From: sp2@cec1.wustl.edu (Sundara Pandian)
Subject: Re: Animal Sacrifice in Temples
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis Mo.
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 22:03:04 GMT

In article <92246.095106IO92395@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> T.C.A.Venkatesan <IO92395@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:
>In article <Btx9sy.6J8@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca>, mvishnu@morse.uwaterloo.ca (m
>vishnu) says:
>>>
>>Killing of innocent animals for spiritual upliftment only reflects the
>>stupidity of the people who are perforoming/sponsoring them.  It also
>>reflects, in my opinion, the primitive (ie backward) nature of the Vedas.
>>
>>Meenan Vishnu
>
>   As long as the meat is being used for feeding people, it is difficult
>to condemn these acts.
      As I pointed out in one of my earlier articles, aswamedha yaga
 ( horse sacrifice ) is reported twice in Valmiki Ramayana, one by
 Dasaradha and the other by Rama. Graphic details are given in the
 same epic. Bhagavatham reports Prthu magaraja performing an aswamedha
 yaga ( see the sixth canto ) and Indra is reported to have stolen one
 of the hundred horses sacrificed in the Prthu's yajna. Vishnu appears
 after the sacrifices of the ninety-nine horses in the sacrificial arena
 pleased by the horse-sacrifice. He also brings Indra who apologises
 in person to the King for stealing a horse from the arena. Do you think
 that horses were sacrificed for feeding people ? Yajur veda describes 
 in detail how the sacrifices were performed, how the victims were slain
 etc. Rig veda also talks a lot about horse sacrifices, special sacrifices
 etc. Horses were sacrificed in those days seeking favours from god.
 Vedas say that animals sacrificed in the yajnas go to heaven. Buddha  
 cornered a Brahmin priest in Bimbisara's court using a clever argument
 exploiting the above superstition.
        
> All the meat in this world comes from killing
>'innocent' animals. One either condemns meat-eating or forget the
>whole thing.

        It is not as simple as that.
        Meat-eating is not irrational. Not all are vegetarians.
  But, it is irrational to seek favours from `god' [ if there is one ]
 by killing animals in a yajna. It is irrational to say that animals
 killed in a yajna go to heaven directly. 
        The meat sellers don't proclaim that
  * They are chosen people by god
  * They enjoy special priveleges for the same
  * They should be held in respect by all
  * Those who dishonour them will be punished by god
  * Others are prohibited from selling meat
  * If low-caste people hear the sound they make while they prepare
    meat for eating, molten lead will be poured into their ears, etc.
  If they proclaim so and if one criticizes them, would you say that
 he is criticizing them just because he is a vegetarian ? 

> If the animals are just sacrificed and thrown away, or if
>killing itself is not done properly, then it is barbaric and needs to
>be stopped.
     See the above reply.
>
>   The spiritual upliftment argument may be just a ploy to satisfy
>witnesses (after all, most people that eat meat do not see the
>butchering process whereas a ritual is a public act) - like kosher
>meat perhaps, or like some muslims do.
     See the above reply.
>
>   Condemnation of the entire vedas based on this is not right.

     I agree with you. Vedas should not be condemned totally, just
 because of the animal sacrifices in the yajnas. One should consider
 other aspects in them as well.
     Though vedas carry mostly material on animal sacrifices, they
 also carry some other material like `purusha suktham' [ dividing 
 people into four castes, brahmana, kshatriya, vaisya and sudra ]
 and some `vedantic' material. They are also non-sense. I will post
 Buddha's criticism on the vedantic material in the three principal
 vedas ( Rig, Yajur and Sama ).

> From what
>I have seen, the vedas and in fact hinduism, have lot of contradictory
>messages.

    What contradictions you found ? Like to share them with us ?
     
> The right approach is to teach the common man how to pick
>up the right stuff.
  
     What is the `right stuff' that you would suggest a common
 man ? Any pointers ? 
      
> Saying that everything about either is wrong is
>a faulty approach!
   
     I did not say that everything about Hinduism was wrong. Meenan
 Vishnu did not say it either in his reply to my article.
>
>Cheers,
>Venky.
                                                       S.Pandian
                                                 sp2@cec1.WUSTL.edu
*************************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil