lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com
Tue Apr 17 18:50:32 CDT 2012
2012/4/18 Rajaram Venkataramani <rajaramvenk at gmail.com>
> On Tuesday, April 17, 2012, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 00:23, <rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> But here you are, who claims to be a vaidhika, who says that animals can
>>> be brutally slaughtered without chanting mantras in a vedic yajna.
>> Did I say this !!??
> Yes. You supported common people eating meat - remember at least your
> posts. None of them do Vedic yajna.
To say none of them does yaGYa needs sarvaGYatvam.
> And calls me a buddhist! You can't show one mandatory paka yajna where
>>> animals are killed and hence your argument is shunya.
>> There are yaGYa-s of great importance which need pashu.
>> Moreover, I already replied your this line of thought.
> You are not telling something I didnt say. Vedas prescribe yajnas
> involving animal sacrifice when and only when it for a higher good - not
> for selfishly satisfying the palette.
Even higher goods are for self and so are selfish in nature. Anything which
is prescribed in veda-s and has a phala needs a adhikArI and adhikArI is
that which has phala-kAmanA essentially. So, any yaGYa including
prANAgnihotra is selfish in nature. Then why to hate eating meat ?
> But I won't call you a Buddhist because they will feel disgraced - at
>>> least they follow their tradition.
>> Don't always go personal. I didn't say that you are a bauddha. Find it
>> anywhere in my post. I just said that your stance is that of bauddha-s.
> You have not shown one instance where my position is wrong or at variance
> with Vedic conception or in line with Buddhist stance. In my response to
> Sri Sunil, I even argue that Busdhist conception of monks not seeing animal
> slaughter is selfish. Calling my stance Buddhist is no different to calling
> me Buddhist (on this).
OK. It's justified now.
Moreover, how could any person, having understanding of shAstra-s, show you
anything as you are not counting their words at all.
> And don't use too harsh language. It's not first time that you are using
>> rough language.
> You are bothered about harsh language but what about harsh treatment to
> animals? I did not use any harsh language. I just said that one who
> supports the mass slaughter is a-vaidhika. I hold that position.
When you are not bothered about pain arising from your words, why should I
bother about killing of animals which supported by veda-s and opposed by
I never said that 'mass slaughter' is vaidika or avaidika. I just said that
eating meat has basis in smR^iti-s and killing animals at places is
supported by both veda-s and smR^iti-s.
Anyway, I give up here. Best wishes for your studies and debates.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list