Digest Number 1672

January 1, 2004

Dear Pradip,

As far as I read, Arjuna's leading the battle is regarded as his duty as a king (though I am not sure I understand the full meaning of this word and I also think the word "duty" has lost a great deal of his significance and meaning in our times). And that which makes a king different from another man, that which is the most inherent for a king is observing of his royal duties and taking his responsibilities. That is why I think Arjuna's killing of relatives is considered as "Dharma", because if he didn't do that he would have gone against his very nature of king which in other words means against the law of Lord. (I think the point here is not at all for the eventual material benefits and acquisitions.)

And is it some innate to nature of man duty or even need to kill and eat animals when he could live without doing that? Some people say man in his nature is animal of prey but I think this is not true. In relation to understanding that plants are also living beings I think - this is true but all the same may be they don't feel the same terrible fear and pain before death as animals do. And, yes, it is may be the law of God that all living beings die but who are we to decide who to live and who to die? (if our lives do not depend of that; and I think they do not depend of killing animals)

Happy New Year to all,Milena

On the battlefield of Mahabharata, Lord Krishna told Arjuna the following – (a) See the people across the enemy line as enemies and not as relatives, friends or Guru (b) Go ahead and kill them for they are not alive in the first place since I've already killed them and what's standing in front of you are mere bodies © Kill, for by killing bodies the soul cannot be killed and thus you will be actually killing no one.But, most people consider killing animals and eating meat as bad. Why does the teaching of Lord Krishna to Arjuna doesn't apply to non-vegetarian people?

Om PeacePradip

Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now