But the theory that in
Vedic times there was no cow slaughter is historically inaccurate. Although cow
was revered and treated as sacred, it was also offered as food to guests and
persons of high status. The fact remains that ancient Hindu scriptures clearly
permit the consumption of meat, even of cows. True scholars, and not modern
frauds, know this. For example, Swami Vivekananda who is considered as a major
force in the revival of Hinduism in modern India, admitted that ancient Hindus
used to eat meat. He says,
"You will be
astonished if I tell you that, according to the old ceremonials, he is not a
good Hindu who does not eat beef. On certain occasions he must sacrifice a bull
and eat it."
[The complete works of
Swami Vivekananda, Volume 3, Pg 536]
In the same volume on
page 174 he says,
"There was a time
in this very India when, without eating beef, no Brahmin could remain a
Brahmin;"
Let us now look at the
evidence from Hindu texts, which proves that Hinduism not only permits beef
eating but also requires its folowers to institute certain cow sacrifices. I
will simultaneously refute the common arguments of Hindus.
Yajna and animal
sacrifices
In Hinduism, Yajna is
a ritual of sacrifice derived from the practice of Vedic times. It is performed
to please the gods or to attain certain wishes. A Vedic yajna is typically
performed by an adhvaryu priest, with a number of additional priests such as
thehotar, udgatar playing a major role, next to their dozen helpers, by
reciting or singing Vedic verses. How to deal with the animal, that is to be
sacrificed in the Yajna, be it a goat, a horse or a cow, is mentioned in the
Aitareya Brahman of the Rigveda as follows:
"Turn the
animal's feet northwards. Make its eyes go to the Sun, dismiss its breath to
the wond, its life to the space, its hearing to the directions, its body to the
earth. In this way the Hotar (priest) connets it with these world. Take of the
entire skin without cutting it. Before opening the navel tear out the omentum.
Stop its breathing within (by stopping its mouth). Thus the Hotar puts breath
in the animals. Make of its breast a piece like an eagle, of its arms (two
pieces like) two hatchets, of its forearms (two pieces like) two spikes, of its
shoulders (two pieces like) two kashyapas (tortoises), its loins should be
unbroken (entire); make of its thigs (two pieces like) two shields, of the two
kneepans (two pieces like) two oleander leaves; take out its twenty-six ribs
according to their order; preserve every limb of its in its integrity. Thus he
benefits all its limbs. Dig a ditch in the earth to hide its excrements.
'' Present the evil
spirits with the blood.."
[Aitareya Brahman,
Book 2, para 6 and 7]
Subsequently, the same
Aitareya Brahman instructing on how to distribute different parts of the
sacrificial animal says,
"Now follows the
division of the different parts of the sacrificial animal (among the priests).
We shall describe it. The two jawbones with the tongue are to be given to the
Prastotar; the breast in the form of an eagle to the Udgatar; the throat with
the palate to the Pratihartar; the lower part of the right loins to the Hotar;
the left to the Brahma; the right thigh to the Maitravaruna; the left to the
Brahmanuchhamsi; the right side with the shoulder to the Adhvaryu; the left
side to those who accompany the chants; the left shoulder to the
Pratipasthatar; the lower part of the right arm to the Neshtar; the lower part
of the left arm to the Potar; the upper part of the right thigh to the
Achhavaka; the left to the Agnidhra; the upper part of the right arm to the
Aitreya; the left to the Sadasya; the back bone and the urinal bladder to the
Grihapati (sacrificer); the right feet to the Grihapati who gives a feasting;
the left feet to the wife of that Grihapati who gives a feasting; the upper lip
is common to both, which is to be divided by the Grihapati. They offer the tail
of the animal to wives, but they should give it to a Brahmana; the fleshy
processes (maanihah) on the neck and three gristles (kikasaah) to the Grahvastut;
three other gristles and one half of the fleshy part on the back (vaikartta) to
the Unnetar; the other half of the fleshy part on the neck and the left lobe
(Kloma) to the Slaughterer (Shamita), who should present it to a Brahmana, if
he himself would not happen to be a Brahmana. The head is to be given to the
Subrahmanya, the skin belongs to him (the Subrahmanya), who spoke, Svaah Sutyam
(to morrow at the Soma Sacriice); that part of the sacrificial animal at a Soma
sacrifice which beloings to Ilaa (sacrificial food) is common to all the
priests; only for the Hotar it is optional.
All these portions of
the sacrificial animal amount to thirty-six single pieces, each of which
represents the paada (foot) of a verse by which the sacrifice is carried
up…"
"To those who
divide the sacrificial animal in the way mentioned, it becomes the guide to
heaven (Swarga). But those who make the division otherwise are like scoundrels
and miscreants who kill an animal merely."
"This division of
the sacrificial animal was invented by Rishi Devabhaaga, a son of Srauta. When
he was departing from this life, he did not entrust (the secret to anyone). But
a supernatural being communicated it to Girija,the son of Babhru. Since his time
men study it."
[Aitareya Brahman,
Book 7, Para 1, Translated by Martin Haug]
I have come across
certain bigots among Hindus, who make the excuse that these are the
translations of a non-Hindu European scholar with 'ulterior motives'. This is a
common response of half-baked Hindus, who have negligible knowledge of
Hindu scriptures. To establish the authenticity of the above translations, I
will produce before you passages from the 'Purva Mimamsa Sutras' of Jaimini,
its commentary called 'Shabarbhasya' and the views of renowned Arya Samaj
scholar, Pandit Yudhishthira Mimamsak on them.
It must be noted that
the Purva Mimamsa Sutras (compiled between 300-200 BCE), written by Rishi
Jaimini is one of the most important ancient Hindu philosophical texts. It forms
the basis of Mimamsa, the earliest of the six orthodox schools (darshanas) of
Indian philosophy.
There are also certain
details to be performed in connection with the animals, such as (a) Upaakaranam
[Touching the animal with the two mantras], (b) Upaanayanam [Bringing forward],
(c) Akshanyaa-bandhah [Tying with a rope], (d) Yoope niyojanam [Fettering to
the Sacrificial Post], (e) Sanjnapanam [Suffocating to death], (f) Vishasanam
[Dissecting], and so forth.
[Shabhar bhashya on
Mimamsa Sutra 3/6/18; translated by Ganganath Jha]
Expounding on this,
Arya Samaj scholar, Pandit Yudhisthira Mimamsak writes in is 'Mimamsa Shabar
Bhashyam'
"In this case and
otherwise it appears from the Jaimini Sutras that the offering of sacrificed
animals is to be made in the Yajnas. It is clearly mentioned in the Mimamsa
Sutrs."
[Mimamsa
Shabharbhasyam, adhyaya 3, Page 1014]
The 'Shamita'
(slaughterer of the animal) is not distinct from the major priests.
Commenting on it the
Shabarbhashya says,
"The liver and the
upper quarter belongs to the Shamita Priest ; one should give it to a Brahmana
if he be a non-Brahmana."
[Shabhar bhasya on
Mimamsa Sutra 3/7/28; translated by Ganganath Jha]
Notice that this is
exactly the same things that we saw was said in Aitareya Brahman Book 7; Para 1
above (the highlighted part). This proves that Shabarbhashya is confirming the
Aitareya Brahman and the translation is also accurate.
Pandit Yudhisthira
Mimamsak also confirms this when he says,
"The division of
the meat of the sacrificed animal as instructed in the Aitareya Brahman clearly
proves that during the time of the writing of Aitareya Brahman and the time
when it was edited by Saunaka, animals were sacrificed in the Yajnas and their
meat was consumed by the Brahmins"
Some half-baked Hindus
who like to play games might try to call all these references as later
interpolations. However, the scholar Yudhisthir Mimamsak outrightly rejects
such a bogus conclusion when he says,
"There is no
strong evidence to consider these passages as later interpolations."
[Mimamsa
Shabarbhashyam by Yudhishthir Mimamsak Adhyaya 3, Page 1075]
Further in Mimamsa
Sutra 3/8/43 it is mentioned,
"Only the
'Savaniya' cakes should consist of flesh"
All these passages
prove that the flesh of the sacrificed animal was consumed as per the
instructions of the Hindu texts..
( Vijay Shanker Singh
)
No comments:
Post a Comment