Dear Sri Nara
nice!!!
The reason given for refraining from meat is certainly not compassion for anything, meat has been labeled not-satvik by the Brahmins in the
post Vedic period, probably to show they are
one better than the vegetarians in the south.
The two points which I wish to contest are Sri Nara's speculation of time and purpose. Per Sri Nara it is post vedic and as a show off of being one better than the vegetarians in the south.
Sri Nara's speculation can be easily rebutted by another speculation by me that mad cow's disease was the reason for abandoning meat by the brahmins. The point of bringing in north india and south india division shows just how much one is aligned with dravidian supremacist philosophy.
I am appending herebelow the excerpts of Vedic Hinduism paper by M. Witzel & S. W, Jamison in 1992. It clearly shows that the concept of "papam" and "karma" are the reasons for the change of stance from ritual sactifice to the concept of ahimsa. The vedic brahmins did not need any lessons from buddhists or dravidian supramacists. The concept had crystallised even before the vedic people moved into the Bihar state area of present day India and in the
middle vedic period
QUOTE :
1. An important point in
middle Vedic thought is the problem of how to
avoid evil (agha, enas, påpa, on the last word, see Das 1984) and pollution. In
fact, this wish, -- and not the avoidance of violence as such, as Heesterman will
have it -- can be seen as the motivating force underlying much of the ritual
reform that took place at the beginning of the period. The little studied myth of
Indra cutting off the head of Dadhyañc illuminates the concern of the main
acting priests in ritual, the Adhvaryu priests, of avoiding direct involvement in
killing, as exercised by them in ritual. They fear pollution by påpa, the "evil" of
being stained with blood and being "touched" by death (cf. the concept of
meni) but they do not object to killing and force as such. Rather they delegate
these actions and substitute another person and avoid direct "contact".
The tale has become main myth of justification of the priestly class
(Witzel 1987b, n. 103): The Aśvin, doctors and latecomers to the ritual of the
gods, become their Adhvaryu priests, after having gained the secret of the (cut
off) head of the sacrifice. They did so after hearing about it from Dadhyañc,
whose head they had replaced with a horse's head as to avoid his killing
by Indra as punishment for divulging this secret. Indeed, in ritual, the killing of sacrificial
victims is done outside the sacrificial ground by helpers, and it is not even
referred to overtly. The animal is "pacified" (śam). This line of thought is in need
of a detailed treatment.
2. If we can indeed trace a development in "philosophy", then it is the
gradual increase in importance of the idea of a second death and of retribution
for one's action in this world (Schmidt 1968). These ideas occur only in late
BråhmaNa passages (and mostly in the eastern parts of North India, e.g.
punarmrtyu, (see Witzel 1989a). While ritual was believed to provide enough
power to eliminate the evil incurred by killing (a fear noticeable already in the
Rgvedic horse sacrifice), this concern now becomes more of a problem: every
action has its automatic consequence and thus the killing of an animal produces
"evil" ("guilt" is not appropriate, as it is a later, moral term applicable only to
karmic concerns). Indeed, in the late BråhmaNam as the concept of a reversal of
fortune in the other world occurs several times.
In the vision of Bhgu, the son of VaruNa, (ŚB 11.6.1) and at other
locations (Schmidt 1968) there emerges the idea of a reverse world where
animals devour humans; this created great fear in Bhrgu, which must be
indicative of what Vedic man felt at this point. In addition, the concept of a
scale on which all of men's deeds are weighed after death is also found (in ŚB) for
the first time (see below). These are new ideas, and the way at least one of them is
introduced is indicative of their singularity: as a vision of Bhrgu, the son
of the highest gods, VaruNa
UNQUOTE
If anyone is willing to quote sources which clearly stipulate what Sri Nara has contended and/or positively repudiates what M/s Witzel and Jamison have stated I am willing to change my opinion. Please note that this paper was published in 1992 and has taken into account pros and cons or contradicting view points existing then. So quotation of paasssages or excerpts of other authors published prior to 1992 have very limited scope.
Regards
