Onion and Garlic used in Indian Cooking?

[sant]

well he was right or wrong i dont care now thats his view maybe foolish

but i have also been foolish

besides all been settled ive taken my revenge and i was right

thank you for concerning

everybody has some good qualities and bad qualities

[sambya]

 

 

PURPORT

 

The word yavana means “meat-eater.” Anyone from a meat-eating community is called a yavana. One who does not strictly observe the Vedic regulative principles is called a mleccha. These words do not refer to any particular man. Even if a person is born in a brahmaëa, ksatriya, vaisya or sudra family, he is a mleccha or yavana if he does not strictly follow the regulative principles or if he eats meat.

 

with due respect to all , im extremely sorry but this is absolutely wrong . being born in india , and having known its culture , tradition and practices and literature since childhood i can say upon my word that this is direct misrepresentation of facts .

 

yavanas were originally used to mean the greeks after the alexanders invasion into the subcontinent . the generals and governors that he left here ( like selucus ) were called yavanas . however later this term began to be used to describe the muslims also when they came to the land about a thousand years ago . and at the time of chaitanya mhaprabhu it was broadly used to denote any non-hindu individuals coming from foreign lands . in this way buddhsts , jains and shiks , although non hindu did not fall into yavana catagory .

 

mlechha is a later day word in hinduism which also meant a non believer in sanatana dharma or vedas . this word particularly gained popularity in the last 500 years . it is synomynous to the muslim's kafir . now , obviously an hindu would look upon his culture and values as superior to the rest of the world . thus any un-hindu attitude or practice were termed as mlecchaachar ( the behaviour of the mlechhas ). the most prominent group to fall into the catagory of mlechhas were the muslims .

 

innumerable ancient and modern literature in almost all vernacular languages bear testimony of these facts . a touch of mlechha or muslim was fit to make you unclean . later when british , french and portugese arrived in the land with their east india companies the white men were also termed as mlechhas . jsut read through colonial history of india ( even just that of calcutta would do ) to find out for yourselfe who wer the mlechhas !!

 

socialising and dinning with an mlechha was an absolute no no !! these were essentially terms used to define a group on the basis of their country and religion . it had nothing to do with meat eating or behaviourial practices whatsoever . there have never been a situation where a non practicing hindu is termed as or reduced to the level of mlechhas . a caste hindu could socialise with a non practising hindu ( alcoholic or meat eater ) whithout the fear of being deserted in the society.

 

 

 

of course im not justifying this discrimation and encouraging such narrow practices of mideaval hindu society . but this purport directly changes the meaning of the words in the sense they were originally used .

 

why cant people simply accept the fact that certain malpractices had crept in the hindu fold which , through grace of god is no longer here. accept fact as it is !!

 

not tough to understand , it is a old tactic to supress the hard fact from the westerners and depict only the virtues of hinduism in order to win over converts ...

[bhaktajan]

to define a group on the basis of their country and religion . it had nothing to do with meat eating or behaviourial practices whatsoever . there have never been a situation where a non practicing hindu is termed as or reduced to the level of mlechhas . a caste hindu could socialise with a non practising hindu ( alcoholic or meat eater ) whithout the fear of being deserted in the society.

 

 

.............................................

except for the un-touchables: ie: fish-mongers, creamation worker; leather-tanners and . . .

.........................................

In the west we all invite prisoners & to dinner? ---Opps, Well we do employer illegal migrants to cook our meals!

[sant]

 

with due respect to all , im extremely sorry but this is absolutely wrong . being born in india , and having known its culture , tradition and practices and literature since childhood i can say upon my word that this is direct misrepresentation of facts

you may be a scholar sambya but if if his divine grace has written something then i think he would have with some purpose

dont reject it completely

one who can do the very difficult task of turning mlech yavana meat eaters into krishna consciousnes i find very little to be able to do what he has done in this present age

[ranjeetmore]

If suppose a devotee is qualified enough to be in association of advanced devotees,does he get transferred to another universe,where there is no Kaliyuga going on ????

[ranjeetmore]

Sant,Do you not know ??

 

Sambya is the most intelligent scholar we have.

[kaisersose]

Sheesh...know your facts, people.

 

Yavana/Yona = Greek. It meant Greek when Ashoka referred to Antiochus as a Yona and it means the same as of 2009. It is derived from the word Ionian (as used by Homer) & nothing has happened to change it meaning in between.

 

Mlechcha is a more general term, used to describe all outsiders (invaders) in general, who did not follow the common socio-religious practices of the region. A Yavana is a Mlechcha too.

 

Cheers

[dev singh]

aall this from a topic about onions and garlic

[shiva]

 

No, actually the hottest chili in the world is native to India.

 

check out the story:

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071026162420.htm

 

That article is not saying that those chilis are native to Assam, just that they "originate" there. No chili is native to India, chilis are cultivated and bred in India and Assam, those are a new subspecies of chili cultivated from breeding different types of chilis, therefore they can be said to "originate" in Assam. Chilis were brought to India in the early 16th century by Portuguese traders, they quickly became popular all over India. Potatoes, tomatoes, and some other vegies were also imported from the Americas and quickly became popular in India.

[Kali_Upasaka]

The vast majority of Hindus in India are meat eaters. They also take onion and garlic. They belong to all castes including Brahmins.

 

In India they do not associate Hinduism with Vegetarian food.

 

Vegetarianism is synonymous with Vaishnavism in Bengal. There are Vaishnavites in South India who are meat eaters. The Saivites in Tamil Nadu are vegetarians.

 

In India vegetarianism and non-eating of onion/garlic is synonymous with Jainism.

 

These are facts which the non-Indian Hindus have to face and accept.

[sant]

According to the 2006 Hindu-CNN-IBN State of the Nation Survey, 31% of Indians are vegetarians, while another 9% consumes eggs. Among the various communities, vegetarianism was most common among Jains, Brahmins at 55%, and less frequent among Muslims (3%) and residents of coastal states respectively. Other surveys cited by FAO [2], and USDA [3][4] estimate 20%-42% of the Indian population as being vegetarian. These surveys indicate that even Indians who do eat meat, do so infrequently, with less than 30% consuming it regularly; although the reasons are partially economical.

[Kali_Upasaka]

Thank you, Sant.

 

According to FAO the number of non-Vegetarians is increasing both in rural and urban areas. Sad.

[sant]

 

Thank you, Sant.

 

According to FAO the number of non-Vegetarians is increasing both in rural and urban areas. Sad.

 

 

thank you as i just got to know this survey now after reading your post

[bhaktajan]

Alas!

 

"These are facts which the non-Indian Hindus have to face and accept."

 

Now we see why the Devatas never visit.