects, it is for the purpose of pleasing His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada and removing a large stone which is dragging us down as we attempt to make spiritual progress. ] First of all, as I mentioned to Malati prabhu, who is one of the GBCs for New Vrndavana, the more important issue is that an investigation should be initiated by the GBC as to why - if New Vrndavana was actually breeding 60-100 animals per year - the herd size is so low today. For ISKCON temples and farm projects to sell ghee from unprotected animals has always been a very disturbing practice, as far as I am concerned. I wrote to Ravindra Svarupa about this way back in 1989, when some devotees were doing this at Gita-nagari. Soon after that, Gita-nagari saw the light and switched over to using burfi from its own - protected - cows, rather than karmi ghee as part of its fund raising project. But in many ISKCON temples, when you walk into the gift shop, you will see bottles of ghee which are the product of cows who have subsequently been shot in the head with a stun gun, hoisted upside-down and then had their throats slit. To me it is an inauspicious practice in the mode of ignorance. Most of these temples do not have any specific programs to support a rural project where cows are protected. They have no program of cow protection at all -- although in many cases, there are individual members of the temples who are very magnanimous contributors to cow protection projects, and they visit them frequently. So, selling karmi ghee, or using karmi ghee as a component of fund raising has always been a disturbing practice to me. I think people only do it because they have not thought through the implications of their actions. It's simply out of ignorance, not out of any particular malicious spirit. So, I personally am not in favor of such a practice, even though it is widespread in many ISKCON temples. On the other hand, this is a battle which is very difficult to fight. If you want to be the leader in it, go ahead. The problem is that most or even all of our temples which have restaurants are also using products from slaughtered cows (which is why many vegans will not eat in them). So -- where do you draw the line? Shall we say that our temples will only use products from our own protected cows? Actually, Gita nagari used to provide all the curd for several Govinda's restaurants on the East Coast. There was an agreement with the temples that they, in turn would help support the cows at Gita-nagari. This went along alright for a number of years, but by the mid-1980s, they were facing their own economic problems and they dropped their commitment to the cows like a hot potato. Their support for the cows only lasted maybe 6-8 years -- but the cows and oxen produced as a result of providing dairy products to them lived to be 12-20 years old. So, based on real-world experience, I would never recommend developing a dairy program based on an agreement with some Govinda restaurant that they will then protect the cows. You will probably be left in the lurch. Twenty years is a long time for devotees -- especially changing temple management -- to commit to anything. So, the answer is that I, personally, am opposed to distributing ghee from slaughtered cows as a fund-raiser, and I have strong reservations about using ghee from so-called protected cows as a fund raiser, because it can easily lead to overbreeding of the cows (it takes many gallons of milk to produce one gallon of ghee). Better to use burfi from protected cows, as it takes much less milk, and consequently entails much less risk of overbreeding. But, this is not a battle that I want to focus my time and energy on. Rather than focus so much on what not to do, I would like if possible to focus more on what we should do -- which is to build up agriculture/cow protection training programs for our young devotees and helping them get settled on the land, without mortgaging their lives to buy property. your servant, Hare Krsna dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 24, 1999 Report Share Posted November 24, 1999 Noma T. Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu> WWW: Vyapaka (Dasa) ACBSP (Montreal - CAN) <vyapaka (AT) accel (DOT) net> Cc: COM: Cow (Protection and related issues) <Cow (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; COM: Varnasrama development <Varnasrama.development (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu> Wednesday, November 24, 1999 8:10 AM Karmi ghee > > >On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, WWW: Vyapaka (Dasa) ACBSP (Montreal - CAN) wrote: > >> [Text 2802718 from COM] >> >> Are there any laws against the sale of slaughtered animal (cow)byproducts as >> fundraisers for Iskcon projects? I am referring to the ghee business at New >> Vrindavana. I don't know of any other project which gets funding from such >> distasteful activities. > H.K.d.d.responded: >First of all, I hope that New Vrndavana is not still using ghee as a fund >raiser. If they are, this seems most unwise, as it would promote a >situation of overbreeding. Someone has not done the proper economic >analysis of profits from selling the ghee produced from one calf -- versus >the cost of maintaining that calf for the next 12-20 years. To my knowledge this is still occuring. When we were having our discussion in regards to footnoting Prabhupada's books this point was raised to Madhava Ghosh dasa and he confirmed that it was still going on. The butter to make the ghee is not from ISKCON cows but rather purchased or perhaps donated from some outside source. > >But, second of all, even if it is true, New Vrndavana is hardly alone in >the practice of selling ghee from unprotected cows. Whatever the actual >results, at least they have an intention to protect the cows. Well, they aren't protecting any cows in this circumstance. Also I don't think the same devotees who are making and profiting from the ghee business are the same devotees who are directly raising funds for the herd's maintenance. >But, again -- I'm not sure that New Vrndavana is still doing large-scale >ghee distribution. I thought they had stopped that several years ago. >Maybe I am wrong about that. I think you're wrong.. > >[if Saranagati is not an ISKCON farm project, why is it listed in Back to >Godhead? Saranagati is definitely not an ISKCON run project. One of my closest friends is a shareholder and when I mentioned this to him this was his immediate response. I think this has also been mentioned before on some of the conferences. However, they are still nice devotees but have decided to keep their distance from ISKCON administration. The Vancouver temple owns shares there still, I think. I can't get into details more than this because I am too distant. It is a great project full of great devotees though. That I am sure of. Prabhupada Village, where the Bhaktivedanta Archives is located, >is not listed in Back to Godhead. Also, Saranagati has by no means been >"singled out" by anyone. As mentioned many times, there are very serious >allegations of cow abuse at Mayapura, Vrndavana and New Vrndavana as well >as other places. The devotees at Saranagati are certainly not being >"singled out" for their alleged shortcomings in the matter of cow >protection. I don't remember stating that they were being singled out and it is good that the whole situation is being looked into. Unfortunately, I can't agree that adopting cow standards are the way to go. It will only create a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. What is needed is education. Empower the devotees what to do and when they can see the benefit of cow and oxen protection, the problem will be greatly reduced or eliminated. > >First of all, as I mentioned to Malati prabhu, who is one of the GBCs for >New Vrndavana, the more important issue is that an investigation should be >initiated by the GBC as to why - if New Vrndavana was actually breeding >60-100 animals per year - the herd size is so low today. With no due ill-respect to Malati, I don't think she should be involved because she has too long a history there. Balabhadra also should be excused due to his not standing up to the situation as already has been mentioned several times by myself on these conferences. Certainly there must be others who can undertake the cause. > >But in many ISKCON temples, when you walk into the gift shop, you will see >bottles of ghee which are the product of cows who have subsequently been >shot in the head with a stun gun, hoisted upside-down and then had their >throats slit. To me it is an inauspicious practice in the mode of >ignorance. I agree. We should distance our temples and indivdual lifestyles away from these products as much as possible. However, if no protected milk products are available Srila PRabhupada has given us the sanction to use products from a conventional source. However, to purchase and/or produce them for profit, I cannot see Srila PRabhupada being in favour of this at all. >So, selling karmi ghee, or using karmi ghee as a component of fund raising >has always been a disturbing practice to me. I think people only do it >because they have not thought through the implications of their actions. >It's simply out of ignorance, not out of any particular malicious spirit. It also shows how financial necessity can warp one's perspective. Hopefully, when these things are brought up to the devotees, they will change direction. > >So, I personally am not in favor of such a practice, even though it is >widespread in many ISKCON temples. Your experience is different than mine but then again I don't travel to too many temples. It is not my experience that the practice is "widespread" but it certainly could be. > >On the other hand, this is a battle which is very difficult to fight. If >you want to be the leader in it, go ahead. I already have enough battles. It should be taken up by the GBC because unless they do it it will only be looked upon as my opinion. Why can't the Min. of Ag do something. Isn't that what they are all about, or at least partly about. Hopefully, as things develop here I can take up a leadership role on this issue by showing a thriving self-sufficient farm using (at least partially) oxen and producing its own milk products in a sustaining and Krsna conscious manner. The Krsna consciousness will be present due to the grace of my good wife. I personally am bereft of it. I'll try to help out on the farm while she prepares so many nutritious and tasty preparations for Srila Prabhupada. > >The problem is that most or even all of our temples which have restaurants >are also using products from slaughtered cows (which is why many vegans >will not eat in them). So -- where do you draw the line? Shall we say >that our temples will only use products from our own protected cows? >Actually, Gita nagari used to provide all the curd for several Govinda's >restaurants on the East Coast. In my opinion, Srila Prabhupada gave allowance to use butter and milk from the outside system. I think he said "what can we do?" But producing it for profit seems to be contributing to the system in a manner that transpresses the boundaries of our philosophy and Prabhupada's allowance. > >There was an agreement with the temples that they, in turn would help >support the cows at Gita-nagari. This went along alright for a number of >years, but by the mid-1980s, they were facing their own economic problems >and they dropped their commitment to the cows like a hot potato. Their >support for the cows only lasted maybe 6-8 years -- but the cows and oxen >produced as a result of providing dairy products to them lived to be 12-20 >years old. In the North American context, I think the cows must be the responsibility of individual householder families. Otherwise, the tendency to overbreed is strong. At least that is what history shows us. But each individual situation is different and if there is definite, non-vanishing support for the herd and the purchase of additional lands, then it possibly can be looked at differently. However, I really don't believe that such a situation exists. On a practical level, there should be a moratorium on all cow purchases in the movement until a practical process of caring for the cows can be established. Certainly, we can't stop individuals from purchasing animals. > > >But, this is not a battle that I want to focus my time and energy on. >Rather than focus so much on what not to do, I would like if possible to >focus more on what we should do -- which is to build up agriculture/cow >protection training programs for our young devotees and helping them get >settled on the land, without mortgaging their lives to buy property. I don't think the mortgaging thing can be accomplished in this generation. Only when properties are paid for and passed onto offspring will this start to happen. Land is just too expensive and I don't see there being enough wealthy individuals willing to buy and donate land. The requirement for an agriculture/cow prot. program is when the animals are producing food for both themselves and humans. Until then they are in a precarious situation. If theyare not producing enough surplus, then they are a burden and the results that has happened in Murari Sevaka will occur again and again. These animals are one component in an agricultural, social ecosystem and they have responsibilities to produce for the greater whole. If they are not fulfilling these responsibilities, they become pets and people get tired of pets occasionally. People don't get tired of animals which are producing foodstuffs for their table. Then and only then will they be protected. That is why the cow standards are best looked at as instructional/educational materials. Their long term role as a legislator of cow protection practice is minimal. Respectfully,, Vyapaka dasa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 25, 1999 Report Share Posted November 25, 1999 Hare Krishna, I must be missing something here. Don't our temples regularly use milk from cows that will be slaughtered eventually? Prabhupada said we could use it. Could you please explain to me what the issues are? Your servant, Sri Rama das [srirama (AT) bbt (DOT) se], or [srirama (AT) jps (DOT) net] < PLEASE NOTE THIS NEW EMAIL ADDRESS [http://www.web-construct.net/creditcard.html] > > Hare.Krsna.dasi (AT) bbt (DOT) se [Hare.Krsna.dasi (AT) bbt (DOT) se] > Wednesday, November 24, 1999 5:09 AM > WWW: Vyapaka (Dasa) ACBSP (Montreal - CAN) > Cc: COM: Cow (Protection and related issues); COM: Varnasrama > development; npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu > Karmi ghee > > > [Text 2803890 from COM] > > > > On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, WWW: Vyapaka (Dasa) ACBSP (Montreal - CAN) wrote: > > > [Text 2802718 from COM] > > > > Are there any laws against the sale of slaughtered animal > (cow)byproducts as > > fundraisers for Iskcon projects? I am referring to the ghee > business at New > > Vrindavana. I don't know of any other project which gets > funding from such > > distasteful activities. > > First of all, I hope that New Vrndavana is not still using ghee as a fund > raiser. If they are, this seems most unwise, as it would promote a > situation of overbreeding. Someone has not done the proper economic > analysis of profits from selling the ghee produced from one calf -- versus > the cost of maintaining that calf for the next 12-20 years. > > But, second of all, even if it is true, New Vrndavana is hardly alone in > the practice of selling ghee from unprotected cows. Whatever the actual > results, at least they have an intention to protect the cows. But, in > most ISKCON temples, you can walk into the gift store and see several > bottles of ghee from slaughtered cows being sold to help raise money to > support the temple. So I cannot say that New Vrndavana would be alone in > this practice, by any means. It is simply that other temples are not > engaged in this practice on the same scale. > > But, again -- I'm not sure that New Vrndavana is still doing large-scale > ghee distribution. I thought they had stopped that several years ago. > Maybe I am wrong about that. > > > Wouldn't the sale of such items/products contravene at least > the spirit if > not > > the actual standards themselves? This would seem relevant since > the Min. of > > Ag/H.K.d.d. has singled out the Saranagati project which isn't > even an Iskcon > > project. > > [if Saranagati is not an ISKCON farm project, why is it listed in Back to > Godhead? Prabhupada Village, where the Bhaktivedanta Archives is located, > is not listed in Back to Godhead. Also, Saranagati has by no means been > "singled out" by anyone. As mentioned many times, there are very serious > allegations of cow abuse at Mayapura, Vrndavana and New Vrndavana as well > as other places. The devotees at Saranagati are certainly not being > "singled out" for their alleged shortcomings in the matter of cow > protection. We are hoping to rectify our past mistakes in cow protection > throughout our ISKCON society. This is not for the purpose of attacking > different projects, it is for the purpose of pleasing His Divine Grace > Srila Prabhupada and removing a large stone which is dragging us down as > we attempt to make spiritual progress. ] > > First of all, as I mentioned to Malati prabhu, who is one of the GBCs for > New Vrndavana, the more important issue is that an investigation should be > initiated by the GBC as to why - if New Vrndavana was actually breeding > 60-100 animals per year - the herd size is so low today. > > For ISKCON temples and farm projects to sell ghee from unprotected animals > has always been a very disturbing practice, as far as I am concerned. I > wrote to Ravindra Svarupa about this way back in 1989, when some devotees > were doing this at Gita-nagari. Soon after that, Gita-nagari saw the > light and switched over to using burfi from its own - protected - cows, > rather than karmi ghee as part of its fund raising project. > > But in many ISKCON temples, when you walk into the gift shop, you will see > bottles of ghee which are the product of cows who have subsequently been > shot in the head with a stun gun, hoisted upside-down and then had their > throats slit. To me it is an inauspicious practice in the mode of > ignorance. Most of these temples do not have any specific programs to > support a rural project where cows are protected. They have no program of > cow protection at all -- although in many cases, there are individual > members of the temples who are very magnanimous contributors to cow > protection projects, and they visit them frequently. > > So, selling karmi ghee, or using karmi ghee as a component of fund raising > has always been a disturbing practice to me. I think people only do it > because they have not thought through the implications of their actions. > It's simply out of ignorance, not out of any particular malicious spirit. > > So, I personally am not in favor of such a practice, even though it is > widespread in many ISKCON temples. > > On the other hand, this is a battle which is very difficult to fight. If > you want to be the leader in it, go ahead. > > The problem is that most or even all of our temples which have restaurants > are also using products from slaughtered cows (which is why many vegans > will not eat in them). So -- where do you draw the line? Shall we say > that our temples will only use products from our own protected cows? > Actually, Gita nagari used to provide all the curd for several Govinda's > restaurants on the East Coast. > > There was an agreement with the temples that they, in turn would help > support the cows at Gita-nagari. This went along alright for a number of > years, but by the mid-1980s, they were facing their own economic problems > and they dropped their commitment to the cows like a hot potato. Their > support for the cows only lasted maybe 6-8 years -- but the cows and oxen > produced as a result of providing dairy products to them lived to be 12-20 > years old. > > So, based on real-world experience, I would never recommend developing a > dairy program based on an agreement with some Govinda restaurant that they > will then protect the cows. You will probably be left in the lurch. > Twenty years is a long time for devotees -- especially changing temple > management -- to commit to anything. > > So, the answer is that I, personally, am opposed to distributing ghee from > slaughtered cows as a fund-raiser, and I have strong reservations about > using ghee from so-called protected cows as a fund raiser, because it can > easily lead to overbreeding of the cows (it takes many gallons of milk to > produce one gallon of ghee). Better to use burfi from protected cows, as > it takes much less milk, and consequently entails much less risk of > overbreeding. > > But, this is not a battle that I want to focus my time and energy on. > Rather than focus so much on what not to do, I would like if possible to > focus more on what we should do -- which is to build up agriculture/cow > protection training programs for our young devotees and helping them get > settled on the land, without mortgaging their lives to buy property. > > your servant, > > Hare Krsna dasi > > 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.