Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
प्रतिवाद: श्रीराम मांस नहीं खाते थे | Counterview: Śrī-Rāma did not eat meat | Hin
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 сер 2024
- क्या श्रीराम पशु-पक्षी का मांस खाते थे? वाल्मीकि रामायण के कुछ श्लोकों के आधार पर अनेक अनुवादकों और कईं टीकाकारों का मानना है श्रीराम पशु-पक्षी का मांस खाते थे।
परन्तु इसके ठीक विपरीत रामायण के एक प्रमुख प्रकाशक (गीताप्रेस), एक प्रसिद्ध टीकाकार (शिवसहाय) और कुछ आधुनिक विद्वान् (डॉ. रङ्गन्) का मानना है श्रीराम पशु-पक्षी का मांस नहीं खाते थे। आइए आज जानें इस प्रतिवाद को।
0:00 परिचय
2:11 मांस शब्द का फल का गूदा अर्थ भी है
2:55 महाभारत: श्रीराम ने कभी मांस नहीं खाया
4:36 डॉ. रङ्गन्: रामायण में मांसभक्षण-श्लोक प्रक्षिप्त
13:12 शिरोमणि टीका: रामायण में मांस का अर्थ वन्यफल
29:57 उपसंहार
CONTRIBUTE:
You can contribute towards video production and editing costs and help in the generation of more such content.
UPI ID (Google Pay India/PhonePe): sunaama@icici, sunaamaqr@icici
NEFT/IMPS details: Account Number: 697905600175
Account Type: Current
Beneficiary Name: Sunaama
Bank Name: ICICI Bank
Branch: Mumbai - Chandivali - Lok Milan
IFSC Code: ICIC0006979
SWIFT Code: ICICINBBCTS
MICR Code: 400229180
आप जैसे विद्वान समाज जब भी दिग्भ्रमित होता है, समय समय पर आप विद्वान पुरुष समाज का मार्गदर्शन करते हैं। आपको सहस्त्र बार प्रणाम। जय श्री राम।
ye khud hi bharmit hai....aise har shabd ka matlab kuchh bhi nikaal lo
@@user-br3ed6cx9ntumhe sanskrit aati hai??wo sanskrit ke e scholar hai,tumhe aati hai sanskrit??apni credibility batao iss topic pe??
@@Rakshita442 aati hai...mujhe jo maanana hai main vo maanunga...unko maans ka matlab phal ka gooda maananaa hai vo maanein...aap meri credibility ki chhodiye pahle khud aapne jitne ghalat shab likhein hain unhein dekhiye...dhanyvaad
@@user-br3ed6cx9n aree toh tum video banake sabit karo ki ram maans khate the,yaha pe comment me veer kyun ban rahe ho??tumhe aati hai sanskrit??mere Bhai se sanskrit pe debate karoge unhe bhi sanskrit aati hai..
Dhanyawad nityanand ji, for your effort, you continue to inspire to learn Sanskrit and why so, because of the misleading narrative in the mainstream.
राम जी तो सबसे पवित्र,दयालु करुणामय सोच भी नही सकते वेज न रहने का।
In Malayalam we say mamsam for fruit pulp
😊 सभी प्रियजनों से अनुरोध है कि यदि कोई व्यक्ति हिन्दी भाषा के शुद्धिकरण के लिए इतना प्रयास कर रहा है; तो हमारा भी यह कर्त्तव्य बनता है कि हम साधु हिन्दी में टिप्पणियाँ लिखकर उनका उत्साह-वर्धन करें! 🙏🏽 आप जनों से विशेष अनुरोध है कि कृपया हिंदी लेखन में रोमन अथवा लैटिन लिपि का उपयोग न करें।
😮😮maams गुदा ही है फल का।।यह बोध रहा मुझे। जय श्री राम। आभार । बहुत।
Jai Shree Ram 🙏
सुप्रभात 🚩🕉️🌞🙏🙏 जय श्री राम जय सिया राम हर हर महादेव शिव सक्ति गौरी शंकर बाबा जी सादर प्रणाम बहुत बहुत सुन्दर जानकारी दी आप ने जारी रखें नित्य नंद जी सादर प्रणाम 🙏🙏✍️👌🎤👌👌💯✔️👍
Jai Shri Ram
जय श्री राम 🙏🙏🙏
It doesn't matter all I know Lord Raama is my hero and my Lord Shri Hari's Avatar❤
जय श्री राम 🌹🌹💐🌹🙏🙏
you are really doing job .. at this day and age when its very hard to find reliable and authentic first hand source + sanskrit scholar.
❤❤❤❤ Jai Shri Ram
Thank you so much. Due to the cryptic nature of Samskrit, which easily can be misconstrued, the knowledge was always meant to be passed down by gurus, and not just by learning the language which is the modern way.
Jai shree Ram 🙏🏻
गीताप्रेस का तर्क: यदि मांस की आलोचना की जाती है तो यह मांस है, और यदि इसकी प्रशंसा की जाती है तो यह फल का गूदा है।
अति सुंदर व्याख्या 🙏
प्रिय मित्र साधुवाद है आपको
Kya high quality video hai sir !
न मांसम् राघवो भुङ्कते न चैव मधु सेवते। वाल्मीकीय रामायणम् ५/३६/४१. अति सुंदर प्रस्तुति। यद्यपि आप सदा नित्यानंद में रहते है, तदपि आज विशेष तरङ्ग में है।
बहुत सुंदर नित्यानंद जी 👌
This must go viral... #sriram #ayodhya
बहुत शानदार 🙏
Hare Krishna
धन्यवाद 🙏🙏🙏🙏
29:33 आमीश् का अर्थ राजस्यभोग भी होता है और कई जगह इसी संधर्भ मे आया है (जब श्री राम कौशल्या के पास जाते है आज्ञा लेने तब वहाँ अग्निहोत्र हो रहा था और उसमे कई सारे फल भी थे और वह उस भोज्य को आमीश् कहा गया है और ये श्लोक भी पाठ भेद मे उपयुक्त होता है जिसे दूसरे पाठों मे तो सीधा सीधा राजस्यभोग लिखा है)
आभार
Jy,sriRam
नहीं तो नहीं 🎉 नमन दयालु हरि कृपा जी सबका सम्मान आपके विचारों के साथ है जी नमन दयालु।
'Flesh of Fruit' is also a well known English expression.
Fruits can be fleshy or dry.
No matter Shri Ram was veg. Or non. veg. He is our Maryada Purushottam, Prabhu, Raja, Bhagwan.
This is what they hate. Our immense and earth shattering faith in our Shri Ram. Never let it go, bhai. Jai Shree Ram ❤
@@InPursuitOfShriRam Shri Ram was totally vegetarian,But fools don't know the true meaning of words like Mansam etc. And valmiki ramayan was interpolated too
no one is saying that non veg. is bad other than vagitarian goons, why they feel insult to Ram when someone said Ram was non vegitarian?
What is Maryada?
ram is not a good character bro. He is very weird character.
He kicked out pregnant sita. He said very harsh words to sita. He doubts sita's character and tell her to go with vibhishan
He hates shudras. As soon as he knew about sambhuk's varna he cut his head immediately.
He was a coward, he killed bali binding behind a tree.
Ram sent surpanakha to the angry laxman , he knew laxman the one will short temper will do some thing to surpanakha
There are many more instances like these.
Namo Raghvaya!! Very informative!!
It's proven even by genetic studies that ancient Indians, including Brahmins, used to eat meat. Our Vedas, Smritis, Mahabharata and Ramayana talk about it in great detail. The animal sacrifice was prevalent in both Ramayana and Mahabharata times. The Vedas and Smritis give description of how the animal must be slaughtered, sacrificed and eaten. Meat could be eaten only after sacrificing it to the Gods otherwise the person eating that meat would be called a 'Meat Eater' (with negative connotation associated with it). Eating meat after the sacrifice was never discouraged in scriptures although vegetarian diet was always preferred. It should be noted that in Ramayana- Rama, Sita, Mlechhas and Asuras, all of them ate meat but only Mlechhas and Asuras have been called 'Meat Eaters' because they did not use to sacrifice it before eating. It was only after the advent of Buddhism that the diet of many Indians changed to pure vegetarianism.
Buddhism me Buddha khud pork meat khake mare the toh Buddhism me kaun sa mana kiya hai meat eating ko?? Mahabharat me Jin yagyo me pashubali hoti thi wahi pe uski ninda bhi ki gayi hai,kuch pada bhi hai??Buddha khud kehte hai pehle ke yagyo me pashubali nahi di jati thi aur Aaj ke time pe matlab Buddha ke time ie Brahmin yagyo me pashubali de rahe hai.
@@Rakshita442 First of all, I am a practising Hindu and a vegetarian and have read the scriptures. Whatever I stated earlier was based on scientific facts. The Indians' diet changed to pure vegetarianism around 2500 years ago. Before this time, the people were flexitarians (mostly vegetarian diet with occasional meat eating). Although Buddha taught Ahimsa, he gave permission to his disciples to eat meat, if offered in alms or is from an animal that has died naturally.
@@shashwattripathi8997 indus se jo fat Mila hai wo toh milk,ghee ka bhi hota hai toh wo meat khate the iss se sabit nahi hota,ye leftist ka failaya narrative hai..Buddha ne meat khana kabhi mana nahi Kiya..
@@Rakshita442 No. The dietary pattern is checked by stable isotope analysis which is done on the teeth. It gives very accurate results. This analysis tells that the Harappan people used to eat meat.
@@shashwattripathi8997 these pseudo-science lovers doesn't really understand the scientific explanation and science based tools done for research
श्रीमान
पशु बलि को बड़े बड़े पद पर बैठे संत भी समर्थन करते है(शंकर और रामानुज परंपरा के)। और केरल,तमिलनाडु,महाराष्ट्र,कर्नाटक में को सोम यज्ञ करवाते है वे पशु बलि को मानते है।
कहते है की यह ब्रह्म सूत्र मैं भी है।
यह बात मुझे बहुत पीढ़ा दे रही है।
The Valmiki Ramayana, an ancient Indian epic, does mention instances of hunting and meat consumption. However, it's important to note that interpretations and translations can vary, and the cultural and religious contexts surrounding these texts are complex. In the Valmiki Ramayana, there are references to hunting, primarily in the context of the royal Kshatriya duty. For instance, in the Aranya Kanda (Book of the Forest), there's a mention of Lord Rama hunting deer, which was a common practice among Kshatriyas for food and sacrifice. This can be seen in verses like Aranya Kanda, Sarga 16, where Rama goes to hunt deer for the sage's ritual feast.Another instance is in the Ayodhya Kanda, where Rama, while in exile, tells Sita about the life in the forest, which includes hunting and eating roots and fruits.These instances show that hunting was a part of the life of a Kshatriya like Rama, especially when living in the forest. However, interpretations vary, and some believe these references to be symbolic or specific to the context of the times. The Valmiki Ramayana is a complex and multi-layered text, and its understanding often depends on the perspective and interpretation of the reader.
You are useful tool of intellectual communist terror 😂😂 you know sanskrit which dharmguru said this nonsense
Thankyou chatgpt!
@@ancientminds199 they believe on chatgpt more than our ancient texts, acharyas and gurus😅
Not sure if this matters to some people, but it is important to know and get rid of any misinformation. Knowledge is important
I don't think we should impose the ethics of this time on someone who lived thousands of years ago. It would be no problem if anyone(especially a kshatriya) ate meat during thousands of years ago when agriculture wasn't that well developed.
Well actually, in India, vegetarianism was popular because we had fertile plains in the north & perennial rivers
So, eating of meat was never required for surviving. That's also the reason India didn't develop innovative techniques the way Israel did due to lack of water in their region; we remained complacent & continued with the age old techniques
Then the British came & ruined our soil
@@suketudanke9897 tell your vegetarian stories to kashmiris bengalis nepalis and mallus. theyll help put things in perspective for you. thanks
@@tehseenchoonawala5713 If you think that the situation today is what it was thousands of years ago then I have a bridge that I want to sell you 😭😭
India was well developed agriculture, westerners gave label that we don't know.
@@suketudanke9897not only British bro, we have been under attack for 2400 years since Alexander. So we have lost lot of things, we will regain that balance in 25 years.
Ayodhya Kanda, Sarga 20, Verses 29-30:Sanskrit :
मूलानि च फलानि च नित्यमाहारवृत्तये।
आहरिष्याम्यहं नित्यम् मृगान् च विविधान् बहून्॥ २०-२९॥
English Translation: "For our sustenance, I shall daily gather roots and fruits, and I will also hunt various kinds of deer."Aranya Kanda, Sarga 16:The Aranya Kanda contains descriptions of Rama hunting deer, especially in the context of preparing for a sage's ritual feast.
Very interesting indepth and well researched video on a controversial topic. Hope you make many more such videos.
Very important topic to talk on .
👍👍👍👍
very nice
What a timely efforts mahashaya! Atyanta krutagnya honge sanatana Samaja aapke uchit prayas ke prathi 🙏🙏🙏
Why this insane obsession with trying to prove the vegeterian credentials of the devas/avataras! When even in the present times 60-70% log at least has tasted meat, in those days probably the no. was even higher!
If shree Rama is not a vegeterian, then what's the problem! Its natures way that one form of life nourishes itself on another form of life!
There was never a time when human beings were entirely vegetarian and nor there will ever be in future as well too 😏
Many of these vegcelling acharyas and babas are to blame for this lunacy. There is no authentic scriptural source for meat = rajasik or tamasic.
Because no god will kill his own creation to satiate his carnal desire.
Anyone who is a carnist isn't a god but the devil.
@@19683 in Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa, Sri Rāma is described as a human rather than an anthropomorphic supernatural extraterrestrial god
Lot of valueable information,Thank you
मैं उन्हें ऐतिहासिक महापुरुष मानता हूँ, अगर वो मांस खाए तभी भी कोई फर्क नहीं पड़ता।
🙏
सच कहूं तो कोई अंतर नहीं पड़ता। राम अवतार ने मांस खाया या नहीं, क्षत्रियकुल में प्रगट मर्यादा और पुरुषों में सर्वोत्तम राम ने उस काल के अनुसार सर्वश्रेष्ठ अनुकरणीय अनुसरणीय उदाहरण स्थापित किए।
Excellent effort Mishra ji - you have blown away many cobwebs from the minds of confused Hindus while lambasting the detractors simultaneously 👌🏽🙏🏽
मर्यादा पुरुषोत्तम थे भगवान श्री राम इसी शब्द से यह ज्ञात होता है कि मांस भक्षण उनके लिए अनुचित है जय श्री राम जय हिंदू राष्ट्र
Thank you Mr. Misra for educating people. I wish people would start learning Samskrit and reading our literature.
Best❤
Thank you brother 🙏
The most simplest explanation is usually the correct explanation, if you have to twist and break the words to align it to the meaning you like that is going to be a fallacy.
If we begin to reject verses from our Hindu scriptures, based on our prevalent food habit and belief system, which are quite different from those ages, then I consider it as a dangerous trend. Soon we will be rejecting parts of the Vedas, Brahmanas, Upanishads, Smritis and Puranas. This habit of rigidity and imposition of our selective tastes over the documents of Rishis will prove disastrous in the long run. What fault is there then, with the politicians, who burn Manu Samhita at the drop of a hat? Purging our scriptures and burning them, are one and the same thing! We are considering ourselves as WISER than the sages. There are numerous instances of meat eating in the Vedas, Upanishads, Ramayana, Mahabharata and the Puranas. There are parts of the Puranas that are too dogmatic and consider other Puranas, as paths to hell! Dogmatism and rigidity are just bad.
Politicians are indeed correct for burning manusmriti
If meat had been there in ved - Gita , it's essence would've endorsed it- but patram pushpam is what krishna says - anyway its unthinkable to presume that Vedic rishis were immolating animals and gorging on the barbecued flesh
You are right. 😊
Yup atleast some of the intelligent comments
Chalo, koi toh samajhdar nikla.
Ancient people used to eat more meat. Peacock and deer meat were common among the royals. Sri Krishna’s bother used to consume all
But what about tasty beef bhuna? Should we give credit to Mughals for this or to brother of krishna?
@@universe6735 beef was consumed in India since Harappan times as the archaeological evidences suggested, so much before Mughals it existed here
@@universe6735 there is nothing wrong with barren cow or buffalo or even male cattle consumption. We can have jhatka meat of those not halal.
@@choudhurysaheb8326 what I am sad about it is I cannot lick azz of Muhgals for beef bhuna anymore . 😔😔
Its true that beef consumption was done once, but due to influence of Buddhism and then later Vaishanism it stopped.
सुन्दरकाण्ड में हनुमानजी सीताजी से कहते हैं:
न मांस राघवो भुङ्न्त्के न चैव मधु सेवते ।
वन्यं सुविहितं नित्यं भत्त्कमश्र्नाति पञ्चमम् ॥
(सुन्दरकाण्ड, षट्त्रिशः सर्गः, ४१)
What about the Golden Mriga story? Nobody would domesticate a deer.
What is this obsession with Vegetarianism? Hindus have always eaten non-veg. Stop this non-veg hatred.
Thanks. Just wondering if Kaikeyi ( like in RCM) stipulated ways of living during Vanvaas i.e. Tapas Vesh? Tapasvi won't be consuming Maams.
Purana up Purana Nam video ban aye guruji
Sir please make a video on ashwamedh yagna as well.
There is a guy name rami Sivan who made such claims about meat on Quora and I exposed him verse by verse and clearly it shows in Gita press version that he is not a meat eater. The sad part is many Hindus accept such information and keep quiet or use it to justify there own meat eating desires
मेरा मानना है कि यह प्रश्न पूछने के लिए यह सही वीडियो है। इसका संबंध अश्वमेध यज्ञ से है। क्या बलि के लिए घोड़े को मारना शामिल था? क्या यज्ञ के बाद घोड़े का मांस खाया जाता था? क्या रानी को घोड़े के साथ संभोग करने की नकल करते हुए घोड़े के मृत शरीर के पास सोना पड़ता था?
Vali argued with Bhagvan Ram about his reason for killing him, because he the Vanar’s meat was not eaten, nor his nails or skin was of any use….. Bhagvan Ram during his 14 years of vanvas didn’t eat meat but being a Kshtriya Raja was permitted but not regularly consumed….only Brahmins were strictly prohibited to eat meat….Why argue about Treta in Kaliyuga when hardly anyone is Satvik?
Mishra is a so called Brahmin... Not actual Brahmin....These people want to gain supremacy by showing that they are veg and hence superior...
Whats biggest quality of bharhmin....
Sacrifice.... Give importance to that... Ask Mishra what varna is he...
Otherwise read Vyadha geeta in Mahabharat where a kaushik Brahmin
is humbled by a butcher...
These satvic rajasic tamasic etc are basic laws.... It dosent exactly follow what u eat.... Its your charechter and vasanas... U can be perfect asura by eating veg.... And most of Indian ao called bhrahmin has amassed wealth in 20th century by serving Anglosaxon Mleachs.....
What did Mishras father,, his great grandfather did 😮
I don't care if he had eaten meat or not, he will still be our Ram. Let me tell you when I was inspired by ISKCON, I practiced vegetarianism strictly for 3 years, and I lost immense weight. Vegetarianism is not that practical unless you're done with your life and now a Spiritual seeker. I am Kshatriya by nature (not by surname) and very rajasik. Its okay to eat meat to gain strength, especially for Kshatriyas. They had to fight wars, so they had to eat meat. Remember, eating meat is prohibited for those who are seeking Moksha not Dharma. Understand the difference. For doing Dharma and eradicate Adharma, we have to gain strentgh in any way possible. If not then people who follow a certain dessert man will subdue us. Hope my comment will be taken with open mind.
They used to hunt animals, not grow them in cages. This is the only difference. And it should not be consumed for taste of tongue.
See the fact is he doesn't eat meat and that's what the video is trying to tell ..
Secondly ,telling warriors can't be vegetarian is a void statement..there are multiple option in vegetarian food which can make you fit and healthy....Even in Roman Empire,the warriors known as gladiators are vegetarian...so don't say vegetarian food is not sufficient...
Maharan pratap was also vegetarian. He is a great warrior.
@@jitendrasinghpanwar5639 Kaha se padhe ho
"unless you are done with your family" lol my whole family is vegetarian from generation and I am 22 years old, vegetarian from birth. I am completely healthy 🗿
the mahabharat anushaasan parv reference is great. it mentions not only rama but also many of his ancestors and also Janaka, so it is very unlikely that Rama and Sita ate meat.
Vali also tells Rama while asking why Rama killed him - you could not have killed me for meat because dharmic people like you don't eat meat. Hanuman Ji also tells Mother Sita that Rama has not taken to meat or wine in her separation.
So we believe bheeshma, hanuman, and vaali instead of modern-day monkeys who said Rama ate meat.
Govindaraja in his teeka, as well as Swami Karpatri Maharaj in Ramayana Mimamsa have resolved the appealingly contradictory verses saying Sri Rama ate Medhya Maamsa only for the purpose of doing the ritual and not for self gratification. Tulasidas Ji also talks about Sri Ram doing Mrgaya as a Ksatriya.
Ramanandacharya as well as your own Guru Sri Ramabhadracharya, both in their Brahmasutra Bhasya 3.1.25 have justified Shrauta Bali. Ramabhadracharya in his Brahmasutra 3.1.25 quotes this verse from Bhagavat-
लोके व्यवायामिषमद्यसेवा
नित्या हि जन्तोर्न हि तत्र चोदना ।
व्यवस्थितिस्तेषु विवाहयज्ञ-
सुराग्रहैरासु निवृत्तिरिष्टा ॥
If you think ancient people did not eat meat, I would suggest you try backcountry camping for a month in a forest without much tools. See how many fruits or roots you can find. When you find no veggies and your body is in a severe need of protein, you will automatically end up eating meat. Humans are very adaptable, which is why we have survived for so long on this planet. To eat or not eat something is a choice but if you don’t have a choice then anything is good! Thus, I have no doubt that Ram and family consumed meat during their time in the forest. People who deny the obvious are merely blinded by their personal bias and have definitely never tried backcountry camping or know any science at all!
😅 Rama's strength and capabilities werent human ,In those times it must have been available in abundance since human population was lower .
And as it is mentioned in the video he took pledge to live like a Muni so we can't deny his own words
@@H00o0DA1No, protein rich plants aren’t as available in the forests at anytime. And those that were would be available seasonally. That too in low quantities. I am sorry, but it is difficult to be vegetarian in the forest, unless you bring cows with you for dairy.
@@abhiramn474 and you will deny Raama 's own word?
In the balkand's fourteenth chapter of Valmiki Maharshi's Sri Ramayanam,
पतत्रिणस्तस्य वपामुद्धृत्य नियतेन्द्रियः |
ऋत्विक् परमसंपन्नः श्रपयामास शास्त्रतः ||
Gita Press translates the पतत्रिणस्तस्य वपामु as 'tuber' or 'Ashwakanda,' while, on the other hand, all other translators, including Pandit Jwala Prasad Mishra, take it as a horse sacrifice. I am quite confused by this interpretation; could you please explain it?
Gitapress has just sanitized it considering the emotions and sentiments of poor hindus
Gītāpress has more authority because it is based on Commentary. In Sāttvika Yajña no animal can be killed. Aitarēya Brāhmaṇa, Mahābhārata (Anuśāsana Parva), and Skanda Purāṇa say this clearly.
Rājasika Yajñas animals are killed. Rājasika Yajñas are low and done only by lower people and Tāmasika is done by Asuras and Āsurika people by sacrificing humans.
The Yajña of Daśaratha was done by Vasiṣṭha and Vasiṣṭha was a Brahmrṣi and hence will follow Sāttvika Yajña. In Sāttvika Yajña Piṣṭapaśu is given hence Gītāpress is correct.
@@descendantofbharatbharatva7155😂😂😂😂😂
@@abhirupSinha Many translators (including Gita press) have done them, per their best judgment, with Vivek in mind (since many take Rama’s Kshatriya non-vegetarianism as a license for non-veg eating).
From Itihasa research perspective, those translations (where mansa/meat etc translated at the inner soft matter of the fruit, etc.) is incorrect.
@@descendantofbharatbharatva7155 namaste valmiki ji😆😆😆😆😆
I admire your videos but this one is biased and baseless. Why would Rama torture the animals unnecessarily!
Not unnecessary, but to scare them away. Animals attack humans in forests.
@@rudraveda And it became the duty of Rama to run behind and frighten them regularly? This sounds ridiculous.
@@kalidas1965 Most of the time yes. Look at the animals that are mentioned. And Rāma rarely went behind them. Boars were common and still ate in forests that attack humans or tribes residing.
The other animal mentioned is Iguana which is used to make thumb and arm guards for archery. Another one is deer which is needed to make the quivering rests and shoulder guards.
Secondly, if you believe in Rāma's divinity then all he does is give the Prārabdha of those Jīvas. Idk how is your point even logical.
@rudraveda From the great Swami Vivekananda to Professor Nrisimha Prasad Bhaduri many are devoid of kogical sense then. Thanks so much. Dogmatism and bigotry are the indications of the pseudovaishnavas!
ॐ नमो नमः
श्रीमान, यदि भगवान राम मांस का भक्षण करते थे तो वे फिर भगवान नहीं हो सकते हैं।यह विषय किसी टीका-टिप्पणी का नहीं है।यह लोगों के मन-मस्तिष्क को विकृत और विकार युक्त करना ही होगा।
फिर सबकी अपनी अपनी सोच है।
||जय श्री राम 🌷🌷🌹🌹🙏🙏|।
भारत के रामायण, महाभारत,स्मृति, पुराणों में बहुत मिलावट की गई है। जहा लोगो की भक्ति थी उन पर हमला किया गया है।
Bhagavan Ram agar mans khate v tha toh koi adharm nhi tha , wo kshatriya varn ma prakat hua or khastriya varn ma mans khana adharm nhi ha yugadharm ke anusar
सत्य है, परंतु "कस्यापि प्राणिनो हिंसा नैव कर्तव्यम्" आदि शास्त्रवाक्यों से, तथा "रामो विग्रहवान् धर्मः" ऐसा जानकर भी यही जान पड़ता है की भगवान भागवत धर्म के स्थापनार्थ ही अवतरित हुए थे और सभी वैश्णवों के लिए उदाहरण स्वरूप है, इसलिए प्याज लहसुन समेत समस्त अभक्ष्य पदार्थों का त्याग करके उन्होंने आदर्श उदाहरण प्रस्थापित किया।
There is a difference between eating hunted wild animals and birds, which is a perfectly accepted thing in hinduism, although a rajasik practice and therefore not really ideal for spiritual development, and on the other hand, killing domesticated animals and breeding animals for their meat, which is considered adharmic, because killing domesticated animals is like killing someone under your protection, which is quite evil.
So you want people to hunt in forest for meat?
Domestic breeding the right way to it and animals live much better as long as they live compared to forest where they strive for living all the time
in those times it was easy to find animals in abundance but today it's not
@@H00o0DA1 people can always buy from professional hunters just like they do in the case of fish. Also, jungle is reduced because large parts of land have been converted for pastures and agriculture. Not the other way around. Anyways, smaller animals can still be found in decent quantities. Besides, I am not telling what people should do. I am just saying what is not considered right in hinduism. Perhaps, this was the reason why a majority hindu population had turned to vegetarianism, when hunting went down and instead livestock breeding for meat increased in the medieval and colonial times. Not that earlier everyone was eating meat, but that percentage reduced even further.
@@H00o0DA1 "Domestic breeding the right way..."
That's what you think is right from a human-centric point of view, my friend. Ask any animal and they'll surely differ from you. Striving for survival is what comes naturally to them, and is the real joy of life for them, just like for humans, compared to just sitting in a cage all life long and then getting slaughtered without a fight.
@@000Aful in Arthshastr written by chankya it's Domesticated animals are mentioned
👍👍👍👌
In Sundarkand's 36th sarg's 41st shloka it is written that Sri Ram never ate nonveg.
Shloka:-
न मांसं राघवो भुङ्क्ते न चैव मधु सेवते । वन्यं सुविहितं नित्यं भक्तमश्नाति पञ्चमम् ॥ ४१॥
Meaning:-
'कोई भी रघुवंशी न तो मांस खाता है और न मधु का ही सेवन करता है; फिर भगवान् श्रीराम इन वस्तुओं का सेवन क्यों करेंगे? वे सदा चार समय उपवास करके पाँचवें समय शास्त्रविहित जंगली फल-मूल और नीवार आदि भोजन करते हैं॥ ४१॥
Pig means cat. Now I leave it to the discretion of whoever reads this to agree or disagree. 😢
Ram was a Kshatriya as per the epic and meat had been food since evolution of mankind
So what if he ate meat? He is Kaala, he is kalabhairava, he is Sankarshana, he is pradyumna, aniruddha and vasudeva. Anything he eats he can digest without dosha or klesha or shaastravirodha he is hutabhuk as in aham viashwanaro bhutva etc etc...There is no reason to get offended by such remarks. Yes God is omicient, omnipotent and omnipresent. He has no dosha whatsoever. So let it be.
Also. Is there a hint to this in the dialogue between Maa Sita and Shree Hanuman at Ashok vatika where Shree Hanuman says Prabhu didn’t eat meat since he was leaving in forest?
श्रीमद्वाल्मीकीयरामायणम् १,८२,००,००० (1,82,00,000)
वर्ष पूर्व ब्रह्मर्षि वाल्मीकि जी ने रचा है, यह आदि काव्य है , यह हमारा इतिहास है।
Guruji, Pranam. Now am little confused. I thought Samskrit is as per sutras (with mathematical precision). This is what I had understood for long.
My question, how is sandhi-vichhed happening creating different meanings? Thought if the sutras are applied properly, this should not happen.
In sanskrit, each word can mean different things because objects are named according to their characteristics in sanskrit. Therefore, things of similar characteristics will obviously have similar or same names. This is a practice found, although in lesser quantity, in most of the languages originating from the sanskrit language family. For example, in english too, the ripe part of fruits is called "flesh" only.
I ❤ Shri Ram And don't dare to demean him but I have one Question Abhijit chavda once Said In Ashvamegha Yagya The Horse Is Killed or sacrificed even eaten.
according to uttra khand It is mentioned that Ashvamegha Yagaya was Organised by Shri Rama when Luv Kush met with Hanumana.
Please Enlighten Me 🙏
I have only one question -
So when हनुमान said to सीता in अशोक वाटिका that SriRam has left consuming मांस in your विरह, हनुमान was saying that SriRam has stopped consuming fruit pulp?
If there are 20+ citations where Ram did not consume meat, and 6 places where there is mention of meat. It means like most mordern people they used to mostly consume veg and occasionally non-veg 🙏🏻
Usme gita press ka meaning dekho usme aate hain ki raghuvanshi na to maans khate hain na madhu ka paan kaete hain aise aap iit kanpur ki website se phaltu arth nikalte ho gitapress wale dekho na
हत्वा के लिए आधुनिक काल में "हकालना" शब्द प्रयोग किया जाता है।
Surely, Shiromani tikakaar was on a wild stretches of imagination when he was applying rules of vyakarna for he flouted the most basic rules of Mimansa.
Give example how he flouted the basic rules of mimansa!
Explain your point how did he flout fundamentals of mimansa?
Rama, Laxmana, and all the kings and princes of Raghu lineage were sworn to not harm, or, kill Brahmins, and yet they killed Ravana, Kumbhakarna, the sons and relatives of Ravana, who were Brahmins and descendants of Vishrava Rishi. If that can happen, as instances of special consideration, so can be with trifling matters as food. Don't you think?
Bad logic
Why do Ravan refered Indrajit as a kshatriya in Sundarkand 😏
Dekhiye, mere mataanusaar Shree Ram apne 14 varsh ke vanvaas ke samay jungalon mein se kewal shaak, phal aadi hi toh nahin khaate honge...Smaran rahe, ke wo ek Kshatriya the aur unse maans ka sewan karna apekshit tha. Ramji toh Sitaji ke aagrah par maayaavi sunhere hiran ka aakhet karne hetu uske peechhe bhaage hi the....toh kya usey maar ke, kewal uska sunhera charm hi toh nahin lena hoga...baad mein unke vichaar mein uske maans ka sewan bhi avashya hoga. Phir, ek Kshatriya hoke, apne Ayodhya ke rajmahal mein kaun sa saag paat, phal aadi hi khaate honge. Jin shraddhaaluon ko unke sambhaavit maans ke sewan ke vichaar se uljhan ya tilmilaahat hoti hai, unhen tanik tark aur tab ki sambhavnaaon pe vichaar karna chahiye. Is mein kuchh bhi anuchit athwa adharm / paap nahin hai. Jai Shree Ram 🙏🙏🙏😇😇😇
AAP MURAKH HE . OR LOGO KO BHI MURAKH BNA RAHE HE .🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒🐵🐒
हां बेटा तू चालाक है। जा पोगो देख
This shiromani tika guy seems to just ignore the most obvious interpretations in favor of whatever convoluted mess he wants to see. Why is this tika authoritative?
Even i felt d same
I am a vegetarian married to a non-vegetarian
It doesnt matter to me whether Shri Ram is a veggie/ non- veggie/ vegan/ eggeaterian
Toomuch defense is a sign of weakness
A debate we don't need and don't care.
पूजो मत खोजो , तुम्हारे भीतर ही छुपा है , खोज करने वाला ही महान होता है
There are no audio and videos and no first hand witness of all the events of Ram Laxman and seeta. Valmiki was not present with them at the all places and time. The events are told to him by different persons like by saints Hanumanji seetaji. Who knows what is truth. Any way so nice of you for correct interpretations and clearing doubts. Thanks
Maans ka tyag karke, matlab pehle khaate the ?
Bhagwan Ram chahen kuch bhi khaye aap kripaya bhagwan Krishna ke bare main bataiye
मुझे समझ नहीं आता कि हम लोगों को सफाई देने की कहॉं आवश्यकता है
Then how do we decide how to divide the word as dividing it differently changes the meaning
Well if its your parampara to do ninda of the balividhan(which has absolutely clear dictums/methods mentioned in both vaidica and tantrika ways) then you are clearly against those sampradayas which practice this as well as those acharyas from non-practicing sampradayas like vaishnavas who supported this.
Again what's the problem! You can eat an animal as food, but loose it in your pants when doing an utsarga to the devatas! (Anyways its not a compulsory practice)
The condemnation of animal sacrifice exists in Manusmrti and Vedas themselves. Only Rajasika and Sattvika people perform such rituals.
@@rudraveda
Yajurveda 21.41 - The priest performed sacrifice with the omentum of the goat
Rigveda 1.162.9 - May the leftover flesh remains on the knife also be unto the gods
Atharva Veda 18.4.42 - May you receive the flesh which I present onto you
Yajurveda Taittirya Brahmana - The sacrificed animal attains the realms of the devatas
Ashvalayan Gruhyasutra 1.24.26 - Madhuparka Ceremony cannot be performed without meat
PS: Now don't say the vedas have prakshipt(interpolations)
@@rushtyin318 I just wonder that were hindus so much fools, silly and irrational that anyone from anywhere can come and interpolate their sacred revered scriptures so easily
@@descendantofbharatbharatva7155 Śrīpati Paṇḍitārādhya in his Brahmasūtra Bhāṣya has said it's Piṣṭapaśu. And Manusmṛti itself says
कुर्याद् घृतपशुं सङ्गे कुर्यात् पिष्टपशुं तथा ।
न त्वेव तु वृथा हन्तुं पशुमिच्छेत् कदा चन ॥ ३७ ॥
If there is occasion, he shall make an animal of clarified butter, or an animal of flour; but he shall never seek to kill an animal needlessly.
You have exposed yourself many times now. You cannot even answer if you know Saṁskṛta or not let alone debate with me. You are a coward hiding behind translations.
only of tantr not veda*