The material presented here is based on a thorough and objective analysis of roots of Vedic words, the context in which they appear, Vedic Vocabulary, Philology, Grammar and other tools critical for correct interpretation of the Vedic mantras. Thus this research series does not merely rely on blind reproduction of works of Max Muller, Griffith, Wilson, Williams and other indologists on Vedas and Vedic language. While they are more popular in contemporary western academia, we have objective reasons to conclude that their works are far from authoritative. We shall explore this facet in more detail in this research series.
Welcome to this first part of the research series on critical evaluation of Misconceptions surrounding the Vedas – the first books of knowledge on earth.
For centuries aspersions have been cast upon the Vedas; the primary holy scriptures of the Hindus of having unholy contents. If one really started believing in those aspersions, the entire Hindu philosophy, culture, and traditions would reduce to nothing but savagery, barbarism and cannibalism.
The Vedas – the very roots of Hinduism, rather the first source of knowledge on earth – are meant for guiding the actions of human being in order to lead a blissful life.
This slanderous campaign has been unleashed by different vested interests to embarrass Hindus around the world citing specific references from the Vedas.
This also comes handy in convincing poor and illiterate Indians to give up their faith on the grounds that their fundamental holy books – the Vedas – contain all the inhuman elements like denigration of women, meat-eating, polygamy, casteism and above all – beef eating.
The Vedas are also accused of animal sacrifice in sacrificial ceremonies popularly known as the YAJNA. Interestingly a section of home-bred intellectuals claiming to have deep study of ancient India has also come up, who cite references from works of western indologists to prove such unholy content in the Vedas.
Saying that the Vedas permit beef-eating and cow-slaughter amounts to striking a lethal blow to a Hindu’s soul. Respect for cow forms a core tenet of Hinduism. Once you are able to convince him of flaws in the foundation of this core tenet and make him feel guilty, he becomes an easy prey for the predator faiths. There are millions of ill-informed Hindus who are not empowered to counter argue and hence quietly surrender.
The vested interests that malign the Vedas are not confined to foreign and home-bred indologists alone. A certain class among Hindus exploited the rest of the population including the socially and economically weaker sections by forcing them to believe and follow what they said in the name of Vedas or else face the wrath.
All the slanders heaped upon the Vedas can be attributed mainly to the interpretations of commentaries written by Mahidhar, Uvat and Saayan in the medieval times; and to what Vam-margis or the Tantra cult propagated in their books in the name of the Vedas.
In due course the falsehood spread far and wide and they became even more deep rooted when western scholars with their half baked knowledge of Sanskrit transliterated these interpretations of commentaries of Sayan and Mahidhar, in the name of translating the Vedas.
However, they lacked the pre-requisite understanding of Shiksha (Phonetics), Vyakarana (Grammar), Nirukta (Philology), Nighantu (Vocabulary), Chhanda (Prosody), Jyotish (Astronomy), Kalpa and so on that are critical for correct interpretation of the Vedas.
The purpose behind this series of videos is to objectively evaluate all such misconceptions about the Vedas – the foundation of human knowledge and establish their piety, sanctity, great ideals and philosophy that cater not only to Hindus but to every human being without bars, bias or discrimination of any kind.
Section 1: No violence against animals
——————————————
Yasmintsarvaani bhutaanyaatmaivaabhuudvijaanatah
Tatra ko mohah kah shokah ekatvamanupasyatah
Yajurveda 40.7
“Those who see all beings as souls do not feel infatuation or anguish at their sight, for they experience oneness with them”.
How could people who believed in the doctrines of indestructibility, transmigration dare to kill living animals in yajnas? They might be seeing the souls of their own near and dear ones of bygone days residing in those living beings.
———————————————
Anumantaa vishasitaa nihantaa krayavikrayee
Samskartaa chopahartaa cha khadakashcheti ghaatakaah
Manusmrithi 5.51
Those who permit slaying of animals; those who bring animals for slaughter; those who slaughter; those who sell meat; those who purchase meat; those who prepare dish out of it; those who serve that
meat and those who eat are all murderers.
———————————————
Breehimattam yavamattamatho maashamatho tilam
Esha vaam bhaago nihito ratnadheyaaya dantau maa hinsishtam pitaram maataram cha
Atharvaveda 6.140.2
O teeth! You eat rice, you eat barley, you gram and you eat sesame. These cereals are specifically meant for you. Do not kill those who are capable of being fathers and mothers.
——————————————–
Ya aamam maansamadanti paurusheyam cha ye kravih
Garbhaan khaadanti keshavaastaanito naashayaamasi
Atharvaveda 8.6.23
We ought to destroy those who eat cooked as well as uncooked meat, meat involving destruction of males and females, foetus and eggs.
——————————————-
Anago hatya vai bheema kritye
Maa no gaamashvam purusham vadheeh
Atharvaveda 10.1.29
It is definitely a great sin to kill innocents. Do not kill our cows, horses and people.
How could there be justification of cow and other animals being killed when killing is so clearly prohibited in the Vedas?
———————————————
Aghnyaa yajamaanasya pashoonpahi
Yajurveda 1.1
“O human! animals are Aghnya – not to be killed. Protect the animals”
———————————————
Pashunstraayethaam
Yajurveda 6.11
Protect the animals.
———————————————
Dwipaadava Chatushpaatpaahi
Yajurveda 14.8
Protect the bipeds and quadrupeds!
———————————————-
Kravy da –kravya[ meat obtained from slaughter] + Ada [ the eater]—the meat eater.
Pisacha — pisita [meat] +asa [eater]—the meat eater.
Asutrpa — Asu [breath of life] + trpa [one who satisfies himself on]—one who takes others life for his meals.
Garba da and Anda da – the foetus and egg eaters.
Mans da – the meat eaters
Meat eaters have always been looked down in Vedic literature. They have been known as Rakshasas, Pisacha and so on….All these words are synonyms of demons or devils that have been out-cast from the civilized human society.
——————————————–
Urjam no dhehi dwipade chatushpade
Yajurveda 11.83
“May all bipeds and quadrupeds gain strength and nourishment”
This mantra is recited by Hindus before every meal. How could the same philosophy which prays for well-being of every soul in every moment of life, approve of killing animals?
———————————————–
Section 1: No violence in Yajna
Yajna never meant animal sacrifice in the sense popularly understood. Yajna in the Vedas meant a noble deed or the highest purifying action.
—————————————–
Adhvara iti Yajnanaama – Dhvaratihimsaakarmaa tatpratishedhah
Nirukta 2.7
According to Yaaska Acharya, one of the synonyms of Yajna in Nirukta or the Vedic philology is Adhvara.
Dhvara means an act with himsa or violence. And therefore a-dhvara means an act involving no himsa or no violence. There are a large number of such usage of Adhvara in the Vedas.
———————————————
In the post-Mahabharata period, misinterpretation of the Vedas and interpolations in other scriptures took place at various points intime. Acharya Shankar reestablished the Vedic values to an extent.
In the more recent times, Swami Dayanand Saraswati – known as the grandfather of modern India – interpreted the Vedas as per thecorrect rules of the language and authentic evidences. His literature, which includes commentary on the Vedas, Satyarth Prakash loosely translated as Light of Truth, An Introduction to the Vedas and other texts led to widespread social reformation based on Vedic philosophy and dispelling of myths surrounding the Vedas.
Let us discover what the Vedas have to say on Yajna.
————————————–
Agne yam yagnamadhvaram vishwatah pari bhuurasi
Sa id deveshu gacchati
Rigveda 1.1.4
O lord of effulgence! The non-violent Yajna, you prescribe from all sides, is beneficial for all, touches divine proportions and is accepted by noble souls.
—————————————-
The Rigveda describes Yajna as Adhvara or non violent throughout. Same is the case with all the other Vedas. How can it be then concluded that the Vedas permit violence or slaughter of animals?
The biggest accusation of cattle and cow slaughter comes in the context of the Yajnas that derived their names from different cattle like the Ashwamedh Yajna, the Gomedha Yajna and the Nar-medh Yajna. Even by the wildest stretch of the imagination the word Medha would not mean slaughter in this context.
It’s interesting to note what Yajurveda says about a horse
——————————————————–
Imam ma himsirekashafam pashum kanikradam vaajinam vaajineshu
Yajurveda 13.48
Do not slaughter this one hoofed animal that neighs and who goes with a speed faster than most of the animals.
———————————————————-
Aswamedha does not mean horse sacrifice at Yajna. Instead the Yajurveda clearly mentions that a horse ought not to be slaughtered.
In Shathapatha, Ashwa is a word for the nation or empire
The word medha does not mean slaughter. It denotes an act done in accordance to the intellect Alternatively it could mean consolidation, as evident from the root meaning of medha i.e. medhru san-ga-me
Raashtram vaa ashwamedhah
Annam hi gau
Agnirvaa ashwah
Aajyam medhah
(Shatpath 13.1.6.3)
Swami Dayananda Saraswati wrote in his Light of Truth:
A Yajna dedicated to the glory, wellbeing and prosperity of the Rashtra the nation or empire is known as the Ashwamedh yajna.
“To keep the food pure or to keep the senses under control, or to make the food pure or to make a good use of the rays of Sun or keep the earth free from impurities[clean] is called Gomedha Yajna”.
“The word Gau also means the Earth and the yajna dedicated to keep the Earth the environment clean is called Gomedha Yajna”
“The cremation of the body of a dead person in accordance with the principles laid down in the Vedas is called Naramedha Yajna”.
———————————————–
Section 3: No beef in Vedas
Not only the Vedas are against animal slaughter but also vehemently oppose and prohibit cow slaughter.Yajurveda forbids killing of cows, for they provide energizing food for human beings
———————————
Ghrtam duhaanaamaditim janaayaagne maa himsiheeh
Yajurveda 13.49
Do not kill cows and bulls who always deserve to be protected.
—————————————-
Aare gohaa nrhaa vadho vo astu
Rigveda 7.56.17
In Rigveda cow slaughter has been declared a heinous crime equivalent to human murder and it has been said that those who commits this crime should be punished.
—————————————–
Sooyavasaad bhagavatee hi bhooyaa atho vayam bhagvantah syaama
Addhi trnamaghnye vishwadaaneem piba shuddhamudakamaacharantee
Rigveda 1.164.40 or Atharv 7.73.11 or Atharv 9.10.20
The Aghnya cows – which are not to be killed under any circumstances– may keep themselves healthy by use of pure water and green grass, so that we may be endowed with virtues, knowledge and wealth.
—————————————
The Vedic Lexicon, Nighantu, gives amongst other synonyms of Gau[ or cow] the words Aghnya. Ahi, and Aditi. Yaska the commentator on Nighantu, defines these as-
Aghnya the one that ought not to be killed
Ahi the one that must not be slaughtered.
Aditi the one that ought not to be cut into pieces.
These three names of cow signify that the animal ought not to be put to tortures. These words appear frequently throughout the Vedas in context of the cow.
——————————————–
Aghnyeyam saa vardhataam mahate soubhagaaya
Rigveda 1.164.27
Cow – The aghnya – brings us health and prosperity
Suprapaanam Bhavatvaghnyaayaah
Rigveda 5.83.8
There should be excellent facility for pure water for Aghnya Cow
Yah paurusheyena kravishaa samankte yo ashwena pashunaa yaatudhaanah
Yo aghnyaayaa bharati ksheeramagne teshaam sheershaani harasaapi vrishcha
Rigveda 10.87.16
Those who feed on human, horse or animal flesh and those who destroy milk-giving Aghnya cows should be severely punished.
Vimucchyadhvamaghnyaa devayaanaa aganma
Yajurveda 12.73
The Aghnya cows and bulls bring you prosperity
Maa gaamanaagaamaditim vadhishta
Rigveda 8.101.15
Do not kill the cow. Cow is innocent and aditi – that ought not to be cut into pieces
Antakaaya goghaatam
Yajurveda 30.18
Destroy those who kill cows
Yadi no gaam hansi yadyashwam yadi poorusham
Tam tvaa seesena vidhyaamo yatha no so aveeraha
Atharvaveda 1.16.4
If someone destroys our cows, horses or people, kill him with a bullet of lead.
Vatsam jaatamivaaghnyaa
Atharvaveda 3.30.1
Love each other as the Aghnya – non-killable cow – loves its calf
Dhenu sadanam rayeenaam
Atharvaveda 11.1.34
Cow is fountainhead of all bounties
The entire 28th Sukta or Hymn of 6th Mandal of Rigveda sings the glory of cow.
Aa gaavo agnamannuta bhadramakrantseedantu
Bhooyobhooyo rayimidasya vardhayannabhinne
Na taa nashanti na dabhaati taskaro naasaamamitro vyathiraa dadharshati
Na taa arvaa renukakaato ashnute na samskritramupa yanti taa abhi
Gaavo bhago gaava indro me achhaan
Yooyam gaavo medayathaa
Maa vah stena eeshata maaghanshasah
1. Everyone should ensure that cows are free from miseries and kept healthy.
2. God blesses those who take care of cows.
3. Even the enemies should not use any weapon on cows
4. No one should slaughter the cow
5. Cow brings prosperity and strength
6. If cows keep healthy and happy, men and women shall also keep disease free and prosperous
7. May the cow eat green grass and pure water. May they not be killed and bring prosperity to us.
———————————————-
What more proofs does one need to understand the high esteem in whichnot only the cow but each living being is held in the Vedas.
The learned audience can decide for themselves from these evidences that the Vedas are completely against any inhuman practice… to top it all the Beef and Cow slaughter.
There is no Beef in Vedas.
——————————————
Bibliography:
1. Rigveda Bhashya – Commentary on Rigveda by Swami Dayanand Saraswati
2. Yajurveda Bhashya – Commentary on Yajurveda by Swami Dayanand Saraswati
3. No Beef in Vedas by BD Ukhul
4. Vedon ka Yatharth Swaroop (True nature of Vedas) by Pt Dharmadeva Vidyavachaspati
5. All 4 Veda Samhita by Pt Damodar Satvalekar
6. Pracheen Bharat me Gomamsa – Ek Sameeksha (Beef in Ancient India – an analysis) by Geeta Press, Gorakhpur
7. The Myth of Holy Cow – by DN Jha
8. Hymns of Atharvaveda – Griffith
9. Scared Books of the east – Max Muller
10. Rigveda translations by Williams/Jones
11. Sanskrit English Dictionary – Monier Williams
12. Commentary on Vedas by Dayanand Sansthan
13. Western Indologists – a study of motives by Pt Bhagvadutt
14. Satyarth Prakash by Swami Dayanand Saraswati
15. Introduction to Vedas by Swami Dayanand Saraswati
16. Cloud over understanding of Vedas by BD Ukhul
17. Shathpath Brahman
18. Nirukta – Yaska Acharya
19. Dhatupath – Panini
————————————————————
Addendum on 14 April 2010:
After this article, there was severe reaction from various sources who cannot live with the fact that Vedas and ancient culture of our nation could have been more ideal than their current communistic ideals. I received several mails that tried to refute the articles by citing additional references that support beef-eating. These include 2 mantras from Rigveda, and some Shlokas from Manu Smriti and a few other texts. An example is the comment from Avtar Gill on this page itself. On these, I have to say the following:
a. The article has given evidence from Manu Smriti itself which states that even one who permits killing is a murderer. Thus all these additional shlokas are either from adulterated Manu Smriti or misinterpreted by twisting of words. I recommend them to read Manu Smriti by Dr Surendra Kumar which is available from http://vedicbooks.com
b. A typical example of foul play by those hell-bent on justifying their obsession with beef in ancient texts, is to translate Mansa as ‘meat’. In reality, ‘Mansa’ is a generic word used to denote pulp. Meat is called ‘Mansa’ because it is pulpy. So mere presence of ‘Mansa’ does not mean it refers to meat.
c. The other texts referred by them are among dubious ones not considered authoritative evidence. Their modus operandi is simple – state anything written in Sanskrit as Dharma and translate the way they want to prove whatever they want. This is how they have been fooling us all by filling our textbooks with all unverified demeaning claims.
d. With regards to Vedas, they could come up with two mantras that supposedly justify beef eating. Let us evaluate them:
Claim: Rigveda (10/85/13) declares, “On the occasion of a girl’s marriage oxen and cows are slaughtered.”
Fact: The mantra states that in winter, the rays of sun get weakened and then get strong again in spring. The word used for sun-rays in ‘Go’ which also means cow and hence the mantra can also be translated by making ‘cow’ and not ‘sun-rays’ as the subject. The word used for ‘weakened’ is ‘Hanyate’ which can also mean killing. But if that be so, why would the mantra go further and state in next line (which is deliberately not translated) that in spring, they start regaining their original form.
How can a cow killed in winter regain its health in spring? This amply proves how ignorant and biased communists malign Vedas.
Claim: Rigveda (6/17/1) states that “Indra used to eat the meat of cow, calf, horse and buffalo.”
Fact: The mantra states that brilliant scholars enlighten the world in the manner that wood enhances the fire of Yajna. I fail to understand from where did Avtar Gill and his friends discover Indra, cow, calf, horse and buffalo in this mantra!
In summary, I continue the challenge to everyone – cite one single mantra from Vedas that justify beef-eating and I shall be eager to embrace any faith that he or she may decide for me. If not, they should agree to revert back to the Vedas.
————————————————————————————————————————–
PDF 
Twitter
Facebook
Email
you have said 100% correctly may god bless you
Let me tell you . All of you guys are giving arguments without any solid proof. Vedic religon was full of voilence and sacrifice. It was created to fullfill the lust of few manipulators called Brahmins who could not do any hard work and have not much intelligence and will to do any productive work.
So they started fraud and created vedas.
i cnt understand if peoples are unaware then why do they say anything. you must know that when the caste system was made the most intelligent ones were given the caste of brahmin, and it was not a group of manipulators, they were the one who made rules and following which the aryas became one of the successful societies in ancient time. every king in india had one brahmin, who use to guide them, if they were not intelligent how come every one believed so much on them. some of the most intelligent ones like aryabhatta, chanakya, dronacharya, sapt rishi and many more every one was brahmin. even the person who predicted that gautam will become mahatma buddha was also a brahmin. if he was also a useless fellow how did he came to know about that.
Hindu religon is full of contradictions . People worship Devis and burn their daughter -in-laws, they kill girl child and but do navratra pujas .
They say we are against nudity and sex but they worship linga and do tantra activities.
Action shows the reality not the manipulated words and sentences.
If you all guys are really interested in makeing revival of Hindusism pls stop praseing hindusism and start promoteing Buddhism . Because of Buddhism India is known all over the world and seen with respect. Because of hindusim everywhere people are suffering
hey cms, your all allegations are foul. you must know that there is no nudity in hinduism. you said we offer prayer to linga, but you must know that linga to which we pray is a vedic word and it means the symbol of the supreme god, and not what you are thinking in nude sense. even in tantra activity there is no sexuality, but some kukarmi started it to fulfill there sexual desires and said it is a tantra activity. and even mahatma buddha was a hindu and he was never against hindus. give me one example in which country hindus are seen with insult.
Great yaar, You made some really good points. I myself a Hindu Brahmin but most of the people have distorted the actual form of religion and always pointing that Brahmins were cruel and bad.
I am a brahmin, teetotaler and vegetarian by birth. Nobody in my family stops me from being non-vegetarian of drinking liquor but i just follow my heart.
Most of the people are unaware that we become Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Sudra by our duties not by other surname.
A sudra who really cares about religion and is a great human being is brahmin but a brahmin who is full of sins is a sudra.
For example: Agastya Rishi and Shabri were sudra but were given and treated with high regards while Ravana was a brahmin but Still Lord Rama killed him because his deeds were not of brahmin.
Hope people understand this simple thing..
People definitely understand. After all it is quite logical, intuitive and rational, apart from being vetted by Shastras. However false ego and perverted priorities make them pretend as if they do not understand.
The person who posted against brahmin and says support Buddhism is a Dalit fool who has been raised with venom against brahmins.They belong to Ambedkar sect and little do they know that Babasaheb Rao Ambedkar himself adopted a brahmin surname "Ambedkar" when one Marathi brahmin by name "Ambedkar" helped him in every way and fed him.These ungrateful people are real vermins in India and Vedic warriors like Agniveer should quell their evil.
Not only this. Dr.Ambedkar married a Brahmin woman. Why he did not marry a dalit?
Dear Agni, as much as I was relief to read your article on 'no' animal sacrifices in the vedas, i have questions which i hope you can enlighten me. My knowledge is not that good so please pardon my ignorance.
Am i right to say that the vedas was revealed to many Rishis from all over and the message received was the same? I learnt that about 420 rishis heard 'God's' words (vibrations). That is why hindus took the vedas as the final scripture because it was consistent and true?
I had asked a scholar the question on animal sacrifice in the vedas and his reply was the following;
"The vedas was revealed to not one but a few hundred 'rishis' or scholars. So how can these few hundred scholars unanimously state the same thing if it wasn't the truth? The information was consistent from all over. Which indicates that yes animal sacrifice is permitted in the vedas provided on how the ritual was carried on. There is even the mantras to chant to relieve the animal from it's state to a better birth after it's death.
If it was just revealed to one man, then we can assume that his lineage had probably misinterpreted it wrongly.
But the fact that few hundred scholars received the same message, so how do we deny that animal sacrifice is not stated in the vedas? Wasn't it documented later but practised earlier on?
How did the Ashvamedha sacrifice happen in Ramayana?
Did they got it all wrong too?
I know the oldest veda is the Rig Veda. How many Rishis actually came up with the Yajur veda, especially on the animal sacrifice bit?
Please advise. Would really want to have your views on it. It would be really helpful to my fellow friends who are faithfully holding on to knowledge passed on. I guess in religion, logic does not play a part in it.
Dear Raveena,
Am glad that you have such curiosity about Vedas. Here are brief answers to your questions (for further details, kindly mail me at agniveer@agniveer.com)
1. As per evidence from Shatpath Brahman and Manu Smriti, the 4 Vedas were initially revealed to 4 Rishis – Agni, Vayu, Aditya and Angira. Each Rishi received revelation of 1 Ved each. These Rishis then transmitted this knowledge to other Rishis. These Rishis then devised a method of Path so that even till this date Vedas are available in exactly same form as during inception of civilization. To know more on this, please read: <a href="http://www.satyavidya.org/must-read/unchangeable-…” target=”_blank”>http://www.satyavidya.org/must-read/unchangeable-…
2. No mantra in Vedas refer to any form of animal sacrifice. All those mantras which are alleged to have animal sacrifice, can be easily proved to mean something else, if we look at context and root meanings of the words, as used in ancient texts of grammar and vocabulary. Many of these come from misinterpretation from translations of Sayana and Mahidhar who were born in around 15th century. These translations were then publicized by western indologists. But if you look at ancient translations, and references in other books like Shatpath, Nirukta, Nighantu etc, one can easily understand the truth.
3. Please read my post, Ashwamedha means efforts to make nation better and has nothing to do with horse.
4. The Ramayan we get today is a much interpolated text. Many verses have been added later on and that can be checked with a close scrutiny. In fact, except Vedas, there are hardly an texts which can be claimed to be available in same original form, thanks to thousand years of darkness, misrule and foreign invasions. So Ramayana and Mahabharat are not to be considered final authority in matters of Dharma. The Uttar Ramayan, which contains the reference to Ashwamedha, can be proved to be a later addition by even a layman.
That is why I specifically focused only on Vedas. My challenge is open to everyone – cite me one single mantra from Vedas that justify animal-killing. Most people merely give a set of english translations from Griffith or Max Muller. But that is not sufficient. Let us instead check out each word of mantra and find out the logical meaning, instead of assuming that any translator of Vedas is a Rishi.
Dear Raveena, Am glad that you have such curiosity about Vedas. Here are brief answers to your questions (for further details, kindly mail me at agniveer@agniveer.com) 1. As per evidence from Shatpath Brahman and Manu Smriti, the 4 Vedas were initially revealed to 4 Rishis – Agni, Vayu, Aditya and Angira. Each Rishi received revelation of 1 Ved each. These Rishis then transmitted this knowledge to other Rishis. These Rishis then devised a method of Path so that even till this date Vedas are available in exactly same form as during inception of civilization. To know more on this, please read: http://www.satyavidya.org/must-read/unchangeable-... 2. No mantra in Vedas refer to any form of animal sacrifice. All those mantras which are alleged to have animal sacrifice, can be easily proved to mean something else, if we look at context and root meanings of the words, as used in ancient texts of grammar and vocabulary. Many of these come from misinterpretation from translations of Sayana and Mahidhar who were born in around 15th century. These translations were then publicized by western indologists. But if you look at ancient translations, and references in other books like Shatpath, Nirukta, Nighantu etc, one can easily understand the truth. 3. Please read my post, Ashwamedha means efforts to make nation better and has nothing to do with horse. 4. The Ramayan we get today is a much interpolated text. Many verses have been added later on and that can be checked with a close scrutiny. In fact, except Vedas, there are hardly an texts which can be claimed to be available in same original form, thanks to thousand years of darkness, misrule and foreign invasions. So Ramayana and Mahabharat are not to be considered final authority in matters of Dharma. The Uttar Ramayan, which contains the reference to Ashwamedha, can be proved to be a later addition by even a layman. That is why I specifically focused only on Vedas. My challenge is open to everyone – cite me one single mantra from Vedas that justify animal-killing. Most people merely give a set of english translations from Griffith or Max Muller. But that is not sufficient. Let us instead check out each word of mantra and find out the logical meaning, instead of assuming that any translator of Vedas is a Rishi.
Thank you so much Agni. Your information is very enlightening. I can't understand why people are still holding on to such myth and claim that those who oppose their view are considered the 'new age' hindus. I am glad that there are scholars like you who are revealing the truth to the public. I am glad that you are on facebook. At least your messages can reach far and wide about the myth of the vedas. God Bless!
Thanks for the Article!
Zakir Naik is an idiot! he doesn't know anything about anything and his half of the speech looks like chapter no xx verse no xx.
Hi Agniveer,
I feel offended on talks about hinduism by Dr.Zakir Naik in youtube. I couldn't find any rebuttals on his claims in youtube. Is it possible to load rebuttal clips on youtube base on his talk. This will help us to see what the vedas actually means from the point of a practitioner.
Rigveda, Manusmiriti sanction beef-eating
A recent photograph of some Hindu protesters demanding a ban on non-vegetarian food in restaurants and government canteens in India made me sit up and take notice. I believe that these protesters are ignorant of what their religion preaches. They are simply going against their own religious scriptures.
Most of the world religions sanctify offering of animals in sacrifice including Hinduism. Hindu scriptures are witnesses to such sacrifices and killings of animals for consumption. References of such commands are replete in Hindu scriptures like Manusmriti, Vedas, Upanishads, Brahmins, Grihsutras, Dharmasutras and others.
This column would not suffice for quoting all such references but a few from different scriptures are imperative to bring home the point and clear the misconceptions:
Manusmriti (Chapter 5 / Verse 30) says, “It is not sinful to eat meat of eatable animals, for Brahma has created both the eaters and the eatables.”
Manusmriti (5 / 35) states: When a man who is properly engaged in a ritual does not eat meat, after his death he will become a sacrificial animal during twenty-one rebirths.
Maharishi Yagyavalkya says in Shatpath Brahmin (3/1/2/21) that, “I eat beef because it is very soft and delicious.”
Apastamb Grihsutram (1/3/10) says, “The cow should be slaughtered on the arrival of a guest, on the occasion of ‘Shraddha’ of ancestors and on the occasion of a marriage.”
Rigveda (10/85/13) declares, “On the occasion of a girl’s marriage oxen and cows are slaughtered.”
Rigveda (6/17/1) states that “Indra used to eat the meat of cow, calf, horse and buffalo.”
Vashistha Dharmasutra (11/34) writes, “If a Brahmin refuses to eat the meat offered to him on the occasion of ‘Shraddha’ or worship, he goes to hell.”
Also, comments of some great scholars of Hinduism are also worth noting:
• Hinduism’s greatest propagator Swami Vivekanand said thus: “You will be surprised to know that according to ancient Hindu rites and rituals, a man cannot be a good Hindu who does not eat beef”. (The Complete Works of Swami Vivekanand, vol.3, p. 536).
• Mukandilal writes in his book ‘Cow Slaughter – Horns of a Dilemma’, page 18: “In ancient India, cow-slaughter was considered auspicious on the occasions of some ceremonies. Bride and groom used to sit on the hide of a red ox in front of the ‘Vedi’ (alter).”
• A renowned scholar of scriptures Dr. Pandurang Vaman Kane says, “Bajsancyi Samhita sanctifies beef-eating because of its purity”. (Dharmashastra Vichar Marathi, page 180)
• Adi Shankaracharya’ commentary on Brihdaranyakopanishad 6/4/18 says : ‘Odan’ (rice) mixed with meat is called ‘Mansodan’. On being asked whose meat it should be, he answers ‘Uksha’. ‘Uksha’ is used for an ox, which is capable to produce semen.
• The book ‘The History and Culture of the Indian People’, published by Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan, Bombay and edited by renowned historian R.C.Majumdar (Vol.2, page 578) says: “this is said in the Mahabharat that King Rantidev used to kill two thousand other animals in addition to two thousand cows daily in order to give their meat in charity”.
It seems a great majority of the followers of Hinduism are not in contact with their religious scriptures thus falling an easy prey to the fascist forces like the Sangh Parivar who have nothing to offer to the Indian society save hatred. And all Indians know where these hatred-mongers are taking India to?
¯ Avtar Gill
avtargills@yahoo.com
Dear Friend, You are in fools paradise. Proof from ManuSmriti is already provided in the article. Proofs from Vedas also are there. You are quoting either from translations of western indologists or interpolated shlokas of Smriti and other texts. Perhaps you are copy-pasting from some Dr Naik site. We shall reply to this nonsense soon in future. Meanwhile you can read 4 Vedas with translations at <a href="http://www.aryasamajjamnagar.org/” target=”_blank”>http://www.aryasamajjamnagar.org/
Further, Maansa means pulp and not necessarily meat. Aamra Mansam means pulp of mango. Or do you think Mango is a meat?
The Rantidev story is completely misinterpreted. The final authority in Dharma is 4 Vedas. And as proved in article, there is punishment upto death for those killing cow!
@x2-in
You have quoted Complete Works of Swami Vivikananda(Vol.3) to support beef eating. Here is Vol.3
http://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info/vivekanand...
Can u pinpoint where Swamiji mentions beef-eating is permitted?
Regards
There are many who specialise in distorting Hindu scriptures. Many muslims, Christians and anti-Hindus fill the web with their lies. You quote yajnavalkya but the passage clearly says cows etc should not be kiiled eaten etc!! Yajnavalkya says the opposite, why? That is the question. Not that it is allowed!
Many other verses you quote are distorted too. Manu and other smirithis forbid killing animals to eat but as part of yajna (worship only) if offered it tis wrong to refuse to eat. That is not to fill the stomah for hunger! That is forbidden. There is a difference between yajna offering and killing for dinner! Usually people do not follow this big difference and write books ignorantly!
Hindus scriptures forbid killing for hunger if one wants to follow a higher satvic life. Eating animals carries demerit for all except in yajna offerings. Even that is not done nowadays!
@Madhu
namaste sister,
sister, I disagree with u partly there, u said animal killing is forbidden for eating, that is true, but u said animal killing is allowed for yajna, that is false. Under any circumstances, Vedas calls for compassion on all animals, so u cannot kill any animal regardless for food or yajna sacrifice.
@Madhu
Sister, give proofs from Vedas in your support. And if you want to sacrifice, why dont you kill your own son/daughter or yourself? When eating flesh leads human to lower Tamasik states, then how can such a Tamasik food be offered in Yajna?
@Madhu
One of the synonyms of Yajna as in Nirukta is Adhwara – Dhwara means an act involving Himsa. Adhwara means an act without any Himsa. Adhwara has been used in all the 4 Vedas several times. So Yajna should be free from any violence as per Vedas. Sister, we have already degraded our beautiful Dharm to the lowest level due to our ignorance. Lets now lift it up rather than sticking to these foolish and barbaric customs.
@Arya
thanks brother Arya, lets all continue to educate each other, and hopefully we will be able to enlighten the world with the light of the Vedas.
@Vik
Namaste brother,
Brother, this is all wisdom of Rishis, nothing from my side. Agniveerji has cleared many such doubts of our minds. So all credit goes to him.
By the way, dont you think we all should be in touch with each other 24X7. We all- Vik, SDC, Aman, Jagdish, Satya Sanatan, Vande Matram, Proud Kafir, RH, Siva, Anand, Dharma, Arya, and all such brothers, who are active here to defend Vedic Dharm, can contact Agniveerji through email and help him turn this one man show into a full fledged movement.
@Arya
Namaste Brother;
Sure, this would be an excellent idea, we should all defend our holy Vedas against threats of evil cults. I am surely with you on this one.
Great Articles from Agniveer.
I have seen people commenting in abusive language without identifying themselves. Isn't that enough to understand their class!
Carry on Agniveer, Godspeed!
This is such a great and much needed article. Thanks for this. Please keep up the great work and debunking myths created by propagandists.
Hi Agniveer,
I have read most of your posts and started reading satyartha prakash.
But I have one doubt.
It is stated that Vedas are apourusheya(not created by man)!! Then the question is who created Vedas???
In his writings Dr.Ambedkar has stated that there are multiple answers available as to who created Vedas(somewhere its stated as Agni, somewhere Skhamba, in Satapatha Brahmana its prajapathi, in Vedas its Indra who created Vedas!!!).. I am very much confused!!!
The link for Ambedkars Riddle(2-6) is:
http://www.ambedkar.org/riddleinhinduism/21A1.Rid...
Can you please answer this riddle????
No discussion on Vedic knowledge is complete without reference to Bhagvad-gita and Srimad-bhagvatam. While Bhagvad-gita was spoken by Lord Krsna on the battlefield of Kurukshetra and Srimad-bhagvtam was compiled by Vyasadev about 5000 years ago. The source of Vedas and purpose of Vedas is mentioned in these scriptures. The first verse of Srimad-bhagvatam states the origin of Vedic knowledge as reproduced below:
O my Lord, Sri Krsna, son of Vasudeva, O all-pervading Personality of Godhead, I offer my respectful obeisances unto You. I meditate upon Lord Sri Krsna because He is the Absolute Truth and the primeval cause of all causes of the creation, sustenance and destruction of the manifested universes. He is directly and indirectly conscious of all manifestations, and He is independent because there is no other cause beyond Him. It is He only who first imparted the Vedic knowledge unto the heart of Brahmäjé, the original living being. By Him even the great sages and demigods are placed into illusion, as one is bewildered by the illusory representations of water seen in fire, or land seen on water. Only because of Him do the material universes, temporarily manifested by the reactions of the three modes of nature, appear factual, although they are unreal. I therefore meditate upon Him, Lord Sri Krsna, who is eternally existent in the transcendental abode, which is forever free from the illusory representations of the material world. I meditate upon Him, for He is the Absolute Truth – Srimad Bhagvatam 1.1.1
Namaste
I would try to answer the confusions presented by Dr Ambedkar in a subsequent post. But in summary, his views are based on shallow writings of western indologists coupled with a general hatred towards a caste-dominated society. Dr Ambedkar had his political stand based on hatred against Brahmins and thus at times he deliberated ignored to highlight the fact that birth-based caste discrimination is a recent distortion and not as per original Vedic teachings. Thus it served his purpose to cast unnecessary doubts on origin of Vedas. But fact is that Vedas are the only texts available without distortions and predating every other literature.
Dear brother, namaste
According to Vedas themselves, the knowledge, which Eeshvar possesses is vedas. In the starting of a new Srishti (universe), Eeshvar enlightens the souls of some purest of the people with his knowledge. These enlightened souls are the first rishis which propagate this knowledge further. According to Brahman granthas, Manusmriti, and Swami Dayanand, the four rishis in the starting of this present universe were-Agni, Vayu, Aditya, and Angira. Thus these four rishis were receiver and propagator of Vedas but not the creator.
As far as the question of creation of Vedas is concerned, it is clear that Vedas are nitya (eternal), and have not been created by anyone. But of course it is a property of Eeshvar. As there is no starting or creation of Eeshvar, there is no starting or creation of Vedas. In the words of Vedic Philosophy, Knowledge is a Guna (property) and Eeshvar is its Guni(the one which owns the property). Hence Eeshvar along with his property Knowledge(Vedas) is eternal. However some places we find Eeshvar as the creator of Vedas, is only from soul's point of view. Because in our frame of reference it seems that Vedas are created in the beginning of universe. But it is actually the enlightenment of Vedas for us and not the creation.
As you said you have started reading Satyarth Prakash, then you must be knowing that Agni, Indra, Prajapati, etc have also been used for Eeshvar and hence there is no contradiction.
Hope it will help you get out of the confusion brother.
With regard to consumption of meat following is mentioned in the Bhagavad-gita:
Even the food each person prefers is of three kinds, according to the three modes of material nature. The same is true of sacrifices, austerities and charity. Now hear of the distinctions between them.
Foods dear to those in the mode of goodness increase the duration of life, purify one’s existence and give strength, health, happiness and satisfaction. Such foods are juicy, fatty, wholesome, and pleasing to the heart.
Foods that are too bitter, too sour, salty, hot, pungent, dry and burning are dear to those in the mode of passion. Such foods cause distress, misery and disease.
Food prepared more than three hours before being eaten, food that is tasteless, decomposed and putrid, and food consisting of remnants and untouchable things is dear to those in the mode of darkness.Bhagvad-gita 17-7-10
Since the Vedic knowledge is holistic in nature it caters to the requirement of all the human beings governed by the three modes of material nature – goodness, passion and ignorance.
You write "the Vedas – contain all the inhuman elements like denigration of women, meat-eating, polygamy, casteism and above all – beef eating."
This seems to say that beef eating is worse than the denigration of women. I know beef eating is terrible but we shouldn't try yo make it look as though cows are more important than women. The subjugation of women in any society is a terrible crime and insinuating that beef eating is worse does not come across well to many people.
Dear Sister, Refer to the article on Women in Vedas. As per Vedas, women are in fact more important than men in society.
The purpose of my sentence was not with reference to comparison between the various inhuman elements. Instead, the purpose of sentence is elaborated a pare below – that 'no-beef' is a unique characteristic of Hindu/ vedic dharma. Thus attacking this characteristic strikes strongest blow to identity of a Hindu. I am referring to intent of those who create such mispropaganda.
Coming to your point on women and cow, let me make very clear – Vedas regard Cow as animal, and not a divine representation. The reason Vedas prohibit cow slaughter is out of compassion for all living beings. The reason why specific focus is put on cow is its health, economic and environmental value that is unmatched.
As for women, Vedas consider them more important than every other living creature on earth. Because human is the best creation and women are better among humans. The reason for this is not a bias towards women, but based on facts – that women sustain the society and create legends out of ordinary humans. Women are first teachers and women exhibit highest levels of tolerance that is so critical for survival of civilization. A society where women are educated becomes strong. A women where women are uneducated becomes barbaric. If all men die suddenly, still society would survive because many women would have children in their wombs. If all women die suddenly, the world would perish.
Thus a Veda follower can no way even imagine subjugation of women or considering them lower than anything in world.
The limited point of my words in article was that beef-eating is most important differentiator for contemporary Hindus and hence antagonists try to prove beef in Vedas among other bad things.
Thanks for taking the time to explain
Thanks Agni bhai, I hope if i can gain even 10 % of your knwlg would make me a acchiever in life.
thanks again.
shivam
@CMS…
You said: "They say we are against nudity and sex but they worship linga and do tantra activities. …
pls stop praseing hindusism and start promoteing Buddhism . …"
I guess you are thinking that buddhism is full of good things and even Ambedkar when talking about buddhism only considers good part of Buddhism , but while talking about Hinduism he refers to unauthentic books like tantras , upapuranas..etc..
Now please do some research on Vajrayana Buddhism…
Many buddhists(vajrayana) are claiming that Tantra started from Buddhism.. If that is true then
what all you talk on hinduism considering Tantra is the fault of buddhists..
It means that these buddhists are the culprits who brought all these…
The vajrayana(Buddhism) includes the consumption of meat and alchohol, and ‘sexuality’
http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art20763.asp.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantra_techniques_(V...
agniveer u have been exposed again
Too vague a statement. Kindly provide evidence. I know, truth hurts those on path of ignorance.
You say that In Vedic ritual of Ashvamedha yagna, Horses were not sacrified ..
But dr. Shekar in the below link has provided full details about the whole rituals which take place during the Ashwamedha Yagna..and how dogs and horses were offered in the yagna..
Its a shame that we dont accept our ancestors faults..
http://dmrsekhar.sulekha.com/blog/post/2008/03/as...
Hi All,
Agniveer says In Vedic ritual of Ashvamedha yagna, Horses were not sacrified ..
But dr. Shekar in the below link has provided full details about the whole rituals which take place during the Ashwamedha Yagna..and how dogs and horses were offered in th yagna..
Its a shame that we dont accept our ancestors faults..
http://dmrsekhar.sulekha.com/blog/post/2008/03/as...
–Madhu (Speak the truth,even if it hurts)
Hi All,
Agniveer says In Vedic ritual of Ashvamedha yagna, Horses were not sacrified ..
But dr. Shekar in the below link has provided full details about the whole rituals which take place during the Ashwamedha Yagna..and how dogs and horses were offered in th yagna..
Its a shame that we dont accept our ancestors faults..
http://dmrsekhar.sulekha.com/blog/post/2008/03/as...
–Madhu (Speak the truth,even if it hurts)
Hi All, Agniveer says In Vedic ritual of Ashvamedha yagna, Horses were not sacrified .. But dr. Shekar in the below link has provided full details about the whole rituals which take place during the Ashwamedha Yagna..and how dogs and horses were offered in th yagna.. Its a shame that we dont accept our ancestors faults.. http://dmrsekhar.sulekha.com/blog/post/2008/03/as... –Madhu (Speak the truth,even if it hurts)
@Madhu
Copy-Pasting the same content won't solve any purpose. Kindly go through all the comments & explanations to clear your doubts!!!!
And beware of self-declared Vedic-Experts who merely base their work on the Western-Indologists . Even I came through one similar article in The Hindustan Times in 2002 or so, written by some D.N Jha , a DU professor in history
Agniveer please reply to avtaar Gill's qoutes from vedas on beef eating…
sanjaya
There is some great misunderstanding being propogated by the enthusiasm of Mr. Angniveer and some of his detractors like this Avtar Gill.
First of all it's idiotic to compare Hinduism with any other religion,let alone prosetelyzing religions like Buddhism, Christianity and Islam.
This was the fundamental mistake made by all our saints in 13th century onwards while going into a dialogue with experts of other ( mainly prosetelyzing and aggressive ones) religions.
Hinduism's scriptures are not like Bible or Koran. Or like Ten commandments. They are not prescriptive, but are descriptive.
If there are few verses which tell us about cow slaughter, they do not become a commandment for the Hindu people.
@Anand
There is not even a single verse of cow slaughter, forget cows, not even animals. Vedas call for compassion on all animals.
@Anand
Brother, its sad to read your comment. This is the problem with most of hindus that they are ready to accept anything in the name of religion even if it is a self contradictory scripture or full of errors. Can you tell me what misunderstanding has been propagated by Agniveerji? Can you provide even a single mantra from vedas which allows animal slaughter forget about cow? Why do you think that Vedas should contain both types of mantras? Should false be also included with truth in order to call a book complete?
What do you mean by Hinduism books? Except some books, they contain all types of errors. Only Vedas can be considered as free from errors. Vedas are prescriptive when they say, do not kill animals and they are descriptive when they say why should you not kill. Vedas are indeed the commandments for the people and you can not question it until you come up with any mistake in those.
People like Avtar Gill will not like to look thousands of Shlokas suggesting us to not to kill animals, but will dance with joy with fringe ones which he mentions. Why? The reason is obvious. His target is not Mr. Agniveer, but RSS. And why? No reason at all. Just because RSS exists, Mr. Gill is against it. He thinks that Hindu's have no right to unify. He thinks that organizing Hindu people is a crime. He is quick to brand them Fascist. I do not know whether Mr. Gill even knows what that term means.
If people belonging to a non prosetelyzing, non aggressive culture want to unite to address their own issues, what is Mr. Gill's problem? Hindu's are not going to attack any other nation or religion. History books are filled with the horrific atrocities Hindu's have faced with the hands of foreign invaders. May be Mr. Gill should shed his pseudo Marxist crap, understand that there is no Berlin wall and stop Hindu hating.
I am absolutely in sync with Anand.
If you abuse and condemn the hindu(read:vedic) faith you become progressive.. and if you defend this beautiful and tolerant faith, you are termed as communal and fascist.
Actually this is how the brand of politics propagated by these Pseudo-Secularists, has flourished. And innocent people have fallen prey to it.
Excellent article, agniveer.
The challenge is yet to be met.
I am well aware that all the Hindus of Kerala except Brahmin's eat Beef, and beef was eaten by Dravidian too; I had to search the basic Hindu religious book to find the following:
Manusmriti (Chapter 5 / Verse 30) says, “It is not sinful to eat meat of eatable animals, for Brahma has created both the eaters and the eatables.”
Manusmriti (5 / 35) states: When a man who is properly engaged in a ritual does not eat meat, after his death he will become a sacrificial animal during twenty-one rebirths.
Maharishi Yagyavalkya says in Shatpath Brahmin (3/1/2/21) that, “I eat beef because it is very soft and delicious.”
Apastamb Grihsutram (1/3/10) says, “The cow should be slaughtered on the arrival of a guest, on the occasion of ‘Shraddha’ of ancestors and on the occasion of a marriage.”
Rigveda (10/85/13) declares, “On the occasion of a girl’s marriage oxen and cows are slaughtered.”
Rigveda (6/17/1) states that “Indra used to eat the meat of cow, calf, horse and buffalo.”
Vashistha Dharmasutra (11/34) writes, “If a Brahmin refuses to eat the meat offered to him on the occasion of ‘Shraddha’ or worship, he goes to hell.”
Also, comments of some great scholars of Hinduism are also worth noting:
· Hinduism’s greatest propagator Swami Vivekanand said thus: “You will be surprised to know that according to ancient Hindu rites and rituals, a man cannot be a good Hindu who does not eat beef”. (The Complete Works of Swami Vivekanand, vol.3, p. 536).
· Mukandilal writes in his book ‘Cow Slaughter – Horns of a Dilemma’, page 18: “In ancient India, cow-slaughter was considered auspicious on the occasions of some ceremonies. Bride and groom used to sit on the hide of a red ox in front of the ‘Vedi’ (alter).”
· A renowned scholar of scriptures Dr. Pandurang Vaman Kane says, “Bajsancyi Samhita sanctifies beef-eating because of its purity”. (Dharmashastra Vichar Marathi, page 180)
· Adi Shankaracharya’ commentary on Brihdaranyakopanishad 6/4/18 says : ‘Odan’ (rice) mixed with meat is called ‘Mansodan’. On being asked whose meat it should be, he answers ‘Uksha’. ‘Uksha’ is used for an ox, which is capable to produce semen.
· The book ‘The History and Culture of the Indian People’, published by Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan, Bombay and edited by renowned historian R.C.Majumdar (Vol.2, page 578) says: “this is said in the Mahabharat that King Rantidev used to kill two thousand other animals in addition to two thousand cows daily in order to give their meat in charity”.
Please read the post carefully. Most of your references are covered already.
@Balamurali
Seems you were so busy with your Murali that you did not even read the page, which you are commenting on. Read, what has been written above-
Claim: Rigveda (10/85/13) declares, “On the occasion of a girl’s marriage oxen and cows are slaughtered.”
Fact: The mantra states that in winter, the rays of sun get weakened and then get strong again in spring. The word used for sun-rays in ‘Go’ which also means cow and hence the mantra can also be translated by making ‘cow’ and not ‘sun-rays’ as the subject. The word used for ‘weakened’ is ‘Hanyate’ which can also mean killing. But if that be so, why would the mantra go further and state in next line (which is deliberately not translated) that in spring, they start regaining their original form.
How can a cow killed in winter regain its health in spring? This amply proves how ignorant and biased communists malign Vedas.
Regarding Rig 6/17/1, there is the word "Gavyam", which are five in numbers according to Aayurved-cow's milk, curd, butter, Mutra and Apashisht. Where does the flesh come into the picture Bala Saheb? Mantra clearly says that the king should be well built through Saatvik bhojan like Ghrit, so that he can defend his country and kill the monsters.
And you forgot that the title of the article is "there is no beef in VEDAS". Why are you talking of Manu, Yajnavalkya etc? And giving quotes of the likes of Vivekanand about Vedas are as useless as the comment given by a fool, on a page, which he has never read!
Dear Agniveer,
Is this correct ? Is there animal sacrifice in Vedas?. , Please write the verse and its correct translation.
The Rig Veda has several very clear references to animal sacrifices.
In a reference to the sacrifice of a goat it says (1.162.2) “The dappled goat goes straight to heaven, bleating to the place dear to Indra and to Pusan.”
In one of the hymns to the horse (1.162.9-11) it says,
“What part of the steed’s flesh the fly does not eat or is left sticking to the post or hatchet, or to the slayer’s
@sss
Brother, please visit http://www.aryasamajjamnagar.org and read the correct translation of mantras. In short, both mantras talk about sun rays and butter of cow respectively. There is nothing like killing the cow.
thanks Arya.
@Arya,
Is there English Translation ?
brother, I cant say for sure. Anyway, I will let you know.
Thanks Brother,
I am a Tamilian, SO Hindi/Sanskrit are far away from me. ( I am learning Sanskrit Now (Self)).
is it possible for you to translate those 2 versus for me . — Please ..
@sss
Brother, will definitely give the translation but for now being, just want to tell you that the Sukta 162 contains Ashva Vidya (knowledge of horses, how to train and care them) and this is also known as "Ashva Medh". This word has been mistranslated by Christian translators deliberately. In Brahmin text, "Ashva Medh" has been explained as care for animals. Mantra 12 and 13 of the same sukta strictly prohibit meat eating. Hence there can not be any Mantra what so ever to suggest killing horses or others.
any update ?
@sss
Rigved 1/162/9
O intellectuals! Kravishah- the one who tread systematically (horse)
ashvasya- of that horse
yat- for
riptam- the dung
makshika aash- which Fly eats,
yat swadhitou swarou- which makes the horse feel uncomfort
shamituh- who does Yajna (yajna means any act which is done for others and not for self)
Hastayoh- in his hands
nakheshu asti- also in his nails
taa sarva- all that knowledge which he possesses of keeping clean and training the horses
deveshu api astu- this knowledge should be possessed by all noble people too.
So the message of the Mantra is- "All the people should keep their horses clean from any impurity so that insects like Flies dont annoy them and they serve you better"
I want to ask you, which word in this Mantra means flesh and which means slayer?
Regarding 1/162/2, which word in it gives the meaning goat?
Brother, all the translations of Maxmuller, Griffith, Mcdonald, Wilson, are based on either Saayan or Mahidhar. Mahidhar was the first person to invent the custom of animal sacrifice in Vedas. He translated Yajna as a place of sacrifice without any reason. Any ancient Rishi has never translated it like this. This is opposite to grammar too. Yajna means the act, which is done for the betterment of others. There is no place whatsoever for such barbaric rituals in Yajna.
I request you to read Satyarth Prakash and Rigvedaadi Bhaashya Bhoomika by Swami Dayanand and discover the real Vedas.
@sss
Brother, I know you are with us. You please start reading the above books in English. And one more thing, ask for some aayats from Bella immediately on the article Contradictions in Quran. Some Mujaahideens of Muhammad have appeared there!
Hey Agni,
Good work. I have a suggestion.
Why not make a list of all prominent people that point to beef and animal slaughter in Hindu scriptures taking the likes of Zakir Naik and communists. Within this quote all their references, mantras, verses and stories which these people use to prove their allegation that ancient aryans were meat eaters.
Then with your knowledge of ancient sanskrit language and grammar provide the correct translations of these mantras (that are used against Hinduism), thereby illustrating that their works are slanderous campaign on Hinduism.
This will really make them speechless and every lay person can counter these people.
Reading this article any sensible person is convinced that there is no beef eating in the 4 Vedas. However, you have to extend this work for other scriptures that our quoted by likes of Zakir Naik and communists– Mahabharata etc.
I know your viewpoint that anything other than Vedas are adulterated text, however, to the extent possible give the correct and unbiased translations of these texts (especially the controversial verses). Though adulterated these texts have now become part of Hindusim and must be aligned with the Vedas to the extent possible.
Best of luck.