| Author |
Message |
    
Heteroclite
Junior Artist
Username: Heteroclite
Post Number: 213
Registered: 04-2009
Posted From: 219.64.145.83
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, June 29, 2009 - 02:00 am: | 
     |
poorvam amma leni vaallandariki aave amma. in olden days delivery deaths are quite common. and many woman cannot give milk to there kinds to various reasons. so chinna pillalaki cow milk patte vaallu. we also see krishna having milk directly from cow in some photos.
assalu manakem karma aavuni thinataaniki. edari lo brathike vallaki avasaram kaani. vallakante agriculture vundadhu, so thintaru .manaki laabham choosukunna cow ni champadam nastame. manam aavu palu thaagutham , perugu thintam, ghee usage akkuva. peda kallapi challukuntam . inka sampadam deeniki.
why we DONT eat beef is wrong question. Why others eat Beef is correct question. may be they know only to make meat of it. we know to use cow in a better way. |
Iamim
Side Hero
Username: Iamim
Post Number: 2059
Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 118.94.227.85
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 11:33 am: |
|
The book FOOD FOR THE SPIRIT, VEGETARIANISM AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS by Steven Rosen, observes, "Despite popular knowledge of meat eating's adverse effects, the nonvegetarian diet became increasingly widespread among the Hindus after the two major invasions by foreign powers, first the Muslims and later the British. With them came the desire to be'civilized,' to eat as did the Saheeb. Those atually trained in Vedic knowledge, however, never adopted a meat oriented diet, and the pious Hindu still observes vegetarian principles as a matter of religious duty.
"That vegetarianism has always been widespread in India is clear from the earliest Vedic texts. This was observed by the ancient traveler Megasthenes and also by Fa-Hsien, a Chinese Buddhist monk who, in the fifth century, traveled to India in order to obtain authentic copies of the scriptures.
"These scriptures unambiguously support the meatless way of life. In the Mahabharata, for instance, the great warrior Bheeshma explains to Yuddhishtira, eldest of the Pandava princes, that the meat of animals is like the flesh of one's own son.
Similarly, the MANUSMRITI declares that one should 'refrain from eating all kinds of meat,' for such eating involves killing and and leads to Karmic bondage.
Elsewhere in the Vedic literature, the last of the great Vedic kings, Maharaja
Parikshit, is quoted as saying that 'only the animal-killer cannot relish the message of the Absolute Truth [Srimad Bhagavatam 10.1.4].'"
SCRIPTURE
He who desires to augment his own flesh by eating the flesh of other creatures lives in misery in whatever species he may take his birth. MAHABHARATA 115.47
Those high-souled persons who desire beauty, faultlessness of limbs, long life, understanding, mental and physical strength and memory should abstain from acts of injury. MAHABHARATA 18.115.8
The very name of cow is Aghnya ["not to be killed"], indicating that they should never be slaughtered. Who, then could slay them? Surely, one who kills a cow or a bull commits a heinous crime. MAHABHARATA, SHANTIPARVA 262.47
The purchaser of flesh performs Himsa by his wealth; he who eats flesh does so by enjoying its taste; the killer does Himsa by actually tying and killing the animal. Thus, there are three forms of killing: he who brings flesh or sends for it, he who cuts off the limbs of an animal, and he who purchases, sells or cooks flesh and eats it -- all of these are to be considered meat-eaters. MAHABHARATA, ANU 115.40
He who sees that the Lord of all is ever the same in all that is -- immortal in the field of mortality -- he sees the truth. And when a man sees that the God in himself is the same God in all that is, he hurts not himself by hurting others. Then he goes, indeed, to the highest path. BHAGAVAD GEETA 13.27-28
Ahimsa is the highest Dharma. Ahimsa is the best Tapas. Ahinsa is the greatest gift. Ahimsa is the highest self-control. Ahimsa is the highest sacrifice. Ahimsa is the highest power. Ahimsa is the highest friend. Ahimsa is the highest truth. Ahimsa is the highest teaching. MAHABHARATA 18.116.37-41
What is the good way? It is the path that reflects on how it may avoid killing any creature. TIRUKURAL 324
All that lives will press palms together in prayerful adoration of those who refuse to slaughter and savor meat. TIRUKURAL 260
What is virtuous conduct? It is never destroying life, for killing leads to every other sin. TIRUKURAL 312, 321
Goodness is never one with the minds of these two: one who wields a weapon and one who feasts on a creature's flesh. TIRUKURAL 253 |
Ipc302
Side Hero
Username: Ipc302
Post Number: 2465
Registered: 02-2008
Posted From: 24.167.20.113
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 10:48 am: |
|
Vishvak:
question here is about prevelance of consumption of cow meat during or befor vedic times and not about horse meat.... |
Iamim
Side Hero
Username: Iamim
Post Number: 2057
Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 118.94.227.85
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 10:25 am: |
|
End 'cruel' religious slaughter, say scientists
Beasts should be stunned before their throats are slit, Jews and Muslims are told
By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent
Monday, 22 June 2009
Meat Hygiene Service suggested 114 million animals were killed under halal and 2.1 million under kosher methods each year in Britain.
Religious slaughter techniques practised by Jews and Muslims are cruel and should be ended, says a scientific assessment from the Government's animal welfare advisers.
The Farm Animal Welfare Council says that slitting the throats of the animals most commonly used for meat, chickens, without stunning, results in "significant pain and distress". The committee, which includes scientific, agricultural and veterinary experts, is calling for the Government to launch a debate with Muslim and Jewish communities to end the practice.
One Muslim organisation, the Halal Food Authority, already insists on the slaughterhouses it regulates stunning animals first on welfare grounds, as long as they are still alive when their throats are slit. But in other halal and almost all kosher slaughterhouses, animals have their throats slit without prior stunning which would render them insensible to the pain. Religious groups say that doing so would be against their interpretation of religious texts.
They are granted an exemption to the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995, which stipulates that creatures such as cows, goats and chickens be stunned first.
In a report into the slaughter of white meat, the Farm Animal Welfare Council (Fawc) said evidence suggested that chicken and turkeys were likely to be conscious for up to 20 seconds as blood seeped out of them. The animals are killed by a transverse incision across their neck, cutting skin, muscle, trachea, oesophagus, carotid arteries, jugular veins and major nerves.
"Such a large cut will inevitably trigger sensory input to pain centres in the brain," the council said. "Our conclusions ... are that such an injury would result in significant pain and distress ... before insensibility supervenes. Fawc is in agreement with the prevailing scientific consensus that slaughter without pre-stunning causes pain and distress. On the basis that this is avoidable and in the interests of welfare, Fawc concludes that all birds should be pre-stunned before slaughter."
While recognising the difficulties of reconciling scientific findings with matters of faith, it urged the Government to "continue to engage with religious communities" to make progress. In a 2003 report on red meat, Fawc called for ministers to repeal the religious groups' legal opt-out.
The Shechita Council, which oversees kosher meat, was contacted but did not supply a comment. Massood Khawaja, president of the Halal Food Authority, insisted that its animals were stunned, unlike those regulated by another group, the Halal Monitoring Committee. "The Koran says use your brain, ponder about things and that's what we are doing," he said. "It's a question of animal welfare."
The Government no longer keeps statistics on religious slaughter, but five years ago, the Meat Hygiene Service suggested 114 million animals were killed under halal and 2.1 million under kosher methods each year in Britain.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said it would not change its "long-standing policy of religious tolerance" by ending the opt-out. "And while the Government would prefer to see all animals stunned before slaughter, we will continue to ensure that required standards of animal welfare are effectively monitored and enforced in all slaughterhouses," it said in a statement.
Last year, Lord Rooker , a minister in the department, called for meat slaughtered without stunning to be labelled for the public's benefit, since some cuts were considered unacceptable to eat, and sold back into the food chain.
The Government no longer keeps statistics on religious slaughter, but five years ago the Meat Hygiene Service suggested 114 million were killed under halal and 2.1 million under kosher methods each year.
Last night, the vegetarian organisation Viva!, Tom Lane, said: âHow many times does the Government's own advisory committe on animal welfare have to ask for a ban on slaughter without pre-stunning before action is taken? Viva! embraces multiculturlism and all religious faiths, but the suffering of these animals is so extreme that a line has to be drawn somewhere.â |
Vishvak
Junior Artist
Username: Vishvak
Post Number: 235
Registered: 01-2007
Posted From: 218.248.69.30
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, June 28, 2009 - 12:58 am: |
|
Ipc302:there might have been consumption of beef by people living in pre-vedic periods
'Aswamedha Yagam' ante Horses ni bali icchi aa meat tinetollu anta...
Vi veri universum vivus vici
My Blog: The Power Of One |
Ipc302
Side Hero
Username: Ipc302
Post Number: 2460
Registered: 02-2008
Posted From: 24.167.20.113
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 04:10 pm: |
|
there might have been consumption of beef by people living in pre-vedic periods which was then changed to being unethical by later generations...who are we to draw a line and decide which customs are good...unfortunately anything which challenges the vedas is being considered a sacrilege and politically a sensitive point and labeled as anti-hindu or pseudo-secular....
i hope there is enough debate among scholars on this issue...if we start threatening the lifes of scholars then what is the difference between us and the monotheistic religions like islam and christianity which have rules written in stone...does it really matter to us if some of our ancestors ate beef? wuld we become less pious by eating beef but not by consumption of other forms of meat? |
Ishan
Junior Artist
Username: Ishan
Post Number: 57
Registered: 01-2009
Posted From: 68.94.96.241
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 03:15 pm: |
|
Beef eating: strangulating history
While one must respect the sentiments of those who worship cow and regard her as their mother, to take offence to the objective study of history just because the facts don't suit their political calculations is yet another sign of a society where liberal space is being strangulated by the practitioners of communal politics. [text Tag=blue-tint][/Text]PROF. D. N. JHA, a historian from Delhi University, had been experiencing the nightmares of `threats to life' from anonymous callers who were trying to prevail upon him not to go ahead with the publication of his well researched work, Holy Cow: Beef in Indian Dietary Traditions.
As per the reports it is a work of serious scholarship based on authentic sources in tune with methods of scientific research in history. The book demonstrates that contrary to the popular belief even today a large number of Indians, the indigenous people in particular and many other communities in general, consume beef unmindful of the dictates of the Hindutva forces.
It is too well known to recount that these Hindutva forces confer the status of mother to the cow. Currently 72 communities in Kerala - not all of them untouchables - prefer beef to the expensive mutton and the Hindutva forces are trying to prevail upon them to stop the same.
Not tenable
To begin with the historian breaks the myth that Muslim rulers introduced beef eating in India. Much before the advent of Islam in India beef had been associated with Indian dietary practices. Also it is not at all tenable to hold that dietary habits are a mark of community identity.
A survey of ancient Indian scriptures, especially the Vedas, shows that amongst the nomadic, pastoral Aryans who settled here, animal sacrifice was a dominant feature till the emergence of settled agriculture. Cattle were the major property during this phase and they offered the same to propitiate the gods. Wealth was equated with the ownership of the cattle.
Many gods such as Indra and Agni are described as having special preferences for different types of flesh - Indra had weakness for bull's meat and Agni for bull's and cow's. It is recorded that the Maruts and the Asvins were also offered cows. In the Vedas there is a mention of around 250 animals out of which at least 50 were supposed to be fit for sacrifice and consumption. In the Mahabharata there is a mention of a king named Rantideva who achieved great fame by distributing foodgrains and beef to Brahmins. Taittiriya Brahman categorically tells us: `Verily the cow is food' (atho annam via gauh) and Yajnavalkya's insistence on eating the tender (amsala) flesh of the cow is well known. Even later Brahminical texts provide the evidence for eating beef. Even Manusmriti did not prohibit the consumption of beef.
As a medicine
In therapeutic section of Charak Samhita (pages 86-87) the flesh of cow is prescribed as a medicine for various diseases. It is also prescribed for making soup. It is emphatically advised as a cure for irregular fever, consumption, and emaciation. The fat of the cow is recommended for debility and rheumatism.
With the rise of agricultural economy and the massive transformation occurring in society, changes were to be brought in in the practice of animal sacrifice also. At that time there were ritualistic practices like animal sacrifices, with which Brahmins were identified. Buddha attacked these practices. There were sacrifices, which involved 500 oxen, 500 male calves, 500 female calves and 500 sheep to be tied to the sacrificial pole for slaughter. Buddha pointed out that aswamedha, purusmedha, vajapeya sacrifices did not produce good results. According to a story in Digha Nikaya, when Buddha was touring Magadha, a Brahmin called Kutadanta was preparing for a sacrifice with 700 bulls, 700 goats and 700 rams. Buddha intervened and stopped him. His rejection of animal sacrifice and emphasis on non-injury to animals assumed a new significance in the context of new agriculture.
The threat from Buddhism
The emphasis on non-violence by Buddha was not blind or rigid. He did taste beef and it is well known that he died due to eating pork. Emperor Ashok after converting to Buddhism did not turn to vegetarianism. He only restricted the number of animals to be killed for the royal kitchen.
So where do matters change and how did the cow become a symbol of faith and reverence to the extent of assuming the status of `motherhood'? Over a period of time mainly after the emergence of Buddhism or rather as an accompaniment of the Brahminical attack on Buddhism, the practices started being looked on with different emphasis. The threat posed by Buddhism to the Brahminical value system was too severe. In response to low castes slipping away from the grip of Brahminism, the battle was taken up at all the levels. At philosophical level Sankara reasserted the supremacy of Brahminical values, at political level King Pushyamitra Shung ensured the physical attack on Buddhist monks, at the level of symbols King Shashank got the Bodhi tree (where Gautama the Buddha got Enlightenment) destroyed.
One of the appeals to the spread of Buddhism was the protection of cattle wealth, which was needed for the agricultural economy. In a way while Brahminism `succeeded' in banishing Buddhism from India, it had also to transform itself from the `animal sacrifice' state to the one which could be in tune with the times. It is here that this ideology took up the cow as a symbol of their ideological march. But unlike Buddha whose pronouncements were based on reason, the counteraction of Brahminical ideology took the form of a blind faith based on assertion. So while Buddha's non-violence was for the preservation of animal wealth for the social and compassionate reasons the counter was based purely on symbolism. So while the followers of Brahminical ideology accuse Buddha of `weakening' India due to his doctrine of non-violence, he was not a cow worshipper or vegetarian in the current Brahminical sense.
Despite the gradual rigidification of Brahminical `cow as mother' stance, large sections of low castes continued the practice of beef eating. The followers of Buddhism continued to eat flesh including beef. Since Brahminism is the dominant religious tradition, Babur, the first Mughal emperor, in his will to his son Humayun, in deference to these notions, advised him to respect the cow and avoid cow slaughter. With the construction of Hindutva ideology and politics, in response to the rising Indian national movement, the demand for ban on cow slaughter also came up. In post-Independence India RSS repeatedly raised this issue to build up a mass campaign but without any response to its call till the 1980s.
While one must respect the sentiments of those who worship cow and regard her as their mother, to take offence to the objective study of history just because the facts don't suit their political calculations is yet another sign of a society where liberal space is being strangulated by the practitioners of communal politics. We have seen enough such threats and offences in recent past - be it the opposition to films or the destruction of paintings, or the dictates of the communalists to the young not to celebrate Valentine's Day, etc., - and hope the democratic spirit of our Constitution holds the forte and any threat to the democratic freedom is opposed tooth and nail.
Prof. RAM PUNIYANI
A member of EKTA (Committee for Communal Amity), Mumbai |
Analog
Junior Artist
Username: Analog
Post Number: 267
Registered: 05-2008
Posted From: 71.55.186.62
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 03:10 pm: |
|
prathi intlo aavunu gomatha ga poojinche vaaru kanuka...for hindus cow/ox = god |
Lionswalkalone
Comedian
Username: Lionswalkalone
Post Number: 1643
Registered: 03-2009
Posted From: 75.210.19.79
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 03:04 pm: |
|
///Hmmm... Interesting topic... Middle-East countries lo father chanipote intlo elder son can live with fathers younger wife ani chadiva... Ante mother varasa annamata... So all these beef lovers, if they settle down in these countries will practice the same? ////
Question ki eduru question vesi topic divert cheyyatam enduku....
I Beef eating specifically prohibited by Hinduism??? telustey clear ga, with details cheppu please. |
Ipc302
Side Hero
Username: Ipc302
Post Number: 2459
Registered: 02-2008
Posted From: 24.167.20.113
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 01:04 pm: |
|
man has never been limited to a certain diet since beginning of time...man could have been eating fruits seeds grass along with meat...the only reason we confuse early humans to be meat eaters is the fact that bones have been found in pre-historic dwellings and since bones are preserved better than plant products...there is no reason to believe than early humans avoided meat...and also eating cooked foods and dairy products has started with the invent of civilization which might have started around 10,000-7,000 BC...our dental structure as well as gut flora suggest a different outlook of our eating habits |
Powerfull
Side Hero
Username: Powerfull
Post Number: 2268
Registered: 02-2008
Posted From: 69.197.166.106
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 01:00 pm: |
|
Iamim: yes its true. if u have infant avoid giving him cow milk here. buy organic milk.
I woud say not just infants, any kid until the teenage. Yes, its a bit expensive but its worth it.
Even the meat, you can see the difference between the organic and regular. Regular chicken takes more time to cook than organic, organic tender and tasty ga vuntadi. |
Powerfull
Side Hero
Username: Powerfull
Post Number: 2267
Registered: 02-2008
Posted From: 69.197.166.106
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 12:57 pm: |
|
Iamim:The next step in evolution obviously was Vegetarianism..
May be red meat is bad, but I dont believe pure vegetarian food is healthier. Asians (Japs, Chinese) are the most healthiest in the world. We all know their food habits. I think Fish is the best. |
Gotcha
Side Hero
Username: Gotcha
Post Number: 3504
Registered: 02-2008
Posted From: 98.206.204.119
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 12:56 pm: |
|
Iamim:
there is a flaw in ur theory. it only applies to people living in tropics. what about people living in cold countries if they were to adapt to veg they would have become exitinct now.
its like monkeys in great plains eat grass while other monkeys in different parts of world eat grass and insects. |
Iamim
Side Hero
Username: Iamim
Post Number: 2054
Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 118.94.226.165
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 12:49 pm: |
|
If we put religion aside.. culturally and sociologically speaking.. Vegetarianism makes sense..
Initially mankind must have been a mixture of cannibals and Annibals..
As Human society evolved into tribes and clans with blood lines.. they must have given up cannibalism..
As man evolved into settler-cultivator from Hunter-gatherer he must have become more sentient and humane and started respecting nature and fellow beings..
The next step in evolution obviously was Vegetarianism..
There are Vegetarians in all cultures and religions.. but the preponderance in Hinduism is due to the very nature of the genesis of Hinduism.. which is a naturally born religion.. by nature.. of nature.. from nature.. for nature.. |
Gotcha
Side Hero
Username: Gotcha
Post Number: 3503
Registered: 02-2008
Posted From: 98.206.204.119
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 12:34 pm: |
|
Jalsa:
yes its true. if u have infant avoid giving him cow milk here. buy organic milk. |
Ipc302
Side Hero
Username: Ipc302
Post Number: 2458
Registered: 02-2008
Posted From: 24.167.20.113
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 12:31 pm: |
|
Jalsa:
that's one of the potential causes for mad cow disease and may be Creubfelt jacobs disease |
Iamim
Side Hero
Username: Iamim
Post Number: 2053
Registered: 03-2008
Posted From: 118.94.226.165
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 12:27 pm: |
|
quote:what? nijamaa idhi?
Yeah they are fed all sorts of meat for better productivity.. I used to buy only organic milk and only Indian Ice Creams.. |
Jalsa
Side Hero
Username: Jalsa
Post Number: 4950
Registered: 02-2008
Posted From: 159.53.46.141
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, June 27, 2009 - 12:04 pm: |
|
//ofcourse i am talking about india cows, ikkada cows eat cows only. they are fed beef//
what? nijamaa idhi? |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page
