I_love_krishna_ Posted July 27, 2003 Report Share Posted July 27, 2003 Isn't Narasimha a lion.. so do they offer him meat in the temples? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted July 27, 2003 Report Share Posted July 27, 2003 Hare Krishna Lord Narasimha is Lord Vishnu, Half-man, Half-lion, he descended to save His devotee Prahalada Maharaja, Lord Vishnu is NEVER offered meat, maybe demigoddess like Kali. haribol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted July 27, 2003 Report Share Posted July 27, 2003 Govindaram, I came in to post a response to this and find that you have pretty much echoed what I was going to write!! Hare Krsna!! I do have some questions for I_L_K: Your recent question about Lord Narasimha and meat eating reminded me of a post you made a while back under your other name of Enlightened. I paste it here: Enlightened posted on 4/22/03 in the "Krsna and Silk Dress"thread: The whole world seems to be an abode of ignorance on the wide range. Some say don't eat meat and then some give meat as an offering to Vishnu in the form of Narasimha... Do you know someone who does this or did you read it somewhere that this happens? Can you post the reference to this if so? I have been researching this and do not find any references on it. I truly hope that your question is not an effort to justify meat-eating by saying that if it is ok to offer meat then it must be ok to eat it. The only reference I have ever seen to offering meat is to Goddess Kali - To which I can only respond that we are not to immitate!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_love_krishna_ Posted July 27, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2003 I heard it from my father's family when I visited India... and also found the references... that condemn meat eating ... never mind... but this post was to see if they do the same thing some where else... Thanks!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted July 27, 2003 Report Share Posted July 27, 2003 I will contact some friends in South India and see if what you heard is valid or not. It might take them a couple of days to get back to me but they will asap. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The post of yours that I just responded to was much longer (before you edited it down) and you mentioned that they do this in South India and that is why I responded that I would contact friends there to find out if this happens in some temples (which I just did). I should have cut and pasted your post so others would understand my response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 there are two three answers. - yes, you can offer him meat, but only of asuras. terrorist are asuras. so do please narasimha. - narashima avatara, like varaha was temporary. i have not heard that after killing the demon narashimha lived for so many years. He just disappeared from view after the task was done, i believe. so, knowing that he was vishnu, we serve him as if he is vishn. so, no meat. - in vaishnav panth, no meat to none. jai sri krishna! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_love_krishna_ Posted July 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 I found the answer my self... Krishna says it himself, all we need to do is a quick search in bhagavath gita... thats why I edited my post. In bhagavath gita, krishna himself says, you offer me anything, I will accept it. krishna is like the fire, we get close to him, but for him every one is equal. You can stay in cold and still offer to krishna the tamasic things, like meat and flesh . Or please him and offer him pure things... the choice is I guess , up to us. I heard that they do that in South India... please confirm it, but it doesn't bother me anymore, because no matter what it is, if it is spiritualized it is pure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 I recolored him - as per Shrimad Bhagavatam description - took many hours - but well worth it... http://i.keen.com/listingphotos/8455381-65660.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhakta Don Muntean Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raguraman Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 Hare Krishna, No Vaishnava temples allow any kind of flesh to enter the premises of the temple. Bhagavad Gita: Whosoever offers Me a leaf, a flower, a fruit, or water with devotion; I accept and eat the offering of devotion by the pure-hearted. (9.26) No meat here. Manu Smrithi on meat eating. Please read fully ans try to understand it. Chapter 5: Verse 26 through Verse 56: * Thus has the food, allowed and forbidden to twice-born men, been fully described; I will now propound the rules for eating and avoiding meat. * One may eat meat when it has been sprinkled with water, while Mantras were recited, when Brahmanas desire (one's doing it), when one is engaged (in the performance of a rite) according to the law, and when one's life is in danger. * The Lord of creatures (Pragapati) created this whole (world to be) the sustenance of the vital spirit; both the immovable and the movable (creation is) the food of the vital spirit. * What is destitute of motion is the food of those endowed with locomotion; (animals) without fangs (are the food) of those with fangs, those without hands of those who possess hands, and the timid of the bold. * The eater who daily even devours those destined to be his food, commits no sin; for the creator himself created both the eaters and those who are to be eaten (for those special purposes). * 'The consumption of meat (is befitting) for sacrifices,' that is declared to be a rule made by the gods; but to persist (in using it) on other (occasions) is said to be a proceeding worthy of Rakshasas. * He who eats meat, when he honours the gods and manes, commits no sin, whether he has bought it, or himself has killed (the animal), or has received it as a present from others. * A twice-born man who knows the law, must not eat meat except in conformity with the law; for if he has eaten it unlawfully, he will, unable to save himself, be eaten after death by his (victims). * After death the guilt of one who slays deer for gain is not as (great) as that of him who eats meat for no (sacred) purpose. * But a man who, being duly engaged (to officiate or to dine at a sacred rite), refuses to eat meat, becomes after death an animal during twenty-one existences. * A Brahmana must never eat (the flesh of animals unhallowed by Mantras; but, obedient to the primeval law, he may eat it, consecrated with Vedic texts. * If he has a strong desire (for meat) he may make an animal of clarified butter or one of flour, (and eat that); but let him never seek to destroy an animal without a (lawful) reason. * As many hairs as the slain beast has, so often indeed will he who killed it without a (lawful) reason suffer a violent death in future births. * Svayambhu (the Self-existent) himself created animals for the sake of sacrifices; sacrifices (have been instituted) for the good of this whole (world); hence the slaughtering (of beasts) for sacrifices is not slaughtering (in the ordinary sense of the word). * Herbs, trees, cattle, birds, and (other) animals that have been destroyed for sacrifices, receive (being reborn) higher existences. * On offering the honey-mixture (to a guest), at a sacrifice and at the rites in honour of the manes, but on these occasions only, may an animal be slain; that (rule) Manu proclaimed. * A twice-born man who, knowing the true meaning of the Veda, slays an animal for these purposes, causes both himself and the animal to enter a most blessed state. * A twice-born man of virtuous disposition, whether he dwells in (his own) house, with a teacher, or in the forest, must never, even in times of distress, cause an injury (to any creature) which is not sanctioned by the Veda. * Know that the injury to moving creatures and to those destitute of motion, which the Veda has prescribed for certain occasions, is no injury at all; for the sacred law shone forth from the Veda. * He who injures innoxious beings from a wish to (give) himself pleasure, never finds happiness, neither living nor dead. * He who does not seek to cause the sufferings of bonds and death to living creatures, (but) desires the good of all (beings), obtains endless bliss. * He who does not injure any (creature), attains without an effort what he thinks of, what he undertakes, and what he fixes his mind on. * Meat can never be obtained without injury to living creatures, and injury to sentient beings is detrimental to (the attainment of) heavenly bliss; let him therefore shun (the use of) meat. * Having well considered the (disgusting) origin of flesh and the (cruelty of) fettering and slaying corporeal beings, let him entirely abstain from eating flesh. * He who, disregarding the rule (given above), does not eat meat like a Pisaka, becomes dear to men, and will not be tormented by diseases. * He who permits (the slaughter of an animal), he who cuts it up, he who kills it, he who buys or sells (meat), he who cooks it, he who serves it up, and he who eats it, (must all be considered as) the slayers (of the animal). * There is no greater sinner than that (man) who, though not worshipping the gods or the manes, seeks to increase (the bulk of) his own flesh by the flesh of other (beings). * He who during a hundred years annually offers a horse-sacrifice, and he who entirely abstains from meat, obtain the same reward for their meritorious (conduct). * By subsisting on pure fruit and roots, and by eating food fit for ascetics (in the forest), one does not gain (so great) a reward as by entirely avoiding (the use of) flesh. * 'Me he (mam sah)' will devour in the next (world), whose flesh I eat in this (life); the wise declare this (to be) the real meaning of the word 'flesh' (mamsah). * There is no sin in eating meat, in (drinking) spirituous liquor, and in carnal intercourse, for that is the natural way of created beings, but abstention brings great rewards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 so far the answers I am receiving are... No way! and I have been asked.. Where in the world did you hear that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_love_krishna_ Posted July 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 * There is no sin in eating meat, in (drinking) spirituous liquor, and in carnal intercourse, for that is the natural way of created beings, but abstention brings great rewards. --------------------------- Yes this is true, if you eat meat, then you follow the same karmic slavery like every other being. And not eating meat is declaring that you do not wish to be in this material world and you wish to rise above to reach the supreme. It does have great benefits. I did hear that this is true, because I went to India, and there we went to a really old temple of Lord Narasimha that was located on a mountain. I saw live chickens being carried to the temple by my extended family. Then after the trip I asked, they said that it was for Narasimha because he is a lion. He is given chickens as offering and it is then given to the population near by which was poor people living in shacks. Anyway, I guess they are wrong and may be it is a way for them to give into temptation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 Hare Krishna I thought meat eating is banned in this age as there are no qualified brahmana's to perform the necessary rituals, the only exception is offering ONLY a goat to Goddess Kali, also Lord Buddha came down specifically for this reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_love_krishna_ Posted July 28, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 Taught non violence, why would he try to kill a goat in front of Kali? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 Hare Krishna Lord Buddha is a an incarnation of Krishna, who came down to stop the slaughter of innocent animals, on the face of people using the Vedas as an excuse to kill these poor creatures, but because some persons are inclined to eat meat, they can sacrifice a goat in front of Goddess Kali, and then gradually give up eating flesh. Haribol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2003 Report Share Posted July 28, 2003 no exception... who kills a goat has to be killed by the same goat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted July 29, 2003 Report Share Posted July 29, 2003 I heard that they do that in South India... please confirm it, but it doesn't bother me anymore, because no matter what it is, if it is spiritualized it is pure. No Narasimha temple in India offers meat to the diety. Krishna is present in the hearts of all living entities as Paramatma. When we kill other living entities we are torturing the supersoul who is the witness of their pain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raguraman Posted July 29, 2003 Report Share Posted July 29, 2003 * There is no sin in eating meat, in (drinking) spirituous liquor, and in carnal intercourse, for that is the natural way of created beings, but abstention brings great rewards. --------------------------- Yes this is true, if you eat meat, then you follow the same karmic slavery like every other being. What about the verse give below. * There is no greater sinner than that (man) who, though not worshipping the gods or the manes, seeks to increase (the bulk of) his own flesh by the flesh of other (beings). The verse you gave assumes that the flesh eaten is hallowed by Vedic mantras(Sacrifices mentioned in Vedas). If anybody eats flesh without doing sacrifice prescribed by Vedas then the above verse applies. Please read the verses given below again. * Herbs, trees, cattle, birds, and (other) animals that have been destroyed for sacrifices, receive (being reborn) higher existences. * On offering the honey-mixture (to a guest), at a sacrifice and at the rites in honour of the manes, but on these occasions only, may an animal be slain; that (rule) Manu proclaimed. * A twice-born man who, knowing the true meaning of the Veda, slays an animal for these purposes, causes both himself and the animal to enter a most blessed state. * A twice-born man of virtuous disposition, whether he dwells in (his own) house, with a teacher, or in the forest, must never, even in times of distress, cause an injury (to any creature) which is not sanctioned by the Veda. * Know that the injury to moving creatures and to those destitute of motion, which the Veda has prescribed for certain occasions, is no injury at all; for the sacred law shone forth from the Veda. * He who injures innoxious beings from a wish to (give) himself pleasure, never finds happiness, neither living nor dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_love_krishna_ Posted July 29, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2003 And it still remains the same. * There is no sin in eating meat, in (drinking) spirituous liquor, and in carnal intercourse, for that is the natural way of created beings, but abstention brings great rewards. This verse does not support meat eating. The first verse you have provided in your previous post (post called wrong)... Is not really contradictory to the verses you have provided in the post above /images/graemlins/smile.gif Even though they appear to be contradictory, they are really not contradicting each other at all but helping each other to prove a point. It is no suprise that vedas are here to free us. Thats their true intention. We have free will to stay in the mire of material existence, or we have the option of getting out of it and try to be free . The vedic verses here just show choice- you can still stay in the material existence and eat meat and be a slave to this world. Or - get the best reward ever by giving up all these things- krishna. then, the other verses you have provided, discourage one from eating the meat . It is a very clever trick to play on the reader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raguraman Posted July 29, 2003 Report Share Posted July 29, 2003 Hare Krishna, I understood what you wrote. My intention was to prove that meat eating is sinful(when eaten without being hallowed by mantras). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 Hare Krishna I got the above wrong, why> <font color="green"> SB 4.19.36</font color> They do not know that goddess Kali never accepts nonvegetarian food because she is the chaste wife of Lord Siva. Lord Siva is also a great Vaisnava and never eats nonvegetarian food, and the goddess Kali accepts the remnants of food left by Lord Siva. Therefore there is no possibility of her eating flesh or fish. Such offerings are accepted by the associates of goddess Kali known as bhutas, pisacas and Raksasas, and those who take the prasada of goddess Kali in the shape of flesh or fish are <font color="blue"> not actually taking the prasada left by goddess Kali </font color> , <font color="red"> but the food left by the bhutas and pisacas. </font color> <font color="blue">O </font color> <font color="green"> Mind </font color> <font color="red"> Just </font color> <font color="orange">Worship </font color> <font color="black"> Krsna </font color> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 Hare Krishna, I understood what you wrote. My intention was to prove that meat eating is sinful(when eaten without being hallowed by mantras). Mantra, no mantra, meat eating is never sanctified, never hallowed, and always sinful. Otherwise all sorts of folks will justify their mlecca attachments, thinking "Oh, I just need to chant this mantra, and then it is ok to eat meat, as it becomes spiritualized." No. There are no shastric references in Prabhuapda's books to this either. Good luck. YS, Prtha dd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raguraman Posted August 1, 2003 Report Share Posted August 1, 2003 Hare Krishna, Manu Smrithi and Vedas clearly mention Vedic sacrifices where animals were offered. It is not sin to kill animals in Vedic sacrifices as the animal assumes a higher life form and is born again in higher planets(Svarga loka). This way both the performer of sacrifice and the animal get bliss. In those days such sacrifices were performed for a higher good by qualified Brahmanas and not for eating meat. In kali-yuga such sacrifices are completely forbidden(no qualified Brahmanas are found). Finally Manu Smrithi tells that by abstaining from eating meat, one obtains higher bliss than that obtained by doing several Vedic sacrifices. I think you get the import of what I was trying to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted August 2, 2003 Report Share Posted August 2, 2003 They do not know that goddess Kali never accepts nonvegetarian food because she is the chaste wife of Lord Siva. Lord Siva is also a great Vaisnava and never eats nonvegetarian food... Interestingly enough, in Tamil vegetarian is called Saivam, i.e. in relation to Siva. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priitaa Posted August 2, 2003 Report Share Posted August 2, 2003 Hare Krishna, Manu Smrithi and Vedas clearly mention Vedic sacrifices where animals were offered. It is not sin to kill animals in Vedic sacrifices as the animal assumes a higher life form and is born again in higher planets(Svarga loka). This way both the performer of sacrifice and the animal get bliss. In those days such sacrifices were performed for a higher good by qualified Brahmanas and not for eating meat. In kali-yuga such sacrifices are completely forbidden(no qualified Brahmanas are found). Finally Manu Smrithi tells that by abstaining from eating meat, one obtains higher bliss than that obtained by doing several Vedic sacrifices. I think you get the import of what I was trying to say. ManuSamhita is not for this age. I know personally one devotee who got into ManuSamhita and Prabhupada wrote him in a letter that if he did not give this up, he would fall down. That in this age it is impossible to practice correclty all the things in ManuSamhita. Therefore certainly the killing of an animal for our tongue would no longer be done correctly these days. Though it is true that in former ages the sacrifice of an animal was for the good of the animal, and not for the purpose of eating meat. However, these were potent priests who could put the body of an old cow into the sacrificial fire and bring it out with a new body. First someone should show they can do that before they think its ok to eat meat. :-) In the age of kali it is the chanting of Hare Krishna that is our saving grace - kalau nasty eva nasty eva nasty eva, gatir anyatha: "In this age of quarrel and hypocrisy the only means of deliverance is the chanting of the holy names of the Lord. There is no other way, there is no other way, there is no other way." ~ TLC 18 Of course, if you eat meat and are attached to it, this debate could go on forever, in which case I dont want to do that. Good luck! YS, Prtha dd 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.