'2mn cows smuggled from India every year'

[third eye]

There is reason why people say 1 Muslim = 10 Hindus. It's because beef makes you strong and courageous.

Its been a while since one read a stupid post !!

 

[Spring Onion]

Where exactly did I state that 'pigs are considered holy" genius? Will you sit at a table or eat at a restaurant where pork is served? Hence my statement which really is so simple to understand

YES i will sit at a table where you are or anyone else is eating pork . in fact i did when i was in India. At the hotel where we were staying was serving pork and foreigners there use to eat and at times i had to share a table with pork eaters. The utmost precaution which i observed was to avoid taking food from nearby tray where pork was put as its steam might had entered the other food tray too.


So all in coming back to your statement well if you are eating pork just sitting next to me well it will NOT offend me at all. The Moral of the story is that Muslims are NOT offended if anyone else is eating pork.

You Indians are still not clear about what is concept about pork among Muslims. You guys are under impression that eating it offend Muslims the way eating of cow meat offend Hindus, which is BTW not the case.

 

[bitter_but_better]

Who created plants ?

How are plants different from animals ?

You are aware of a phenomenon called food chain .. right ?

hmm plants do not have brain to feel the pain of being cut from a blade alive.
And if you belive they have then whats the different btw plants and man?

A donkey does all that, a buffalo probably does it better than a cow.

hahahahaha
then eat DONKEY and buffalo also

 

[Spring Onion]

Then we will slaughter and eat Muslims.

lolzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz please do so .

A failed reporter in her 40's is reduced to writing "lolzzzzzz". Such a sad development, I wish you the best.

oh i dint know you were allergic to lolzzzzz so let me replace it with howz that?

 

[janon]

hahaha stupid reply from a senior member.
Lemme explain you about "the equal rights" in single line
m not gonna give lecture
if human murders a human then what punishment he will get?
Got it?

Exactly same punishment (the equal rights) should be for a human who kill innocent animals.
This is what i was talking about.
And you take it from where to where lol
i mean who gave you (the humans) right to kill animals
if you think it is by god then if your relative got murderd by mr.A then mr.A also has a right to roam free in the world just like you animal killer/eater.
Why different law then?

You are rather thick, aren't you?

That's precisely my point. You say that animals have the same right to life as humans. So since we arrest or execute humans who kill humans, shouldn't we do the same to animals who kill animals?

It was an argumentum ad absurdum from my part, to take your argument to its logical but absurd conclusion, to demonstrate why the premise is false.

Reductio ad absurdum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reductio ad absurdum - RationalWiki

If you are still too thick to understand informal logic, I cannot help you.

hahahahaha
then eat DONKEY and buffalo also

I see that logic is really not your strong point. The point was not that we eat animals because they are useful, the point was that there are other useful animals who don't get to be treated as holy despite being useful.

 

[janon]

............ 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.... .....

That's what I was telling @Indrani earlier. The vedic religion and early hindu religion are rife with references to the "good guys" eating meat, including beef. It was the later spread of jainism and buddhism that made vegetarianism the dominant cultural practice. And the during the revival of hinduism after that, the social practice was continued. It's simplistic people like her who look at whatever the current practices are, and then believe that that was always the case, or that those were some universal laws for the religion. No it wasn't, and if she actually spends time reading historic documents and religious scriptures instead of being outraged on behalf of her religion on PDF, she might actually learn something.

@Indrani : Indra enjoying some choice beef in the Rigveda:

13 Wealthy Vrsakapayi, blest with sons and consorts of thy sons,
Indra will eat thy bulls, thy dear oblation that effecteth much. Supreme is Indra over all.
14 Fifteen in number, then, for me a score of bullocks they prepare,
And I devour the fat thereof: they fill my belly full with food. Supreme is Indra over all.

I can show you innumerable examples from the vedas, upanishads and brahmanas of mortals and immortals, deities and sages, brahmins and others all eating meat, including beef. Yes, it is an undeniable truth that vegetarianism was accepted on a large scale due to the advent of buddhism and jainism, and NOT vedic or upanishidic hinduism. Ahimss was not a "founding principle" of hinduism, and in fact there are no founding principles. Your name calling and protestations with no data to back you up simply appears to be all "sound and fury, singnifying nothing."

@Indischer

 

[bitter_but_better]

You are rather thick, aren't you?

That's precisely my point. You say that animals have the same right to life as humans. So since we arrest or execute humans who kill humans, shouldn't we do the same to animals who kill animals?

It was an argumentum ad absurdum from my part, to take your argument to its logical but absurd conclusion, to demonstrate why the premise is false.


If you are still too thick to understand informal logic, I cannot help you.


I see that logic is really not your strong point. The point was not that we eat animals because they are useful, the point was that there are other useful animals who don't get to be treated as holy despite being useful.

but i heard that meat eaters are fatter than veggies..
So who is thick?
Why you put animal to animal law here?
U r comparing humans brain to animal's..
Do animals have better brains than humans?
So if they eat other animals.. This does not indicate that we should also eat animals..
Humans brain level is equal to animals?
..
U r So thick to understand No?

 

[janon]

but i heard that meat eaters are fatter than veggies

Where did you "hear" it? And yes, meat eaters tend not to be emaciated, because they get a lot of protein in their diet, and not just carbs.

So who is thick?

The one who cannot understand that the word "thick" in the context referred to mental, not physical thickness.

From OED:

Thick:

1. Informal : Of low intelligence; stupid : 'He's a bit think.'

Why you put animal to animal law here?
U r comparing humans brain to animal's..
Do animals have better brains than humans?
So if they eat other animals.. This does not indicate that we should also eat animals..
Humans brain level is equal to animals?

Repeat - try to understand what the point of an argument ad absurdum is. The links provided earlier will help.

 

[SrNair]

Everyone can eat beef or pork ,infact that is their personal choice and freedom.A few years ago I have also consumed
beef even if I follow Hinduism.But then I avoid it not because of some enlightenment.But because of their treatment of that poor animals.And due to population explosion in subcontinent food items are not that reliable Be it vegetables or meat.
So we shpuld reduce our food consumption.Like that is mentioned in this article meat items should be reduced as maximum as you can.Otherwise worst diseases will infect you.

Some right wingers is attacking meat eaters in here .That is not fair because animal slaughter was a part of old ritual pf Brahmins.

 

[bitter_but_better]

Where did you "hear" it? And yes, meat eaters tend not to be emaciated, because they get a lot of protein in their diet, and not just carbs.



The one who cannot understand that the word "thick" in the context referred to mental, not physical thickness.

From OED:

Repeat - try to understand what the point of an argument ad absurdum is. The links provided earlier will help.

hmm you can not force me to accept your points.
Well I think my arguments are going above from your head.
Enjoy eating meat!
But I will encourage everyone to be veggie..
Some will understand some won't like you..

 

[EagleEyes]

Indian cows are not pretty for some reason.

 

[possumlot]

That's what I was telling @Indrani earlier. The vedic religion and early hindu religion are rife with references to the "good guys" eating meat, including beef. It was the later spread of jainism and buddhism that made vegetarianism the dominant cultural practice. And the during the revival of hinduism after that, the social practice was continued. It's simplistic people like her who look at whatever the current practices are, and then believe that that was always the case, or that those were some universal laws for the religion. No it wasn't, and if she actually spends time reading historic documents and religious scriptures instead of being outraged on behalf of her religion on PDF, she might actually learn something.

@Indrani : Indra enjoying some choice beef in the Rigveda:

Most of the vedic practices which involved animal sacrifice is forbidden in the Kal yuga. The Dharma-shastra and Manusmriti is very clear about not eating the flesh of animals. Especially cows.

Even in the Veda's the animal sacrifice was made to the gods and the rest eaten as prasad. It was regulated and was performed under strict observance of rituals.

Meat eating among the hindu's existed but it was on special occasions with the understand that taking a life of another to fulfil your own greed was a sin.

Meat eating existed even in Buddhism and Jainism ..... so much for your expert commentary. The buddhist and Jains do not eat meat for the same reasons Hindus do not eat meat. because it is sinful and it makes it that much harder to break free of the cycle of rebirths.

I can show you innumerable examples from the vedas, upanishads and brahmanas of mortals and immortals, deities and sages, brahmins and others all eating meat, including beef. Yes, it is an undeniable truth that vegetarianism was accepted on a large scale due to the advent of buddhism and jainism, and NOT vedic or upanishidic hinduism. Ahimss was not a "founding principle" of hinduism, and in fact there are no founding principles. Your name calling and protestations with no data to back you up simply appears to be all "sound and fury, singnifying nothing."

@Indischer

It is foolish to credit vegetarianism to Jains and Buddhist, especially since Buddha himself was a kshtriya and was a known meat eater Worse you try to imply Jainism is of a different origin and is separate from Hinduism. The fact is the the first Thirthankara i.e. the founder of Janism and the first man to acheive Moksha is from the Rig Vega.

"But Risabha went on, unperturbed by anything till he became sin-free like a conch that takes no black dot, without obstruction ... which is the epithet of the First World-teacher, may become the destroyer of enemies" —Rig Veda, X.166

Hinduism itself changed the practices of animal sacrifice and replaced it with vegetables almost 2000 years back.


Or your weird logic will now claim since the gods drank Soma ..... all hindus must become alcoholic to apart from becoming beef eaters

Some right wingers is attacking meat eaters in here .That is not fair because animal slaughter was a part of old ritual pf Brahmins.

....... you are an embarrassment to RSS.

 

[janon]

Or your weird logic will now claim since the gods drank Soma ..... all hindus must become alcoholic to apart from becoming beef eaters

Umm...Soma is not alcohol. There are many theories on what it is, and I have my own theory, but it is most definitely not alcohol. I just had to point this out in your post because the real Soma has a very interesting history.

Anyway, I'm really not interested in a continued religious quibble. It is a fact that hunting and meat eating were widespread in Vedic and hindu society, and it is a fact that the spread of jainism and buddhism coincided with the spread of vegetarianism. I am perfectly aware of their dietary laws as well, and the fact that Buddhists do eat meat. But my point was that ahimsa was not a central tenet of hinduism (it is for jainism), and that meat eating was not due to hinduism initially.

Now the larger point is this - religious laws do not matter for somebody who chooses not to follow them. Whether I eat beef or meat or not is not influenced by what a religious scripture states. Even if the first sentence of the Rig Veda and all Puranas was "Thou shall not eat beef because verily, cow is the most blessed amond animals" or some such crap, I would still eat my hamburger and fries if I like it.

Neither the vedas, nor the manusmriti nor the quran are part of the Indian penal code. So I will have a beer if I feel like it, I will have a burger if I feel like it.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Indian cows are not pretty for some reason.

Oh, that's subjective

 

[third eye]

Indian cows are not pretty for some reason.

In India ladies are expected to be ( & found to be) pretty not cows.