[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: animal slaughter in the Vedas
On 2 Mar 1996 02:56:35 GMT, "Narahari Achar, B. N."
<acharb@msuvx2.memphis.edu> wrote:
>Dear friends: this is the second part of the conclusion(!!).
>
>Dhruba refers to buffalo meat eating :
>
>" tri yachChatA mahishshANAmagho mAstrI.." _RigVeda 5.29.8
>
>The "straight" meaning of this quote would be " hey, Indra, when you have
>eaten the meat of three hundred buffaloes..."
>
>This sukta 5.29, has Indra as devata, and gaurIvItishAktya as the rishi.
>This is in praise of Indra in the context of vr^travadha, i.e., killing
>of vr^trAsura.
>The real meaning is "oh Indra, when you have received three hundred
>offerings of soma, you will be powerful to kill vr^tra".
>
>Just as "ukshshNa" means bull as well as soma, "mahishsha" means buffalo
>as well as another variety of soma plant. There are some twenty varieties
>of soma plant.
>
>As for eating goat meat Dhruba gives 1.162.3.
>
>"eshshachChAgaH puro ashvena vAjinA...."
>
>The "straight" meaning here is "the hornless goat has been brought in
>front of the horse.."
>
>The sukta 1.162 is known as the ashva sukta and is a praise of "ashva",
>the sun. The rishi is the same as that of sukta 1.164, mentioned
>earlier.The word"ChAga" should not be interpreted as "shr^ngarahita ajA",
>"hornless goat", but it means the morning or the dawn fire that is lit
>before the sun rises. The real meaning of the rik is "the morning fire is
>lit before the sun, the giver of food rises.."
>
>So, my friends, these verses donot refer to any commonly accepted
>practices of meat eating. It is the misinterpretation of the "scholars"
>that has caused the confusion among our people. I have given the
>originals and the context in which they have to be understood, even at
>the cost of being overly scholarly. I felt that it was necessary to do so
>, when people quote from the vedas and proclaim that cow slaughter is
>part of madhuparka, beef is offered at weddings, and that it was a common
>practice to eat meat of bull, buffalo, and goat. As you can see these are
>erroneous statements and do not represent the true spirit of the vedas. I
>plead once again, please do not propagate erroneous information. Thanks
>for your patience. With best regards,-Narahari Achar
>--
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Subm.: srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu Admin: srh-request@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu
>Archives/Home Page: http://rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu:8080/soc_hindu_home.html
I wholeheartedly agree. The Vedas are divine scripture and inspired
scripture. To equate words with everyday, literal parlance is to
ignore the context with which it was divined and therfore, meaningful
intrepretation is not possible. The Vedas must be intrepreted in the
heart and not translated with a dictionary.
Anand Sethuraman
asethura@westworld.com
(or Anand_Sethuraman@bstz.com if urgent)
