Vegetarianism and the Garden of Eden

[Gauracandra]

It is interesting to note that a number of Judeo-Christian faiths accept that God’s original plan of peace on earth included vegetarianism. I have spoken with an orthodox Jew at work about this (he wears the yarmulka, wears the Jewish tassles, doesn’t cut his beard, follows all kosher laws etc…). He accepts that in the Garden of Eden all were vegetarian, but that after the flood God gave Noah permission to eat meat as a way of sustenance. Other groups accept this as well. The Seventh Day Adventists, one of the fastest growing Christian churches today, accepts that a vegetarian diet is the way to go. One of their founders was a woman named Ellen G. White who had a vision from God saying that His original plan was for all to live off of fruits and grains. Once I had a conversation with some Jehova Witnesses about this. They showed me a picture of God’s restored heaven on earth. In it there was a picture of a lion sitting next to a lamb. I asked them about the lion eating the lamb and they said that in God’s restored heaven on earth all creatures would live peaceably with one another. I then asked is that how it was in the Garden of Eden and they said yes. I followed up with, so all creatures in the Garden were vegetarian then. And they said that was true but they added that after the flood God gave permission to eat meat. So I asked wouldn’t it be appropriate that if we knew God’s original plan was vegetarian, shouldn’t we try to follow this? They said it all depended on the individual’s decision but since God gave permission to Noah, then it was all right. I would also point out that the Cathars, a medieval mystical form of Christianity, were strict vegetarians. These are just some points to consider on this topic.

 

For your pleasure I have put together a quick listing of quotes from the Bible regarding abstaining from the eating of flesh. The quotes all come from the King James version of the Bible.

 

Gauracandra

 

 

“Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in that which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherever there is life, I have given every green herb for meat; and it was so.” – The Bible, Genesis 1:29-30

 

“But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. And surely YOUR blood of YOUR lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it” – The Bible, Genesis 9:4

 

“Saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he-goats. When ye spread forth your hands, I will hide Mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear, for your hands are full of blood.” – The Bible, Isaiah 1:5

 

“He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man” – The Bible, Isaiah 66:3

 

“For that which befalleth the sons of men, befalleth beasts, even one thing befalleth them: As the one dieth, so dieth the other. Yes, they have all ONE breath. So that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast – for all is vanity” The Bible, Ecclesiastes 3:19

 

“Take care not to destroy God’s work for the sake of something to eat” – The Bible, Romans 14:20

 

“Moreover, ye shall eat no manner of blood, whether it be of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings” – The Bible, Leviticus 7:26

 

“We the Christian leaders, practice abstinence from the flesh of animals to subdue our bodies … the unnatural eating of flesh-meat is polluting” – Saint John Chrysostom A.D. 345-407

 

“And the flesh of slain beasts in his body will become his own tomb. For I tell you truly, he who kills, kills himself, and whoso eats the flesh of slain beasts, eats the body of death” – The Essene Gospel of Peace

 

[Maitreya]

Gaurachandra,

 

Nice quotes.I like to ask them why God gave permission to Noah.Always they give the same answer that after the flood there was a lack of vegetation.That obviously does not apply here and now.So it comes down to they like it.Afterall, nowhere in the Bible does it say they MUST eat meat.

 

Anyway thanks for the quotes, I few I knew and a few I hadn't seen so I printed them out.

 

YS MC

[shvu]

 

Afterall, nowhere in the Bible does it say they MUST eat meat.

Neither does it say that one must refrain from eating meat. The key point is that Jesus himself doesn't seem to have made such a comment although there was enough vegetation 2000 years back.

 

Unless he did say so and the people who wrote the bible left that out.

 

Cheers

 

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Originally posted by shvu:

Unless he did say so and the people who wrote the bible left that out.

 

Well the fact is those who compiled "the bible" did leave many Christian books out. Why only those 66 books were accepted as the bible? Thats another interesting topic. Anyone want to bring it up?

 

 

[amanpeter]

Originally posted by jndas:

Well the fact is those who compiled "the bible" did leave many Christian books out. Why only those 66 books were accepted as the bible? Thats another interesting topic. Anyone want to bring it up?

 

Y'all might want to check out: http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

 

------------------

Radhe Radhe ALWAYS Radhe!

[Maitreya]

Originally posted by shvu:

Neither does it say that one must refrain from eating meat. The key point is that Jesus himself doesn't seem to have made such a comment although there was enough vegetation 2000 years back.

 

Unless he did say so and the people who wrote the bible left that out.

 

Cheers

 

 

Well it is forbidden and can be seen by negation."Here is what you shall eat, the fruits of the trees and the green herbs". Meat is excluded.Like in the Gita, Krishna gives a list of what He is willing to accept.Meat is not on it.Some may say neither is milk, so that can get carried to extremes. But we can see the general plan was obviously to live in a way that is as non-violent as possible.

 

I'm not sure what that region had for vegetation 2000 years ago, it is in the dessert, a barren type land.What Israel has done in the last 50 years may make it a far cry from what it was then.

 

But even eatting the meat was restricted to types of animals and you had to remove all the blood to make it kosher.Good luck on that one.

 

From what ever point religion starts it must move towards the sattva-guna in it's practices.

 

YS MC

 

 

[shvu]

 

From what ever point religion starts it must move towards the sattva-guna in it's practices.

Which seems to have reversed in the case of the Jews. All the above quotes taken from the OT are against meat-eating, implying that there was a time when they were vegetarian.

 

I know from reliable sources that there is mention of meat-eating in the Vedas. According to the original Ramayana, Rama eats deer meat in the forest. Not surprising because Rama, Krishna, etc were Kshatriyas. But interestingly Agastya a sage, also eats meat. There are also references of cows being sacrificed in place of other animals, if the cow was barren or frail. The manu-smriti allows meat-eating, although not recommended.

 

Historically, Ahimsa was introduced by the Buddhists and the Jains [600 BC onwards]. They put an end to Vedic style animal sacrifice.

 

Cheers

 

[amanpeter]

jndas prabhu, Might it not be appropriate to create a separate forum category for vegetarianism discussions since many consider it such an important aspect of the spritual path?

 

------------------

Radhe Radhe ALWAYS Radhe!

[Gauracandra]

Neither does it say that one must refrain from eating meat. The key point is that Jesus himself doesn't seem to have made such a comment although there was enough vegetation 2000 years back.

I understand this point, but I also think we can only take this so far. I'll give an example. A few months ago I was watching a program in which a professor was saying that Christians should not be against abortion. He basically used the same line of reasoning "Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus say one should not have an abortion. In fact Jesus who was a social reformer probably would be pro-choice" or something like that. The moderator sort of sat there with his jaw on the ground (as was mine).

 

There are a number of Christians these days who are saying that Jesus was vegetarian. I don't know all the particulars but I do remember one interesting point that I was told. Apparently there is a tribe called the Nazarenes which if you believe what these Christians say were vegetarian. As I understand it (and I could be wrong) this is not considered controversial, but rather established fact. There is also a place called Nazareth. So these Christians say that there is a mistranslation of Biblical wording. Its not Jesus of Nazareth (Jesus from a place called Nazareth) but rather Jesus the Nazarene (Jesus belonging to the Nazarene tribe). Again, I don't know if this is true or not, but a vegetarian Christian explained this to me once.

 

As for other Christian books being left out, this has always been very interesting to me. Apparently there was a Gospel of Mary Magdalene that was left out. It is believed by some to have been done because it would have placed women at the forefront of the Christian movement. After all Mary Magdalene (a woman) was the only person who did not abandon Christ.

 

I have always thought it would be fascinating to wander through the Vatican. They've gotta have so much accumulated world treasures it would be incredible. I wouldn't be surprised if they had every one of these other Gospels, as well as treasures from around the world. I don't remember the details, but there was a very sophisticated Indian tribe in Mexico or Brazil (somewhere in South America) which had libraries with thousands of books explaining their culture, medicine, history etc.... When the Spanish Conquistadors came they burned and looted the library. But, interestingly enough, several years ago the Vatican returned one of these books (called the Codex I believe) to its country of origin. So if they have one, who says they don't have them all, plus so many other treasures of the world. Something to think about.

 

Gauracandra

 

[shvu]

 

Jesus never wrote anything. He preached and his teachings were remembered by his fishermen disciples who mostly were also not strong on writing skills. Thus the gospel was viva voce for until some years after Jesus's death. Then different groups of people mixed the gospel with their own image of the world savior and the tradition continued for a while in different languages in varied forms.

 

In 185 AD, some sources were marked as authentic, probably because they were found to be common among all the variants. Then began the evolution of the New testament and it reached a concrete shape only in 400 AD. Bible history is a whole subject by itself.

 

Some interesting points,

 

1. There was a book of enoch that was popular among the Jews and Christians for about 500 years from 200 BC. Then the church banned it because it had some conflicting material on angels.

 

2. I have heard say that there were portions on reincarnation in the early NT. But it was removed later.

 

Cheers

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Originally posted by shvu:

I know from reliable sources that there is mention of meat-eating in the Vedas.

There are mention of various sacrifices that involve the consumption of animal flesh by the brahmana priests and the king. The aswa-medha yajna is one example, but the same scriptures which describe this yajna also say it is forbidden to be performed in Kali yuga.

 

In Vedic yajnas the animal was not 'killed', but was elevated to a higher body. This was done to prove the efficacy of the brahmanas and the mantras they were chanting. The king was sacrificing huge quantities of gold and other valuables into the fire, and he needed some guarantee that it was actually being delivered to the gods, and not just being burnt up. For this purpose, the brahmana priests would physically demonstrate the efficacy of their mantras by transforming the animal into a gandharva. A horse would enter the fire, and a Gandharva (a heavenly human species) would emerge form the fire. The soul of the horse would be given a higher birth, and it was seen directly by the king. There still remained the karma of the horse to be accounted for. That horse was destined to traverse through many lives before he attained the body of the andharva, so that karma needed to be ballanced. All of those karmic reactions, existing between the horse body and the gandharva body, would remain in the flesh of the horses dead body. It was the duty of the king and the brahmanas to eat that flesh, and there by accept all of the karmic reactions within it. It is described that after eating this flesh, the brahmanas would lose their tejas and no longer be able to perform sacrifice. They would have to perform severe tapasya (austerities) in order to regain their tejas and shakti. The king would likewise have to give his entire wealth away in charity as a means to regain his tejas. Thus the king and brahmanas eating of flesh in the sacrifice was not an enjoyment, but a sacrifice they had to accept.

 

 

According to the original Ramayana, Rama eats deer meat in the forest.

I have heard such statements hundreds of times, but I have yet to locate the verses being referred to. I never came across them while reading it myself. I even have done searches on the internet to gather the various 'references' to these verses. But the funny thing is, when I look in the manuscript, they don't match. What they claim these verses say, and what is written has no connection at all, not even a bit.

 

Perhaps you can locate some valid references, and I will check the verses to verify them. My understanding is that the Valmiki Ramayana does not say Rama ate meat, but another later Ramayana does. I know the Indonesian version of Ramayana says this, but that isn't surprising since they are not vegetarians.

 

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-26-2001).]

[Guest guest]

It is interesting to follow how the sadhus who had compilated the Bible had opted to a specifically version on jiva tattva. According their doctrine on jiva-tattva, jivas had felt from a Vaikuntha, where they were having God's personal association.

 

It seems that they were somewhat unhappy there, and so, avidya could enter Vaikuntha and make them to do another option, that was to turn their face to God and thereafter to come to this material world to face dualities.

 

This version is not different than Sankaracarya's version on jiva-tattva, where he states that jivas are nothing than Brahman covered by maya; i.e., originally they were pure Brahman and suddenly ignorance had cover them.

 

In our line, however, jiva-tattva have another siddhanta. We consider that jivas were originally in the Causal Ocean. Not in Vaikuntha exactly, but in a tathasta position (marginal) between material universe and spiritual universe. In that position they had never met God face to face. They where in a dream-like state and in this condition they were transferred by the glances of Maha Visnu to this material world.

 

Only immature and somewhat deficient jivas would come to this material world to make a intensive gradation curse on how to become more tasteful to God's appetite of prema (pure love).

 

Both jiva-tattva, however are non-conflicting, as the real jiva-tattva out of the scope of any reasoning, and these metaphors only may give one a glimpse of it.

 

Anyway one should never imagine that a jiva in his spiritual and pure condition may eat or kill another jive who is an eternal entity and cannot be killed. There is no question of a pure jiva in cit-jagad (heaven) be veg or non-veg. This is non sense.

 

Some transcendentalists may prescribe a vegetarian diet due several reasons, and one should follow the discipline instructed by his own acarya according his own adhikara.

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Originally posted by shvu:

I am very dubious that Vedic scriptures talk about Kali-yuga.

You know that my usage of "Vedic scriptures" includes shruti, smriti and nyaya texts. The above text being referenced is a puranic text. I hope we don't have to go back to this topic again.

[shvu]

 

Yeah, we certainly don't have to go into that topic once again.

 

The Ashwamedha yaga is described in the Yajur veda and it is highly unlikely that the Yajur veda talks about yugas, especially about the bad, bad Kali-yuga.

 

I raised this question, to clarify this doubt.

 

Cheers

 

[shvu]

But the funny thing is, when I look in the manuscript, they don't match. What they claim these verses say, and what is written has no connection at all, not even a bit.

In the Sundara Kanda, the 36th sarga, the 41st sloka describes how Hanuman tells Sita, " When you were away, Sri Rama refrained from eating deer meat."

 

This is the reference that I have, albeit not verified by me. Perhaps someone who has access to the Valmiki Ramayana can verify this.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by shvu (edited 05-29-2001).]

[shvu]

 

The aswa-medha yajna is one example, but the same scriptures which describe this yajna also say it is forbidden to be performed in Kali yuga.

I would like a reference to this. I am very dubious that Vedic scriptures talk about Kali-yuga.

 

Cheers

 

 

[ethos]

This is a great thread. And it stayed on track. Well almost.

 

I'm gonna stick my neck out here and say I was sure the ksytrias had some kind of license to eat meat much as they did to gamble.

 

Let's play this again. I'll do a Vedabase search and see what I can find. Not much hope of finding it manually.