Beef

April 28, 2009

I'm surprised at the answers of many of my group friends who are supposed to be

heading towards being a spiritual person. I think you need to understand what

you are eating here. There is no remorse in the way an animal is killed today.

What you see in the supermarket are neat slices or cuts of whatever meat you

care to eat but do you stop to think of what kind of treatment may have been

meted out to the animals before they are neatly placed in front of you ? Don't

act like you people are ignorant of the truth. Enough said maybe you should

google and see the harsh reality.....

Stop cruelty to animals. The first step to spirituality is not hurting others

and respecting animals ...treat them the way you will treat yourself.

Rashmi

________________________________

Shakti Thondan <sakthithondan

I agree with Sankara Menon's point here. Being non-vegetarian has nothing to do

with spirituality. Personally, I gave up eating meat, but not for spiritual

purposes, but for health reasons. I still eat good amount of fish as a

significant source of protein and certain amino acids.

Anything eaten in moderate quantity is not harmful. French eat more fatty food

and red meat yet have the lowest rate of heart diseases than even Americans,

simply because of their eating habits: 1) Their lunch and dinner is unrushed 2

hour deal and 2)They take red wine along with their foood in moderate quantity.

At Mother's Lotus Feet,

Shakti Thondan

To receive the Light of Supreme Power visit http://www.sakthiol hi.org

--- On Tue, 4/28/09, sankara menon <kochu1tz > wrote:

sankara menon <kochu1tz >

The issue has no spiritual basis see vivekananda quoted below. Physically it

maybe better to avoid red meat especially considering that Indians are

genetically prone to heart attack. Thats it.

April 28, 2009

Rashmi,

The debate here is primarily about spiritualism and meat consumption. I

believe the responses on this group is in no way a sign of apathy or

indifference to the plight of animals. It was just underlining the fact that

spiritualism is not exclusive to vegetarianism.

Please dont misunderstand the groups comments.

Bob

--- On Tue, 4/28/09, rush ram <rume235 wrote:

rush ram <rume235

I'm surprised at the answers of many of my group friends who are supposed to be

heading towards being a spiritual person. I think you need to understand what

you are eating here. There is no remorse in the way an animal is killed today.

What you see in the supermarket are neat slices or cuts of whatever meat you

care to eat but do you stop to think of what kind of treatment may have been

meted out to the animals before they are neatly placed in front of you ? Don't

act like you people are ignorant of the truth. Enough said maybe you should

google and see the harsh reality......

Stop cruelty to animals. The first step to spirituality is not hurting others

and respecting animals ...treat them the way you will treat yourself..

Rashmi

April 29, 2009

Robert

Sorry if i sound harsh but what i mean is yes in today's world spiritulism is

connected with vegetarianism and avoiding animal products.

Decades back the animals were reared in a friendly environment till they were

taken to the abattoir . They multiplied naturally not like what goes on today. A

pig doesnt live in a farm anymore ..it does know what sweet smelling earth is

all about...they are born in " factories " artificially impregnated n

are slaughtered after their time is up with even having know what mud and sky is

all about. Hen are injected so that they may produce huge eggs which hurt them

and make them bleed everytime they lay eggs. Spiritualism is primarily about

living your life without intentionally hurting another living things and by

consuming meat and using animal products like leather, fur etc u are abbeting

violence. Spiritualism does not go hand in hand with violence. I dont wish to

debate on this because I will NEVER agree otherwise. I am a hindu ..I have eaten

beef and other animal meat and enjoyed it but since the last 3 years since i

have completely stopped

eating meat n am slowly giving up all animal products like leather goods

etc.... I have opened out my eyes to reality and this is an important step

towards spiritualism. I dont want to sound like i'm showing off but i must say

that a lot of people think i;m in my early or mid 20's whereas i'm in my early

40's. So my friends vegetarianism not only is the first step towards

spirituality but also youth

Rashmi

________________________________

Robert Partick <robertpartick

Wednesday, 29 April, 2009 1:10:41 AM

Re: beef

Rashmi,

The debate here is primarily about spiritualism and meat consumption. I

believe the responses on this group is in no way a sign of apathy or

indifference to the plight of animals. It was just underlining the fact that

spiritualism is not exclusive to vegetarianism.

Please dont misunderstand the groups comments.

Bob

--- On Tue, 4/28/09, rush ram <rume235 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote:

rush ram <rume235 (AT) (DOT) co.in>

I'm surprised at the answers of many of my group friends who are supposed to be

heading towards being a spiritual person. I think you need to understand what

you are eating here. There is no remorse in the way an animal is killed today.

What you see in the supermarket are neat slices or cuts of whatever meat you

care to eat but do you stop to think of what kind of treatment may have been

meted out to the animals before they are neatly placed in front of you ? Don't

act like you people are ignorant of the truth. Enough said maybe you should

google and see the harsh reality..... ..

Stop cruelty to animals. The first step to spirituality is not hurting others

and respecting animals ...treat them the way you will treat yourself..

Rashmi

Own a website.Get an unlimited package.Pay next to nothing.*Go to

http://in..business./

April 30, 2009

I have never been told that there is a compulsion of use of Meat and

Alcohol. But then I am not a siddh sadhak either. I am an ordinary

mortal.All the agamas and tantra say that those acts which are

ordinarily considered wrong cease to be so if done with absolute

detachment(as already pointed out by somebody else but in reference with

vedas). Even served the meat of his own family it would not make any

difference to him as he/she is free from detachment. I am not sure how many

of us can claim to be detached.

Also another interesting reading would be Vimlananda's biography by Robert

Svobodha. Vimalananda was a aghori but has repeatedly expresses his disgust

for those who are nonvegeterians

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Surya <mahamuni wrote:

>

> Only " Real " tantrikas use meat and alcohol, huh? This is so humorous and

> silly that it is beyond words.

>

> JAI AMMA!

>

> Surya

>

April 30, 2009

Shakti SadhanaHello:

I have been looking at the thread on Beef - it is an emotional issue wherever

and whenever it is brought up!

My $0.02:

I personally have no doubt that it is necessary for a serious spiritual aspirant

to be a strict vegetarian. I have been on the path most of my life and have been

fortunate to have contact with a few gurus. The basic tenet of " Ahimsa

Paramodharma " is a cornerstone of spirituality.

I quote from Manusmriti (as described on page 83 in Self-Realizaton in Kashmir

Shaivism, Swami Lakshmanjoo, State University of New York Press)

a.. Sages and saints of old teach us that the one whose flesh you eat in this

world will eat you in the next world (Manusmriti 5:15)

b.. Count the hairs of the animal you have killed and eaten, and for that many

lifetimes you will be killed by that animal. (Manusmriti 5:38)

c.. He who avoids meat eating for his whole life receives the same meritorious

fruit after death as he who adopts the asvamedha sacrifice every year for one

hundred years (Manusmriti 5:53)

Swami Lakshmanjoo was emphatic and categorical - " You may think that only the

butcher who has actually slaughtered the animal is a sinner. You are wrong. Any

person involved in any way is equally a sinner and a criminal in this most

terrible violent act of killing. " and quotes Tantraloka (page 80, SUNY reference

above)

a.. Even if you are not a thief and yet you associate with thieves you are

also considered to be a thief.

Cheers

Mukti

May 1, 2009

Hello Group,

Quite a thread...

Now here's my two cents. Bear with me, and please ask if confused.

Spirituality is about oneness, being single, about the spirit.

To attain spiritual clarity / introspection, one needs to be detached.

To be detached requires detachment from sensory

stimuli, which means the five senses are under control.

To control those five senses, one needs to shut

down external stimuli first, after which one

would lose desire to stimulate those senses which

come in the way of spiritual advancement or introspection.

Bear in mind that one can't think about calm if

one were plagued by a raging hunger, distress

from overeating, craving for a flavour or in

extreme discomfort owing to the need to gratify

sexual desire, or the need to protect oneself from cold/heat, etc.

Having said that, assume that one were known to

be intolerant of say, pineapples because they

create acid reflux, or even lamb cutlets for the

same reason, one would avoid these foods bearing

in mind the objective of attaining calm, to achieve balance.

Now lets talk about spirituality vs. religion.

Religion = Middle English religioun, from

Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio

supernatural constraint, sanction, religious

practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back. 13th century

1 a: the state of a

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religious>religious

<a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1): the

service and worship of God or the supernatural

(2): commitment or devotion to

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religious>religious

faith or observance2: a personal set or

institutionalized system of

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religious>religious

attitudes, beliefs, and practices3archaic :

scrupulous conformity :

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conscientiousness>conscientiousness4:

a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

Spirituality = Middle English, from Anglo-French

or Latin; Anglo-French, espirit, spirit, from

Latin spiritus, literally, breath, from spirare

to blow, breathe 13th century

1: an animating or vital principle held to give

life to physical organisms2: a supernatural being

or essence: as acapitalized :

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/holy+spirit>holy

spirit b:

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/soul>soul

2a c: an often malevolent being that is bodiless

but can become visible ; specifically :

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ghost>ghost

2 d: a malevolent being that enters and possesses

a human being 3: temper or disposition of mind or

outlook especially when vigorous or animated <in

high spirits>4: the immaterial intelligent or

sentient part of a person 5 a: the activating or

essential principle influencing a person <acted

in a spirit of helpfulness> b: an inclination,

impulse, or tendency of a specified kind :

<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mood>mood6

a: a special attitude or frame of mind <the

money-making spirit was for a time driven back

J. A. Froude> b: the feeling, quality, or

disposition characterizing something <undertaken

in a spirit of fun>7: a lively or brisk quality

in a person or a person's actions8: a person

having a character or disposition of a specified

nature9: a mental disposition characterized by

firmness or assertiveness <denied the charge with spirit>

From the above definitions, taken from Merriam

Webster, it may be surmised that religion relates

to binding down something, say, a social code binding down a set of values.

Spirituality pertains to an individual approach

to activating individual intelligent principle.

If spiritual principles or logical belief by one

individual is " enforced " upon society to regulate

conduct, it becomes religion eventually.

So, Spooky the cowherd decided if

cows=milk+beef+leather, but

beef=reflux=headache=no peace=no milk+leather, he

thinks, I better get milk+cow+peace, leather

later when cow dies. To add to this belief, he

bolsters it saying milk=curd=cheese=butter=other

good things for 10 years, beef = one meal. Spooky

becomes famous for some reason or his logic

appeals to 82% of his people, since they all come

from the same gene pool anyway, and beef is banned.

Truth is, you feel you want, go get. You know

what you want, where you want to go. You can

decide for yourself if you want to be

intelligent, and if you have no problems with

meat interfering into the physique or mental

states, you will eat meat and be intelligent, all at the same time.

This is is the story of how something comes to be

eventually gospel 6000 years later and we have

this bunch of people communing virtually at their

screens discussing beef vs. veggies, karma vs. not.

Jai Mataji,

The Spook.

May 2, 2009

Yes I used the word " real " in all deliberately and in all seriousness. There are

" real " and " unreal " tantreekas. As there are " Real " Gurus and " unreal " Gurus.

As we are aware there is California Tantra which is just a way to have multiple

sex partners; there is half baked Tantra without lineage and lineage knowledge

and experience; there is Tantra to attain material goals ALONE etc. etc. These

are not " real "

A Real Tantrika is one who comes from a lineage going back to the mists of time,

where the lineage knowledge and experience has been transmitted to by a capable

Guru who has attained and who has practiced the various stages and reached the

practice of the higher mantra where alone such material are used. Usage of

these results in no sensual pleasure at all but is a mental and physical

excretion that stretches one's endurance to the limit. That is why such

practices are limited to the " Pancha Parvas " – " The ordained days " and to people

who have attained a certain level. They are serious and will not use mantras

frivolously. They almost NEVER use mantra for any personal purpose.

These days some people get all mantras as a package deal. They will take a long

time to reach the stage where the authority to use these - mantras and 5Ms - is

attained. That is why it is said " eka, dwi, tri panchavarshaanyaalocya " -

(1+2+3+5 =11 years of contemplation and observation by Guru before giving the

highest mantra) is stated as a minimum time frame. By the end of 11 years one

will know whether the student is ready for the Mantra and whether he will handle

it responsibly. The student also would have reached reasonable maturity to

understand what is what. There are set tests never spoken of to know the mettle

of the student. This is passed on as part of the special knowledge of a lineage.

This is essential because the negative results of improper usage affect the

Guru. If the disciple misuses or does not practice mantra as prescribed, the

Guru suffers. Thus the student has to be very very responsible. The Guru never

curses a disciple for these transgressions, but smiles because he took the

responsibility of the disciple and if his judgment was wrong he suffers. Thus

there are " Real " Gurus and " not real " Gurus also. Despite the bhu shuddhi and

bhoota shuddhi the Guru will still suffer and normally his/her progeny too for

the misuse and non-user of mantras by a disciple. Hence the care with which

Gurus of yore selected disciples. Now money, fame and ego drive and we have

people acting as Gurus without the basic RIGHT or ABILITY to impart the

knowledge and not knowing how to do it properly so that the energy passes. They

give mantras from books. Ask them the meaning of the letters or words of the

mantra and you will get a blank stare or some nonsense. All mantras have a

meaning and a meditation practice associated with it. It is these that empower

the mantra. One example of what the Maha Ganapati mantra is was earlier stated

in this group. Bhava or attitude is very very important in the practice. But who

cares for all that now? Where is the time!!! Just parrot mantras and talk about

instant kundalini awakening. Hence " real " and " unreal " .

But times are changing now. Even 15 years ago Srividya was spoken of only in

whispers. To find a Guru was difficult. Even after finding it was sooooooooo

difficult to get initiated. The supplicant waits the pleasure of the Guru to

teach. But now times have changed and the details are available; there are

" Gurus " to give instant deeksha – for some consideration. Of course there are

some compassionate ones like my late Guru (or Amritananda Nathaji) – who used to

say I will give to all who ask. The hell with consequences. " If I give to 100,

and ONE practices my mission is accomplished " . She suffered a lot because of the

immaturity of her disciples who used the mantras for material and sensual gains.

It is like the parable of sowing in Bible(Matthew 13:3-8[?]).

Same with Pratyangira. Just a few short years ago we never even used to

pronounce the name of the mantra let alone the mantra per se. If you do you go

do 108 Gayatri. If the mantra is used at all - indeed only in the difficult of

circumstances, it is followed by 1000s of Gayatri. Now? Ask any astrologer -

they immediately say shatru dosha and prescribe Pratyangira homa!! And there

are people who will perform without any care!!

Results? Zilch, Nada, zero!!!

But I have also noticed that it is very very difficult now as of yore to find

siddha sadhakas - the REAL Tantreekas and those who are willing to teach to

boot. If you find one, you are indeed really really lucky. The real ones now

hide deep deep underground for they want to keep the system pure, away from

prying eyes. They reveal themselves to deserving after a lot of thought. They

will not be holding Seminars here and there.

But then, as then as now there were and are self assured people who think they

know it all because they read a few books. Like people who think that because

they read books on mountaineering can climb Everest because they read the books.

Because of the past karma, SOME do attain the path. But that is rare indeed and

hapstence. Others who recite mantras like parrots hopefully will reach the path

in some future janma, because of their efforts here and now. Nothing goes to

waste. That, at least, is a saving grace.

But then, these are thoughts of an ignoramus. Welcome to ignore, deride or make

fun of.

, " Surya " <mahamuni wrote:

>

> Only " Real " tantrikas use meat and alcohol, huh? This is so humorous and

silly that it is beyond words.

>

> JAI AMMA!

>

> Surya

>

May 2, 2009

I never talked of compulsions. I said there are regions where the usage is

" permitted " . I did not say that unless you eat and fill your stomoch with meat

and fish and get drunk on alcohol and lie with 100 maidens you will not attain.

I also did not say that 5Ms are sinequa non.

Please also note that even the so called samayins use substitutes namely Vada

made of Lentils (which incidentally has the same protein content as meat); ripe

planains deep fried in ghee as representing Fish; and tender coconut with the

bottom cut off for alcohol etc. They are calle Prateekas or symbols or

substitutes.

I do not think this open forum may not be right for a detailed explanation of

the uses and effects of these things. They, for those who are capable of using

them, will learn from a " real " guru (smile).

[There!! I have again done it!!]

--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Aditya Kumar Jha <aditya.kr.jha wrote:

Aditya Kumar Jha <aditya.kr.jha

Re: Re: beef

Friday, May 1, 2009, 12:14 AM

I have never been told that there is a compulsion of use of Meat and

Alcohol. But then I am not a siddh sadhak either. I am an ordinary

mortal.All the agamas and tantra say that those acts which are

ordinarily considered wrong cease to be so if done with absolute

detachment(as already pointed out by somebody else but in reference with

vedas). Even served the meat of his own family it would not make any

difference to him as he/she is free from detachment. I am not sure how many

of us can claim to be detached.

Also another interesting reading would be Vimlananda's biography by Robert

Svobodha. Vimalananda was a aghori but has repeatedly expresses his disgust

for those who are nonvegeterians

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Surya <mahamuni (AT) cox (DOT) net> wrote:

>

> Only " Real " tantrikas use meat and alcohol, huh? This is so humorous and

> silly that it is beyond words.

>

> JAI AMMA!

>

> Surya

>

May 2, 2009

Lively discussion!

Just a point of note - Hitler was not a vegetarian. His doctors told him to

be a vegetarian for health issues, but he continued to sneak meat into his

food, such as hiding sausages in his meals. He was also a hunter, etc.

That being said, the point that vegetarianism doesn't make one a

peace-loving person is certainly true.

-sundari

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Tulasi <thundergod999 wrote:

>

> Hi

>

> I possed a question on wether a hindu can eat beef. I got the answer now.

> thanks

>

> But the argument keep going back to vegetarianism.

>

> I wish to share my view on this.

> If ur into vegetarianism its good for spirituality. One fasting enthusiats

> told me that removes toxins from the body. And his fasting is just drinking

> plain water for 10 to 14 days. Absolutly no food goes though his mouth

> during this fast. At the end of the fast(zero food) he attains excellent

> mental clarity that increases his psychic powers. He attribute it to toxins

> in meat, insecticide and fertilizer in plant. When he does not consume

> anything all toxins are removed. But i doubt that vegetatianism makes one

> peace loving eg .Hitler was a vegetarian.

>

> So can one attain moksha by vegetarianism. That a defininate yes.

>

> Now comming to meat. Can one reach moksha. Somewhere in the shakti sadhana

> website , Goddess matangi, when she was on earth, she was a meat eater. So

> any vegetarian who is adament about their vegetarian position should then go

> to the picture of goddess Matangi(and many other gods and godess) and yell

> at her for being non vegetarian. Even other herbivourious primates like

> chimpanzee sometime take a diet of meat(probably for biological rasons). And

> human are omniverious , we (in theory)need at least a little meat in our

> diet. If i remember corectly , our intestines not exactly a herbivours one

> and there are certain vitamins lacking in vegetarian food.

>

> But can one attain moksa with non vegetarianism. That is an also astounding

> yes. (So its ok to be a non vegetarian, im sure many throughout history

> reached moksha)

>

> Let me streach the topic. If one wants to do tantric sex attain moksha ,let

> them carry on. If one wants to smoke marijuana and attain moksha , let them

> carry on.(but getting arrested by police is a sparate matter). If one is

> disgusted people having tantric sex and smoking marijuana for spirituality,

> then curse and swear at lord Shiva.

>

> Lastly on this matter on books, different books tells u different thing.

> Its like a blind man feeling the elephants tail and calling it elephant and

> while another blind man holding a trunk and calling elephant. I think its

> more important to choose a correct methodology about doing well in it.

> whatever bring you moksha, then fine.

>

> I think a person not harming animals is his or her personal choice. It is

> sometimes reenforced because there are books that promote such behaviour. So

> If such person eats meat , it automatically becomes a sin. But for all

> others (non vegetarians)who dont follow such rules, there is no sin.

>

> Books sometimes can be dangerous. A group of people interprated a holy and

> it lead to the collapse of the world trade center in 9/11.

> Another group of fanatics in india (which im so ashamed of) are attacking

> christian rendering them homeless. I dont know what on basis or book they

> carry out their actions. (Christian are also worshiping lord shiva)

>

> My point is books are guide not absolute truth,

>

> <%40>,

> Rajesh MR <mrrajeshvedam wrote:

> >

> > What I pointed is ,charaka the exponder of ayurveda says that when we

> start meat havan in yaga ,verious illness also started in the earth.If

> ajamamsa rasayana in ayurveda means it is against charaka.Another thing aja

> in commen sanskrit means goat.But when it takes aja medha there aja means

> not to take birth.it is the meaning of god also.here aja in rasayana is

> actually seven years old rice grain.it will not sprougt out because of its

> oldness.The system of ayurveda is the off shoot of veda.I think we must have

> a good research on this thing .thanking all of you.acharya m.r.rajesh

> >

> > --- On Thu, 30/4/09, sankara menon <kochu1tz wrote:

> >

> > sankara menon <kochu1tz

> > Re: Re: beef

> > <%40>

> > Thursday, 30 April, 2009, 8:51 AM

> >

> > Maybe my friends should read Lalitopakhyana. The relevant portion is

> already translated and available in the files section lali.pdf. There meat

> eating and drinking have already been dealt with.

> >

>

--

***

Sri Kamakhya Mahavidya Mandir

www.kamakhyamandir.org

You'll find Mother in any house.

Do I dare say it in public?

She is Bhairavi with Shiva,

Durga with Her children,

Sita with Lakshmana.

She's mother, daughter, wife, sister -

Every woman close to you.

What more can Ramprasad say?

You work the rest out from these hints.

- Ramprasad Sen (1720-1781)

May 2, 2009

If making fun of you is the only way to make you reveal your wisdom and

experience from which I can learn.....I will do it everyday. :-)

, " kochu1tz " <kochu1tz wrote:

>

> Yes I used the word " real " in all deliberately and in all seriousness. There

are " real " and " unreal " tantreekas. As there are " Real " Gurus and " unreal "

Gurus.

> As we are aware there is California Tantra which is just a way to have

multiple sex partners; there is half baked Tantra without lineage and lineage

knowledge and experience; there is Tantra to attain material goals ALONE etc.

etc. These are not " real "

> A Real Tantrika is one who comes from a lineage going back to the mists of

time, where the lineage knowledge and experience has been transmitted to by a

capable Guru who has attained and who has practiced the various stages and

reached the practice of the higher mantra where alone such material are used.

Usage of these results in no sensual pleasure at all but is a mental and

physical excretion that stretches one's endurance to the limit. That is why such

practices are limited to the " Pancha Parvas " – " The ordained days " and to people

who have attained a certain level. They are serious and will not use mantras

frivolously. They almost NEVER use mantra for any personal purpose.

> These days some people get all mantras as a package deal. They will take a

long time to reach the stage where the authority to use these - mantras and 5Ms

- is attained. That is why it is said " eka, dwi, tri panchavarshaanyaalocya " -