No Beef Or Non Veg in Vedas And Why I don’t eat meat? Part-1

All Reference From
Most polluting industry Because meat and livestock is one among the foremost polluting industries of the planet . Whatever ecological damage we face today are often attributed significantly to the present non-essential industry. (refer United Nations document on meat industry being culprit for global climate change , land pollution, water depletion and loss of biodiversity at Cause of hunger and poverty Because meat is explanation for hunger and poverty within the world. even as i personally hate being hungry and under-nutritioned, I feel an equivalent for many my brothers and sisters born from same mother earth. If I could have killed myself to satisfy their hunger, i might have gladly done so. But for all i do know , if people stop eating meat and adopt vegetarian ways, they might feed a minimum of 10 times more people using an equivalent efforts and energy. this is often supported the principle of energy-pyramid which states that the a minimum of 10 units of vegetation is consumed to organize 1 unit of meat by feeding the meat-producing animals. Refer any text on organic phenomenon or energy pyramid. actually for many of the commercially produced meat that humans eat currently, energy losses are much higher. Thus everyone who stops eating meat is feeding a minimum of 9 more people aside from himself. What might be a greater sort of charity than simply avoiding meat! And what might be a greater sin on behalf of me than forcing a minimum of 9 people to die from hunger because i really like the taste of mutton! Moreover, meat industry also significantly depletes water. Since I consider entire humanity as my very own family, I cannot sleep peacefully with the guilt of being a explanation for hunger and thirst for my dearest brothers and sisters and innocent children in my global home. Vegetarian alternatives exist Because in today’s era, I don’t see anybody hunting to survive just like the lions in Africa. Meat is just a non-essential addiction. there's no meat-product that a healthier vegetarian alternative doesn't exist. Meat is non-renewable Because meat is non-renewable. An animal once killed cannot grow more animals. But a plant, even when uprooted, can grow a replacement plant from its roots, shoots and seeds. Thus the hunger and thirst caused by meat-eating is far more long run and intense than that discussed earlier. Life is gorgeous Because I consider my life to be dearest to me. I consider lifetime of my near and dear ones to be most precious. I see all humans considering lives of their near and dear ones equally precious. If I kill any of them, i'm deemed a murderer because I snatched the foremost precious gift of life. So how am i able to commit an equivalent crime on other species who too have a face and brain like me, who also love their life such a lot , who also face an equivalent fear once they approach death, who also express happiness and grief like me and my dear ones? just because I don't understand their language or consider them less intelligent? By this logic, even killing of mental-patients should even be legitimized. Killing of coma patients should even be legitimized. Eating orphans should even be legitimized. And since they're not, even meat eating may be a crime of same order on behalf of me . Question: Then do you have to not stop eating plants also? in any case , even they need life, as proved by science. Answer: Research has only proved that plants also demonstrate similar processes and cellular structures that are found in animals. Science doesn't say that plants have a personality like animals. there's no thanks to prove that plants exhibit same sort of sorrow or joy or put efforts like animals. Plants don’t reproduce during a manner almost like animals or stop having the ability to breed more plants like animals after they're killed. There are significant differences in plants and animals, which is why even science of biology clearly differentiates study of botany and zoology. So I don't consider plants to possess a soul that feels “I am this mango tree”. This including reasons discussed above justify eating of plants, but not of animals. But albeit we assume that plants can feel pain like animals. Still, we will live without eating animals. But we cannot live without eating plants. We simply don't have a choice here. And by eating plants, a minimum of 10 times more humans in our family can get food to eat and water to drink that by tasting a beef-steak. Thus commonsense and basic humanity demands that we show mercy on those a minimum of whom we will allow to measure without killing ourselves and torturing our relations . Or else, same reason could also be given tomorrow to justify cannibalism also . Question: Even lions and tigers eat meat. So what's wrong if humans eat? Answer: Lions and tigers and other carnivorous animals eat meat because they're designed naturally to try to to so. If they are doing not eat so, they might die. they're not during a position to think, analyze, choose and choose what to eat, what to not eat, whether to dine in a plate or during a bowl, whether to cook or not cook, whether to combine 5 sorts of meat with some toppings or eat plain and raw, whether to cook in Tandoor or roast. Since humans possess this finesse, question of right and wrong is also relevant to humans alone. Now humans have a choice of food – animals or plants. there's 100% evidence that eating of animals causes hunger, pollutes nature and is at par with eating humans. Further eating animals is optional. So a wise person like me won't eat animals. On plants, there's controversy. People like me believe that they're chemical reactions and not souls with personalities. Others may differ. But in absence of conclusive proof for latter, it might be still wiser to prefer them for food rather than animals and be less criminals in worst case. Further we don't even have a choice during this case. Say you're forced to drink from one among the 2 bottles. One is confirmed to contain deadly poison. And opening the bottle will certainly kill 10 people . For other, there's a confusion thereon being poison and nobody else gets killed. What would you choose? a minimum of , i might choose the second bottle without second thoughts. Same is that case with eating plants – the natural, humane way of eating. Question: But i'm an atheist. I don't believe soul or God. So plants or animals are all similar biochemical reactions. Why should I differentiate? Answer: If you're an atheist or agnostic, there's all the more reason why you ought to eat plants but not animals. Because I assume you admit that you simply are a person's . And being a person's , I assume, you agree that hurting other humans isn't acceptable in any rational society. I assume that you simply love your fellow citizenry . I assume you think about humanity to be your circle of relatives . I assume you look after each and each innocent person . And hence, I assume you'd want to stay a minimum of 9 people hungry and thirsty while you relish on chicken-tikka. And you'd not like our future generations to be permanently diseased and in poverty just because we've been screwing up the environment. I assume that you simply indeed love your children and would like to gift them with blessings than curse them with hatred. If my assumptions are correct, then an atheist must be frontrunner for “Say No to Meat” campaign. If my assumptions are wrong, then even eating up an atheist is equally justified. Question: Then even domestication of animals and drinking milk should be crime? Answer: Well, these are ambiguous topics. There are often views and counter views. One can discuss and debate on these. But no matter that, a minimum of this is often certain that if these were to be crime, then killing of animals is sure to be a criminal offense of much muchbhigher magnitude. So a minimum of we should always avoid conducting such great crimes against nature, humanity and animals, albeit we differ on these few issues. For example, we cannot justify killing of citizenry on pretext that a lesser crime called ‘corporate fraud’ isn't clearly defined in law. for somebody who raises an issue that domestication of animals and drinking of milk also are crimes, there's all the more reason why such an individual should be torch-bearer of movement for compassion on animals and promote vegetarianism. Question: what is going to I eat if i'm during a place where I only get meat? for instance , if i'm stranded on an island or am in Antarctica. Answer: this is often a really interesting question! Tell me, what percentage times you've got actually been in Antarctica or are stranded on an island like Robinson Crusoe? This very question implies that you simply agree that EXCEPT once you are stranded on an island or an area where you want to eat meat to survive, altogether other situations, you ought to not eat meat. OK So we offer you this concession. once you become Robinson Crusoe , eat meat if you indeed believe so. But 99.9999% of human inhabitations and situations don’t demand you to be a Robinson Crusoe! You get ample non-meat food in most locations where humans live as a society. in any case the animals they eat also eventually need to eat plants. (All food-chains do begin with plants. there's no animal that converts solar power into bio-energy. Only plants can do this .) Question: What about eggs? Eggs are good for health and even government promotes eating of eggs. Answer: Government is additionally mired in scam charges. simply because government promotes something doesn't make it rational. Had that been the case, there would are never a movement against scams and for change of governance! Coming to eggs, have you ever ever been during a poultry farm? The way these eggs are produced by ruthlessly torturing the chickens can raise your hairs (assuming you've got compassion). Further, it's one among the foremost unhygienic locations. If you think about that humans should even be motivated to eat excreta after picking from commode and serving on a gorgeous plate, then perhaps you've got a minimum of one lame reason to defend egg-eating. Because the foremost modern and expensive egg-farms are not any more hygienic than a unclean toilet during a dirty bus-stop of Karachi. (By the way, the foremost hygienic of the meat-farms are more dirty than you'll imagine.) Also, there's no special nutrient in eggs that's not available in plants in ample. actually eggs don’t even compared to be termed nutritious compared to common fertilizer . Eating pulses would be a way wiser and nature-friendly option than invite diseases and destroy environment for eating womb of a bird. Question: If we stop eating animals, won't their numbers get older and fill the whole earth? We must kill animals to preserve natural balance. Answer: this is often perhaps the cutest cruel question I even have ever heard in my life. Cute because it seems as if an innocent child who first learnt about nature in his pre-school has framed the question. Cruel because one is attempting to project himself as Robinhood who kills to save lots of the planet! But let’s face the truth . what percentage folks actually eat animals due to our genuine concern for nature? what percentage folks are indeed environmentalists? Or is it merely tingling of our taste-buds that we would like to satisfy by hook or crook? Coming to facts, this argument would are valid had humans as a race would are eating meat exclusively through hunting like lions and tigers. Now lions and tigers don't create farmhouses to rear deer and sheep in order that they will have a ready supply of food. Humans on contrary have created an enormous commercial industry to supply meat-providing animals then kill them to fulfil their tastes. 99% of humans actually GROW the animals they kill. And in process of this growth, they destroy the character like anything. Thus this cruel question puts the enquirer at par with Osama bin Laden who justifies his terror attacks as service to humanity! (This may be a hard truth that the majority terrorists seriously believe that they're serving humanity and God by killing others!) By the way, humans don't eat all the animals and birds. Humans don’t eat carnivorous animals for instance . Most humans don’t eat crows, vultures, jackals or scorpions. Why they need not filled the whole earth then? Also, this line of thinking are often extended to permit cooking up terminally ill and aged humans. After all, we all are trained since childhood to cite population because the greatest problem facing us. Someone who has studied ecology at even basic level won't give such unscientific arguments and invite ridicule. On contrary meat industry has endangered many species to extinction. So if preservation of natural balance of population be the overriding selfless goal, then don't think even a second to adopt vegetarianism. Question: To kill other animals may be a phenomenon . All powerful animals kill to eat. So what's wrong if humans also act naturally? Answer: First, as discussed earlier, no animal ever grows animals. No animal constructs poultry farms and butcher houses. They simply follow their hunger instincts on need basis. Second, the foremost powerful animals are primarily vegetarians. Be it elephant, or horse, or hippopotamus, or wild buffalo, or rhino, or gorilla. Third, animals also live nude, don't read poems, don't clean their parts after shit and don't do tons of things that humans do. They also don't cook meat before eating. If meat-eating was so natural for humans, then most folks would are relishing meat without using spoons and forks. Humans were designed to be intelligent. To be ready to judge and choose what's wrong and what's right. To be compassionate. To be loyal. To be rational. Thus, if indeed humans want to be ‘natural’, they ought to protect and not torture animals. And if this logic be considered seriously, then even cannibalism is additionally natural if practiced by powerful humans. Of course, there remains no basis for anti-corruption movement. in any case it's natural for the more powerful to trample those that are less powerful, as per the enquirer! But lets be human. Lets accept it, this is often a beast-mindset and not human way of thinking. Humanity is about analysis, love, compassion and urge to guard the less powerful. These traits alone make humans so special and different from animals. Question: Biologically, humans are designed to eat animals. check out our teeth, our intestines. We don’t have organs to digest cellulose like herbivorous animals. Hence are we not designed to eat animals? Answer: yet one more lame excuse to justify cravings of tongue. Humans are designed to be break away both herbivores and carnivores. Unlike herbivores, humans cannot digest grass. that's why we aren't grass-eaters. But unlike carnivores, we also are not designed to eat meat . So we don’t have huge canines like lion and tiger. Human canines are at the best good for peeling sugarcanes (Consult your dentist before you attempt so though. If you've got been eating an excessive amount of of junk, then sugarcane may peel off your teeth instead!). If meat was so natural to us, we might have naturally been eating uncooked meat. By chasing, hunting, killing and erosion an animal using fingernails and teeth alone. we might not have required to tie or imprison the animal then kill it using special weapons. No animal does that. On contrary, fruits and vegetables are often eaten uncooked. actually many health-regimes specialise in purely uncooked-diet. But meat demands use of fireside . the hearth is employed in order that meat is converted to a more acceptable form. lately a meat concept is on rage in some places. But medical advice is to possess it cooked to make sure there's no infection. And most humans find even the mention of meat very disgusting. in any case we were designed naturally to be not cruel. So if biology is your inspiration, be a vegetarian. Our brain, body, intellect and emotions were designed only to be compassionate humans. Question: But I sleep in a family and society where meat is predominant food. How am i able to suddenly stop eating meat and appear crazy in my group? Answer: this is often a more honest question. it's indeed a problem with many genuine honest people that are forced to eat meat thanks to peer pressure. The answer is to rethink an equivalent issue from a special perspective. Just assume for a second that you simply are among a gaggle of cannibals who want to eat your relations . Would you enjoy feasting with them and erosion leg of your daughter, finger of your mother and intestine of your brother with masala curry? A rational person considers all living beings as his circle of relatives . But albeit you think about all humans as your circle of relatives , still meat eating means you're killing a minimum of ten of your circle of relatives members. Thus, if we simply get thinking about the Mother Nature as our mother indeed, problem is solved. Then we look after Mother Nature like we look after our own mother. Then we are deeply touched at hunger and poverty of our own brothers and sisters across the world , and wouldn't be party to anything that creates numerous innocents die and suffer thanks to lack of food. So rather than being someone ashamed of your honesty, you become an agent of positive change. rather than fearing that you simply appear crazy, you are feeling proud that you simply are the foremost sensible. Question: Does it mean all meat-eaters are murderers and will be hated? Answer: Technically, first a part of the question is yes. Anyone who is in anyway instrumental to death of an innocent is indeed a culprit. But we disagree that they ought to be hated. Meat-eating may be a cultural issue today. Cultural issues are tackled through sensitisation and awareness and not through Talibanization and hatred. Remember, the whole foundation of movement against meat-eating lies in compassion and genuine concern for all living beings. So we should always eradicate this brutal practice through humane means. We do agree that law should be appropriately formulated to discourage meat-eating and promote healthy environment-friendly human-friendly habits like plant-eating. But not through any feeling of hatred towards anyone. We all humans are one single family. we should always love one another and encourage one another for improvements. So albeit you eat meat, I still love you as a mother loves her new-born calf. which is why I appeal to you to mention to not meat. Question: What would then happen of numerous meat-rearing farms and industries? wouldn't it not cause people in these industries to become unemployed? Answer: No, they might become even more productive. rather than meat, if they begin producing fertilizer , they will feed a minimum of 10 times more people with same investments. And hence this is able to boost the economy like anything and convey prosperity to all or any . And future generations will thank them for gifting them a less-polluted environment and a less-hungry life. Question: If meat-eating was so unnatural, why humans started eating meat in first place? Answer: precisely the same question are often posed for crimes like murder, fraud, racism, gender-discrimination, terrorism and rape. Any evil breeds on ignorance and lack of education. albeit you check out Bible, it states that originally all humans were plant-eaters (Genesis 1.29 for example). Vedas – the oldest books known to humanity – vociferously suggest non-meat diet for humans. the primary mantra of Yajurveda itself begins with an advise to guard the animals. Over ages, thanks to lack of wisdom, lack of development, violent periods etc, there was an incentive to focus only on immediate needs than think smartly. Or blindly ape old customs in name only of faith or culture. Hence meat-eating became as prevalent as gender-discrimination or racism etc. When we plan our present and future, we aren't in the least bothered about why we didn't do something in past. We simply rationally evaluate the advantages in present and future, and plan accordingly. that's why we use laptops, speak on mobile phones, watch TV and travel in planes and trains albeit human civilisation never had these ever before. What we should always be bothered today isn't why something happened in past. we should always instead specialise in what we'd like to try to to immediately to save lots of our lovely planet and convey nourishment for teeming billions that face punishment for our cravings of tongue. we should always specialise in what we must do today to not be a villain torturing our own lovely children tomorrow. Question: i assumed you'd argue as animal-rights activist and that i would question why you're not being a plants-right activist. You instead started arguing as human-rights activist. How do I counter you then? Answer: 1. The way Supreme Lord has designed this world, if one genuinely starts caring for humans alone, then look after animals would contribute automatically. in any case this is often just a marvellously symbiotic world where everything is interrelated. You revisit what you give. 2. Why does one got to counter something which is so obvious and intuitive? allow us to admit that meat-eating may be a social-evil that thrives from dark-ages like gender discrimination, racism etc. it's few century ago that we gave voting rights to women. Racism and casteism were legally uprooted few few decades ago. Still movement against these evils continue. So we aren't as evolved as technological advances may make us believe. allow us to take meat-eating as next evil to tackle, given the appalling situation of environment and given the poverty statistics of the planet . we should always realise that every bite of meat we relish makes one poor die somewhere in world. And making earth closer to hell for our youngsters whom we love the foremost . 3. For those that indeed are rational and compassionate, this is often indeed also an animal-rights issues. We inherited this tribal mentality somehow that the entire world is meant exclusively for us – the humans. This lust made us destroy the environment and begin considering the whole earth as our personal consort. And within last century, things has turned so worse that scientists are now worried about what would happen about our basic necessities of food, land and water in times to return . In medieval times, the lust made us to disregard women as inferior to men in name only of even religion. Women, like animals, were considered by many priests to possess no soul. Others considered them to be half-intelligent than men and impure. Many people , like “blacks” were considered fit be slave alone. Then in previous couple of decades, the enlightened ones took a journey backwards to rectify the blunders. We thus uprooted racism and casteism. We started considering women as adequate to men in social, intellectual and political rights. And now it's time to require the journey a step further and show our concern for animals also . of these concerns – human-rights, gender-rights, animal-rights – are a part of same spectrum and caused out of same ignorance in human mind. therefore the evolved ones should work to require this next step. And even those societies that are yet to try to to their homework on gender-rights and human-rights also could expedite their progress if they holistically incorporate animal-rights also . But albeit they are doing not, the damaging situations of today force any rational person to embrace animal-rights. As a way to fulfil demands of grave human-rights issues like poverty of teeming billions and damage of environment guaranteeing a dangerous future for our youngsters . So don't counter the sunshine of truth. Be honest, be humble and be rational. Love others as you expect others to like you. the smallest amount you'll do to showcase your love for your own brothers and sisters and youngsters of future is to exchange that chicken-soup with tomato-soup. Be human, love humans. Say no to meat! And remember, you revisit what you give. PS: We didn't take up the difficulty of health hazards of eating meat. This has been amply covered in many researches. To summarise, meat eating is explanation for dreaded diseases like swine influenza , mad cow and bird flu. It increases risk of cancer, heart condition and diabetes. A habit that takes innocent lives, promotes hunger, destroys way forward for children cannot bring positive impact in our lives. you can't meditate properly if you eat meat. Food has greatest impact on state of your mind, after your deeds. What we propose is to think simple and honest. In world, you revisit what you give. So give compassion and humanity and obtain back prosperity, health and happiness. Be human, love humans. Say no to meat!

Post a Comment