Here is the truth, straight from Valmiki Ramayanam. Not in line with your view? Well, truth is above individual opinions. I will be happy if this video makes to open Valmiki Ramayanam and read for yourself. Atleast, this video could be a reason for you to read Ramayanam.
The sole reason Viswamitra took Rama and Lakshmana is to guard the yajna from the rakshasas as they were pouring blood and flesh in the yajna. What makes you think that offering meat into the yajna as the Integral part of the ritual. It is strictly anti- vedic.
@@sb-bw4lpOh so this is a new piece of dumb nonsense? Ok let me take it…. So you are trying to justify that Rama married at (8+12) 20 years age? Dasaratha says that he is just 12 and doesn’t have much knowledge about Dhanurvidya (Warfare) and asks Viswamitra to excuse Rama. So according to your dumb logic, Rama doesn’t know Dhanurvidya even after 12 years of Upanayanam? Dude, get over this nauseating piece of nonsensical interpretations about Ramayan. Go read it and get a life!
@Sigma01350 the idea is that you eat more and more sattvik food if you are a saint. But again if no other food source then they too can eat meat for their nourishment and sustenance
@@Anshulhesorry brother I again checked my facts. You are right. Even saints did eat meat for Vedic rituals as a prashad. I am now understanding the true Sanatan Dharma
Ayodhya Kanda (Chapter 20, Verse 29) In this verse, Bharata describes the hardships Rama and Sita may face in the forest and mentions possible food items: "Phalamoolashanau daantau tapasau brahmacharinau" Translation: "They will live as ascetics, consuming fruits and roots.
@@soumyakumar1049 "One who is intelligent sees no need in killing an innocent animal for the satisfaction of the tongue" - beauty of Sanatan Dharma, based on intelligence and logic.
चतुर्दश हि वर्षाणि वत्स्यामि विजने वने। मधुमूलफलैर्जीवन्हित्वा मुनिवदामिषम्।।2.20.29।। अमिषम् all meat, हित्वा abstaining, मुनिवत् like a hermit, मधुमूलफलैः honey, fruits and roots, जीवन् while living on, चतुर्दश fourteen, वर्षाणि years, विजने in a solitary, वने in the forest, वत्स्यामि am to dwell. Abstaining from eating meat like hermits and living on honey, fruits and roots, I am to live in the solitary forest for fourteen years. If he did not eat meat, why he abstained? This is also explained in the video.
What is the problem with Shree Ram eating meat?!! Why are people outraging over this? Bhakta Kannappa fed pork or pig meat to Shiva while the temple priest fed bel patra. People need to stop thinking like Christians or Muslims. Just they have to follow their books doesn't mean we have to do that too. We are not the same. All religions are not the same. We are a Dharma, They are a Mazab.
Bakta Kannappa fed meat to Shiva because of his innocence. Whatever he was eating daily he fed the same to Bhagawan. And Kannappa himself prays to Shiva that he doesn't know anything about rituals. It is like a child feeding meat to his father. It's pure innocence and lack of knowledge. So people who are knowledgeable, know the rituals, daily going to the temples cannot follow Bhakta Kannappa. Because we didn't come from sentinel island all of a sudden.
@ProjectShivoham I feel so sad for you ! You will never know understand Lord ram and Kashivishwanath (lord shiva ) ! Hari anant hari katha ananta ! Kalp bhed ! You are tellling people to read valmiki's ramayan but ramcharitmanas is the best book - greater than all vedas , upnishads, puran . Kashi is the oldest city , where lord shiva give moksha to people by chanting/giving ram tarak mantra to the souls . Kashi vishwanath wrote satyam shivam sundaram on the ramcharitmanas . Its the best for everyone it binds the entire sanatan ! It has chaupais written by lord hanuman himself ! You are a kalyugi shudra who will never understand the kumbh mela ! Chant sitaram , krishna and shiv any sagun sakar form of nirgun nirakar brahm i wish you get nirmal mati ( understanding ) .
@maruthimacha1847 then say it matters to you. Don't speak for Shree Ram. Don't force your biases on others. You don't speak for anyone other than yourself.
Meat eating is permitted for Kashatriyas and Bhagwan Ram was a Kshatriya. I don't know who has made this hinduism=Vegetarianism. There are some sects in Hinduism which are Vegetarian and some are Non-Vegetarian. If you are a vegetarian, then that's totally fine. And if you are a non-vegetarian THEN THAT'S TOTALLY OKAY. People don't read religious text and then say Hinduism=Veg.
These things came into Hinduism when things like animal sacrifice and eating were challenged by Buddhism and Jainism, then brahman came up with these things like Hinduism=vegetarianism and many others like cow is scared in the process of revival of the Hinduism.
@@Abhishek_Singh_OG Cow is sacred even in the Rig Veda. Buddhism has nothing to do with vegetarianism. Most buddhists are non-vegetarians. Buddha himself is known to have eaten pork.
Rama did not eat meat, and that is a fact. The Uttarakanda is not part of the original Valmiki Ramayana, and that is also a fact. The verses you provided do not show anywhere that there is a mention of meat consumption. Hunting for carcasses only occurred for sacrifices, rituals, or maintaining a balance in the forest. Below, I will respond to your attempts to portray Rama as a meat-eater. Additionally, it is important to acknowledge that the original six kāṇḍas (books) of the Valmiki Ramayana do contain later additions, and this is evident from the Balakanda (Canto 4, Verse 2). It mentions that the text comprises 24,000 shlokas and 500 sargas (chapters), plus the Uttarakanda. However, the version we currently have contains an extra 100 shlokas. Therefore, one should not simply read the existing version stamped as Valmiki’s Ramayana but should refer to the critical edition of the Valmiki Ramayana, which is closer to the original source. Now let me respond to all your arguments attempting to portray Rama as a consumer of meat. Here are your points and my answers, with evidence to prove that Sri Rama was indeed a vegetarian and the embodiment of dharma: Argument 1: Sita offered meat with cooked rice to the River Ganga (Ayodhya Kanda 52:89). Answer: Even in the English language, the term “flesh” (māṃsa) does not exclusively refer to animal flesh. According to the Oxford Dictionary, it also means the edible part of a fruit or vegetable. In Monier Williams’ translation, māṃsa can mean the fleshy portion or pulp of a fruit. In this context, Sita promised to offer 1,000 pots of sacred water (not alcohol-since sura can also refer to pooja water), different types of fruits mixed with milk (māṃsa bhūtaidena ca), and honey for making panchamrita. There is no mention of cooked meat or rice in the verse. Offering cooked meat to the River Ganga, especially in this context, is absurd and inconsistent with the customs of dharma. Thus, your interpretation-likely based on Western translations-is flawed. Argument 2: The hospitality of Maharishis involved flowers, drinks, and meat of different kinds (Ayodhya Kanda 91). Answer: While it is true that kshatriyas (like Bharata) were not prohibited from consuming meat, this does not mean that Rama, a dharma-mūrti (embodiment of dharma), followed the same practice. Bharata’s actions or diet cannot be equated with Rama’s. In fact, Bharata adored Rama as the ultimate symbol of dharma and even placed Rama’s footwear on the throne during his exile. Bharata’s reverence for Rama demonstrates that he looked up to him as a role model of virtue. Thus, the hospitality extended to Bharata has no bearing on Rama’s vegetarianism. Argument 3: Guha offered meat and other forest produce to Bharata (Ayodhya Kanda 84:17). Answer: Similar to the previous argument, Bharata’s consumption of meat does not indicate that Rama did the same. In fact, Rama explicitly told Guha (Ayodhya Kanda 50:44): “Know me to be under a vow to live as an ascetic, wearing robes of bark and deerskin. I am determined to live in the forest by eating roots and fruits only.” In the next verse, Rama asked for as little as what is fed to horses, which was satisfactory for him. This shows that Rama adhered to the life of austerity and avoided hunting animals for food or sport. Argument 4: While walking by the banks of the Yamuna, Rama hunted deer and consumed it (Ayodhya Kanda 55:33). Answer: The Sanskrit word “cheratu” in this verse is singular and does not imply that the deer was consumed. The actual translation is that Rama and Lakshmana drove away (or dispersed) many (bahūn) sacred (medhyan) animals while walking along the Yamuna. If we interpret this as hunting for consumption, it raises several inconsistencies: Why would many sacred animals be hunted in large numbers for food? Why is there no mention of cooking or eating in the subsequent verses? This argument is further invalidated by the fact that Rama lived on roots and fruits, as stated in other verses. Argument 5: Rama remarked that the meat was sacred, savory, and roasted on fire (Ayodhya Kanda 96:1,2). Answer: The Sarga after the 95th Sarga is considered Prakshepa (interpolation) by revered Acharyas for generations. In any case, the second Sloka that starts with “Edam medeyamidam…” means: Dharmapurusha Sri Rama stated, “This area is burned by Yajnic fire (Edam agninanishtapatham), this place is pleasant (swathuIdam), it is purified (Medhyam).” By stating all these, Rama seated himself with Sita. Notice that the second Sloka makes more sense when read with the first Sloka: Rama showed the river by the mountain to Sita (Sitam tham girinimangam thada). Rama showed the fruitful trees by the river (Giriprasena Mamse), being enthusiastic (Chandayan) while seated there. Argument 6: Rama and Lakshmana hunted animals for sport and consumed their meat (Ayodhya Kanda 52:102). Answer: This argument has a fundamental problem, and it is evident that you’ve taken the mistranslation of “Varaha” as another name for deer instead of boar. The Sloka has the word “Thathra,” which means “even though,” so it should be read as “even though they were tired of hunger.” True Kshatriyas are not removed from their duties even in the harshest situations, such as hunger, sleep, and pain. That’s why Karna suffered the pain of a worm infestation on his thighs to avoid awakening his master Guru Parashurama. Even today, hunters hunt certain predators for conservation and ecological balance. This is to avoid mostly preys from going extinct. Notice that the forest is still under Ayodhya's Jurisdiction and therefore authorities have the right to behold dharma duties and balance. As per the Sloka, the words used are “Mahamrigham” or “Dushtamrigham,” which include boars and three types of vicious deer. The word “Maharurum” is used to interpret a giant Ruru deer. Logically, why would someone hunt four different types of giant animals when just one large, 600kg deer would last over 100 days if consumed three times a day? Without refrigeration, a normal animal carcass would decay within 10-30 days. The correct interpretation is: having hunted down those Dushtamrighas, Rama immediately went near a sacred (medhyam) tree. The next Sarga (53rd), first Sloka, clarifies Rama’s actions right after reaching the sacred tree. Did he start cooking meat immediately? Any mention of meat at all? The Sloka says: “The benevolent Sri Rama consorted with the tree, after which he meditated on Sandhya and started advising Lakshmana.” There is no mention of a carcass being taken, meat being cooked, or eaten. Hence, it is proven again that Rama never consumed meat. Argument 7: Lakshmana Hunting Deer for a Sacred Offering (Ayodhya Kanda 56:26) Answer: It’s true that Lakshmana hunted a deer for a sacred ritual offering (Vaasuthuhomam). However, these offerings were part of rituals like housewarming or entering a new shelter (Ayodhya Kanda 56:25). What’s offered in a ritual doesn’t necessarily reflect the offerer’s diet. Hence, claiming this proves Rama or Lakshmana consumed meat is baseless. Argument 8: Offering Cooked Meat to the Devatas (Ayodhya Kanda 56:37-38) Answer: This passage mentions offerings of fruits, flowers, water, and yes, cooked meat, to Bhootas along with Vedic mantras. However, there’s no mention of the Vedas mandating meat sacrifice. Handling or offering meat in rituals does not mean it was consumed. For example, Dharmavyada, the butcher in the Mahabharata, sold meat but did not eat it. Similarly, this verse doesn’t prove that Rama ate meat. Argument 9: Hanuman’s Description of Rama’s Diet (Sundara Kanda 36:41) Answe: Hanuman describes Rama’s ascetic lifestyle to Sita, stating he no longer indulges in luxuries like “meat” or “Madhu.” Some misinterpret “Madhu” as alcohol. But if we look back at Ayodhya Kanda 20:29, Rama promises Mother Kausalya that he’ll survive on water, honey, roots, and fruits during his exile. Clearly, “Madhu” refers to honey or sacred water here, not alcohol. Further, Hanuman’s words in Sundara Kanda 36 imply that Rama had even relinquished fruits and honey, relying solely on roots, adhering to Vanaprastha laws. Rama’s promise to Kausalya is reinforced in Ayodhya Kanda 2:54-16, where he tells Sage Bharadwaja, “We are entering the forest to live on roots and fruits.” Suggesting he broke this vow is simply inaccurate. Many of these claims are based on mistranslations and misinterpretations of Sanskrit terms. For example:Words like gavya are misread as cow meat when they actually refer to products derived from cows, like milk or butter.Mahisha, often misinterpreted as “bull,” actually means “one who serves” in Vedic Sanskrit. Similarly, colonial-era translations have distorted meanings in the Ramayana. To conclude, the narrative that Rama consumed meat is based on mistranslations, interpolations, and a lack of understanding of the original Sanskrit text. The critical edition of the Valmiki Ramayana, along with commentaries from revered Acharyas, clarifies that Rama adhered to a vegetarian diet throughout his life. Rama's conduct was governed by dharma, simplicity, and ascetic values, which are incompatible with the notion of consuming meat. He explicitly stated his commitment to living on roots and fruits during his exile. Misinterpretations of certain verses, influenced by colonial-era translations, have propagated the myth that Rama ate meat. However, a thorough and critical analysis of the original text dispels such claims and reinforces Rama's adherence to a vegetarian lifestyle as part of his commitment to dharma. By rejecting these unfounded arguments and referring to authentic sources, we uphold the true essence of the Valmiki Ramayana and the virtuous character of Sri Rama.
all of ur "answers" are based on speculations and "bias".. bias of lord Rama being a vegetarian.. u cannot digest the fact that lord rama indeed consumed meat as a kshatriya, or that pashu bali and meat eating are indeed incorporated in vedic rituals, sacrificial altars can be found in harappa and rakhigarhi excavations.. u defeated the whole purpose of this video, that is to accept the verses at its face value.. i mean how stupid u have to be with ur "yes they hunted animals but didn't consume it" ?? tf they hunted the animal for then?? "bharata eat meat but that doesnt mean rama ate too" ?? even if i agree with this, then also it means that people did consume meat at that times and they were much more sanatanis and u and me and hence people consuming meat today should not be mocked... and pls stop adding translations like u please.. every word is a mistranslation but "mamsa" means fruit pulp only right?? i mean if mamsa means fruit pulp then what is the word exclusive for meat?? and if u forgot lemme remind u that "phal" is already a word for fruit
The problem is that many people don't know Sanskrit, so they rely on translations, which often reflect the translator's biases. It's like watching a movie review before seeing the movie itself-you end up influenced by reviewer's perspective. To truly understand the original meaning, it's essential to learn Sanskrit. I have no personal issues with Geeta Press, but they cater to a specific audience and adjust the interpretations accordingly. For those genuinely curious, I recommend reading the original Sanskrit Ramayana with a Sanskrit dictionary instead of depending on any translated material.
Becoming vegetarian is not about going to our ancient India roots it's about becoming more moral/ethical human being, back then we don't have any that we have today (it can be food, basics common laws, tecnology, transportation anything) but we are choosing what is morally best for us and for our surroundings. Being a vegetarian or vegan is a choice to be a better thoughtful person not just going back to what our ancestors used to eat
Amount of hate getting just for telling the truth. Meat consumption is never prohibited but just avoided by brahmins and other vegetarians.Even Brahmins used to eat meat. I think Ramayana itself have the story of Vaatapi . I myself am a staunch vegetarian but truth should not change according to our preferences
1: Only Brahmanas and Vaisyas were vegetarians. Kshatriyas and Sudras were meat eaters - some selected types of meats. Sri Rama was a Kshatriya. - They or other ancient Hindus did not eat Cow-meat or Pig meat. Only Fish and birds. Western authors translated Sanskrit words like "Dairy food" as Animal Food or "Cow meats".
Brahmanas were also meat eater specifically from coastal regions of vanga, Kalinga, and many more. Meat eating always was common it's just that north indians today are reminiscent of the cryptic buddhic Jain past nothing else. Also there was no rule for any Varna to not eat this or that anyone can eat anything
The Mahabharat states that Yudishthir as a pious king hosted banquets feeding the Brahmins where he provided inexhaustible quantities of meat, including all domestic species and supplemented by all species hunted in the forest, in addition to many many types of liquor described.
@Sigma01350 Please read Valmiki Ramayan when Hanuman meets Sita in Lanka, introducing himself as a doot of Sriram, doubting if he is an agent of Ravan, she asks him to tell her how Ram looks like. Hanuman says that Ram is dark skinned and Lakshman is fair skinned.
The issue with Vaishnavites is that they are trying so hard to portray Rama and Krishna as being vegan, which is historically inaccurate. Where Vaishnavites go wrong is assuming that Rama and Krishna followed Vaishnavism. In reality, Vaishnavism, like Jainism, is a philosophy founded by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in early 16th Century CE. Both Rama and Krishna were Kshatriyas and followed the Shakta tradition. It’s crucial to study the original Sanskrit texts with the help of a Sanskrit dictionary rather than relying on translations, which often distort the translations with personal bias.
I think you're mistaken-Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu lived from 1486 to 1534, so the 4th century BCE is an incorrect timeline. I am opposing nothing else but this, and to avoid any misunderstanding, I want to explicitly state that I fully support this comment except for the timeline.
Have you read Bhagavad Gita? Does Krishna mention Shakta tradition? Even in Bhagavad Gita Krishna talks about foods in the mode of goodness as being fruits, roots, etc... no mention of meat as being part of mode of Goodness.
@@sakshig6858 do you know basic science, humans were hunters and gatherers, not only gatherers, that means everyone has been a non vegetarian at one time or another. The real question is what you choose to become, at this era we do anything and everything we want, at our will. Why do you even care, tell me are you the perfect human according to bhagwat anyway? Then why tryna be the veggie ehh?? Okay, let me tell you something you can't deny, Lord krishna did consume milk products, and you know which industry is known for the most cruelty? The dairy industry... Now the question comes- should you be vegan then? Am supporting the vegans?? Hell no, you know what else science says? It says plants also have life, and they pretty much feel everything like any animal, they just can't express it in a way we understand. That means vegans support exploiting those who can't speak for themselves... Ohh shitt... That's really sick... So should you stop eating then? Hell no... You know nature made everything, and it manages everything too, that's why it made humans omnivores, that's why you have those two sharp pairs of canine teeth, we humans are meant to eat meat, so the whole point is I don't care if lord rama or lord krishna ate meat, that doesn't make them good or bad, this doesn't change the fact they were great... they just consumed meat even if they did, not cocaine... And being vegetarian or vegan won't make you something more pure than you're already, you're committing hundreds of other real sins everyday anyway... And if all this talk hurts your fragile ego, then dump your comments, I'm jobless anyway... And I don't like it when people admiring original leather purses, and fur jackets talk nonsense on youtube... And if you've read till here, answer me have you read bhagwat yourself, no need to answer me actually, just ask yourself how much greatness have you actually gained from it that you're discussing gods here? Imbeciles judging god... Poor souls.
Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
@@KrishnaKaliyuga Great point sir. The Gita Press one was such a let down for me, they clearly have an agenda and removing slokas and misinterpreting them as per convenience. The “Critical Edition” is published by whom? Would love to buy it? I went online iitk hosted Valmiki Ramayan site and everything said here contradicts Gita press
@rajdeepsaha5607 Critical edition was collected by Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute of pune. Iitk online version is good for offline hard copy you can check by Bibek Debroy. Gita press in it's older versions have the shlokas intact in later versions they have sanitized by removing meat related verses and interpreting as fruit pulp. 'Hatva' or kill cannot be used for fruit pulp
The very popular Ashvamedh Yagna is a horse sacrifice ritual in which the horse is sacrificed after one year of traveling. Ram and Yudhisthir both performed the Ashvamedh Yagna & Meat is permitted in the Shakta Sect, but it must be Bali meat. After presenting Bali to the goddess, only that meat may be consumed; no other meat is permitted. Bali is required for both Maa Kaali and Devi Durga; without it, Devi pooja cannot be performed (not daily household poojas). After Bali, the animal's soul takes a higher birth with Devi's grace, and the flesh becomes Mahaprasad. According to Manusmriti, Onion and Garlic are considered Amisa (Tamasic Food), hence neither onion or garlic is used in the cooking of Mahaparad (Bali meat).
There is a complete process of bali; only male animals can be sacrificed; before giving bali, the animal is worshipped; and the priest speaks the bhoot apasaran mantra into that animal's ear so that its soul can take a higher birth after leaving that body; bali sould be done in one go so that the animal does not feel much pain; if the weapon is missed, the priest will receive a lot of negative karma, indicating that the goddess rejected that bali. Bali is offered to the goddess not because we enjoy eating meat, but because it is part of the ritual; we only receive the meat as prasad, much as Shiva abhishek cannot be performed without milk. If someone is offering bali only because of his craving for meat or there is greed behind it, then bali has no value and is a sin.
@@VanaraVegeta There’s nothing fake in it. Bali pratha is part of Dharma whether you like it or not. You have been brainwashed into thinking these things doesn’t exist
See, I have no guilt, while you have less information and an existential crisis. You preach about saving lives while eating vegetables, which have their own lives. Millions of germs, other organisms, and thousands of pests have already killed in order to safeguard your gorgeous tomato. So, congratulations, you are a killer as well; but If you're that committed, then stop eating and instead drink water and breathe air. if you feel you are booking a ticket to paradise by eating plants, you know who will arrive first? A Goat.
This only eating vegetarian food is making us weak, normal people should eat jhatka meat. People on a spiritual path sanyasi etc should avoid meat. Watch neeraj chopra interview on why he converted from vegetarian to meat eater.
The more Dharmic I am becoming, the more meat eating I am becoming too as I am realising the vegetarian propaganda against Hindus being done by the vegetarian lobby. According to Ayurveda we should consume meat in limited quantities and different types of meat are recommended for different body types. Our diet should be a proper balance of veg & non-veg Also our scriptures never mentioned veg or non-veg food. Food is divided into 3 types - saatvik, rajasik and taamsik. Saatvik is pure veg, Rajasik contains some veg foods & some types of meat like mutton, fish, etc while Taamsik includes onion, garlic, mushroom and some meats like chicken
@@dv9239it's not nonsense. Jhatka causes least amount of pain whereas Halal causes direct suffering. So yeah they are different. Hindus should have food which causes least harm to the animal.
How can he fight a war while just living on fruits and vegetables. Not even milk products were available to him, muscle mass will drop. How can he fight without a high protein diet
I also feel the same, growing protein rich pulses and vegetables takes lot of time. While animals like rabbit and deer are available abundantly. It required great marksman skills to hunt those animals.
@param_jnana mathas are situated in important urban center ? Shankaracharya situated his four Mathas in the forest, you stupid fellow? He most likely hunted deer or other forest dwelling animals for food... Face the facts ... All Kshatriyas are ate meat, even Ramakrishna Paramahamsa ans Swami Vivekananda ate meat... Nothing wrong with it.. forcus on the lesson of their lives rather that what they ate.. Idiots like you is the reason why Hinduism declined
As you can see here that according to translations ram says that he will not eat meat in exile but as soon as he left and reach forest his friend offered him meat , the fisherman offered him meat , This clearly means that this meat word could be interpolation or mistranslated….
No.....in sundara Kanda sri hanuman describe the state of sri ram to Sita, that he doesn't eat or drink........ given inference on His food.... also certain description in the previous kanda says about hunts.. So, it was way of life Moreover Ram was a kshatriya...the present food habits of Brahmins in many parts of India now is veg. and sura is prohibited as a sin. This is only for certain communities.
In Valmiki Ramayan, Balakanda 20.2, Dashrath mentions to Vishwamitra that Ram is less than 16 years old. However, in another instance, Marichi tells Ravana that Ram was only 12 years old. This discrepancy seems intentional, as Marichi might have been trying to intimidate Ravana.
@@arunkumar-vx8ml He means that a smaller kid of 12 yrs is so fierce. Maricha does not know the age of Shri Ram. He simply might have mentioned "a 12 yr old kid".
@@shashankshorya122 16 was probably the age when a boy was considered an adult the time Ramayan was written so Ram being younger than that had to be mentioned just like people today would say under 18 and not specify the age of a minor
In Bengali Ramayana translation it clearly states that Ram used to go to ‘Varaha Shikaar’ regularly during the Vanavaas phase. I would think that Varahaa meat was not to feed the trees in the forest.
With my limited knowledge, only Kshatriya was allowed to eat meat as per shastra. Also, instances said in video meat consumption was at the time of rituals only and when bharata went to some Rishi's place... Now a days also it is easy to prepare meat and offer to our guest to please them (if they eat nov nveg) than making 4,5 items in veg for guests...
Kshatriya's were having duty to protect kingdom and its people. For the same, they have to roam everywhere and it may not always possible to provide enough food to the army so hunting would be best way to feed army...
Brahmanas were generally vegetarian, but with some exceptions. They could consume meat from Havishesha (Prasada) from certain Yajnas or from Shraddha. Sometimes they would also consume meat from Bhiksha, depending on the situation. Kshatriyas also consumed meat from hunting, which was a common practice to keep them sharp. Vaishyas could some times purchase meat from the market. Shudras could also slaughter domesticated animals and sell their meat. However, not all animals were considered fit for consumption. Now, although some varnas were permitted to consume meat in their own ways, the shastras encourage them to follow the example of the Brahmanas if possible and minimize animal suffering.
Excellent video. Newer versions of Raamayana leave out certain shlokas which talk of meat eating entirely; I know as I have two versions of Vaalmiki Raamayana at home. I cannot understand this obsession with making entire Aarya vartana and vedic culture vegetarian. Folks are commenting below that Manu smriti prohibits eating meat; but manu smriti lists which meats are allowed for consumption for different purposes. So does garuda purana and others. Mind boggling really.
Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
@KrishnaKaliyuga Shlokas have been removed from the full version of Raamayana from Gita Press itself. So, yes, I have two different, full versions. I also have 3 versions of Sundara kaanda from Vaalmiki Raamayana.
@@nagendrachemuturi9145 Multiple direct references for your information th-cam.com/video/JJZoGn7vLKA/w-d-xo.html&lc=UgyvrgV4vzhuTHkxBOh4AaABAg&si=tBjR3Hqkh3vIq8h2
@nagendrachemuturi9145 Thanks for confirming what we believed. Someone needs to debunk Gita press in this for safety of future generation who may not know. As I understand the older versions of Gita press had meat eating verses and newer latest versions it is removed. If a video can be done of Gita press removal of verses showing proof it will be helpful for future generations. None has right to remove shlokas which Valmiki wrote not even Gita press.
What you are telling is hundred percent true. I have read Valmiki Ramayanam several times and found that all people including Rama consumed MEAT. And till 12 th century meat was offered to Gods in Hindu temples. It was Ramanujacharya who substituted vegetarian offerings in the place of animals and modified Slokas to suit the change. Your work in this video program is commendable. 👍
What is wrong with Eating meat ??? Most people don't even know that in the name of Vegetables we only had Okra, Onion, White radish Eggplant 2-3 more etc. Potato, Tomato, Cauliflower, Cabbages & Peas weren't even Existed in Ancient India. They were later brought here by outsiders . Moreover, Justify that Fruits were available throughout the year isn't logical.
Please visit the Jagannath temple. There you will see that most of the vegetables you mentioned are not even offered to the lord and the reason is the same they are not ancient Indian vegetables . That being said the puri temple uses more than 40 different vegetables in the prasadam all of which are indigenous to Bharat . So to say Bharatiyas never consumed vegetarian diet because there were no vegetables in Bharat is very incorrect. Almost a thousand years of Abrahamic rule made us forget a lot of things about ourselves.
This is a critical point - Indians didn't even have potatoes, tomotoes or chillis until the Europeans set sail and started directly trading with us in the late 1400s. These vegetables in turn come from the Carribeans and Americas, which the Europeans had started discovering and were able to bring them here. Vegetarianism would be worse than veganism for the average Hindu in ancient times. This is why most Jainis (who were the progenitors of vegetarianism) become less strict about their religion as the restrictions (garlic, onions, etc) are too suffocating.
@@akash_goel Akash ji How can having dairy and eggs along with plants be worse than having just plants? Also please let's not confile ancient Indian vegetables to maybe just cucumber and say we didn't have much options then as most veggies were brought later...that's far from the truth. Ancient Indian vegetarian cusien was very varied , perhaps more than the modern one. It's our fault that today we have limited ourselves to 25 or 30 vegetables many of which are indeed not native to Bharat .
@@kumarpurohit7379 I never said they didn't consume vegetarian diet but, it was quite less. Moreover, if Ancient Indians never consume Meat. How come almost everyone here has a Digestive system that's quite effective in Digestion of Meat?? 85% of Eastern Asians are Lactose Intolerants because, their ancestors didn't have access to Cows. Cows were actually introduced to Japan during the 2nd World war by the Indian National Army personnel near Thailand ( Rebels). Same with South Koreans, Chinese , Siberians & Native American 90% of them are Lactose Intolerants as their ancestors didn't have access to Cows & Hence, no Cow milk which led to Absence of an important enzyme which dilutes Milk Compounds.
@@kumarpurohit7379 Suppose, if from today onwards u pledge that you & your upcoming 4th will completely abscond Meat/ Non vegetarian diet. From, the 5th generation onwards the Enzyme that's responsible for the digestion of Meat products will start depleting in the DNA of your Bloodline Until a Generation ( maybe 13th or 16th ) that will completely rely on Vegetarian sources. Ahimsa Never meant "No Violence" ( that's for Jains ) it's Meant "Least Violence possible" ( Hindus ). Yes, plenty of Hindus didn't Consume Non Vegetarian diet in Ancient times & killing or cooking meat was forbidden in Houses. But, our ancestors never completely abandoned it & retained it in the form of Animals Sacrifice Once or Twice a Year.
Takes guts to explain this truth to the modern Sanatanis. My deepest respect brother 🙏🏻 The idea of associating vegetarian diet with purity is indeed very new to our ancient civilization.
@@sarasara5151 Rama, Sita & brothers indeed ate vegetarian food. Find below mentions in Valmiki Ramayana to bust this video: 1) AyodhyaKanda canto 20 (29,31) Rama says to Kausalya that he will live in lonely forest like an ascetic eating bulbs roots and fruits. चतुर्दश हि वर्षाणि वत्स्यामि विजने वने। कन्दमूलफलैर्जीवन् हित्वा मुनिवदामिषम् and wear bark of tree. आसेवमानो वन्यानि फलमूलैश्च वर्तयन् 2) AyodhyaKanda canto 50 (44) Rama embraces Guha, his close friend and says that he survives on fruits and roots alone, leads an ascetic life and wears tree bark and kusa grass कुशचीराजिनधरं फलमूलाशनं च माम्। विद्धि प्रणिहितं धर्मे तापसं वनगोचरम् 3) AyodhyaKanda canto 52 (68-71) Rama and laxmana vow and become ascetics by locking their hair into a mass by applying milk of banyan tree. 4) AyodhyaKanda canto 52 (88-89) Sita worships river Ganga and says that once they are back from exile, she will donate cows, food, clothes to brahmanas & others, and offer drinks and meat to yakshas and Demi Gods. गवां शतसहस्त्रं च वस्त्राण्यन्नं च पेशलम् । ब्राह्मणेभ्यः प्रदास्यामि तव प्रियचिकीर्षया ll सुराघटसहस्त्रेण मांसभूतौदनेन च। यक्ष्ये त्वां प्रीयतां देवि पुरीं पुनरुपागता ll 5) Ayodhyakanda canto 52 (101,102) They reach a place called Vatsa which is a place of natural abundance and beautiful crops. They hunt 4 different animals (Higher species difficult to catch in sport). ततः समृद्धान् शुभसस्यमालिनः क्रमेण वत्सान् मुदितानुपागमत् तौ तत्र हत्वा चतुरो महामृगन् वराहमृश्यं पृषतं महारुरुम् They perform evening Sandhya and give offerings (eg नैवेद्य) before dinner and stay. आदाय मेध्यं त्वरितं बुभुक्षितौ वासाय काले ययतुर्वनस्पतिम् This last para of Canto is a summary of activities over the day till evening. One should not assume that the hunted animals were offered as नैवेद्य and eaten in dinner, as there is no such mention of eating meat, especially when it's clearly mentioned that Vatsa is a land of natural abundance and having beautiful crops. Also, a single animal would have been enough in dinner, if it was a case of eating their meat. In next canto, Rama meets Sage Bharadwaja and clearly mentions that he is living on roots and fruits only. 6)Ayodhyakanda canto 54(16) Rama says to Sage Bharadwaja that they are living on fruits and roots only पित्रा नियुक्ता भगवन् प्रवेक्ष्यामस्तपोवनम् धर्ममेवाचरिष्यामस्तत्र मूलफलाशनाः and Bharadwaja offers them various fruits and roots नानाविधानन्नरसान् वन्यमूलफलाश्रयान् 7) Ayodhyakanda canto 56(22-32) At Chitrakuta, considering a long stay, Rama instructs Laxmana to erect a hut and arrange for offerings of flesh to the yakshas and spirits. ऐणेयं मांसमाहृत्य शालां यक्ष्यामहे वयम् । कर्तव्यं वास्तुशमनं सौमित्रे चिरजीविभिः ॥ Laxmana arranges it. Rama performs Vastushanti rituals and satisfies all presiding Gods. वैश्वदेवबलिं कृत्वा रौद्रं वैष्णवमेव च। वास्तुसंशमनीयानि मङ्गलानि प्रवर्तयन् ॥ जपं च न्यायतः कृत्वा स्नात्वा नद्यां यथाविधि l पापसंशमनं रामश्चकार बलिमुत्तमम् ll Till this day a Bali is offered during Vastushanti puja. 8) AyodhyaKanda canto 60 (22) Sumantra reports to Kausalya that the trio are fully implementing the sacred vow of their father and living only on wild fruits. वने रता वन्यफलाशनाः पितुः l शुभां प्रतिज्ञां प्रतिपालयन्ति ते ॥ 9) Ayodhyakanda Canto 84 (10,17) Guha being a fisherman offers fish, roots, wild fruits etc towards Bharata's contingent. 10) Ayodhyakanda canto 87 (18) Guha recalls to Bharata that even after arranging different fruits for Rama, he did not take it and the trio did fasting. औपवास्यं तदाकार्षीद् राघवः सह सीतया 11) Ayodhyakanda canto 88(26) Bharata alongwith Shatrughna vows to live on fruits and roots like an ascetic. अद्यप्रभृति भूमौ तु शयिष्येऽहं तृणेषु वा । फलमूलाशनो नित्यं जटाचीराणि धारयन् ॥ 12) AyodhyaKanda canto 96 (1-2) This opening paragraph summarizes the time spent by Rama and Sita at Chitrakuta. Rama shows Sita the beauty of Chitrakuta, and explains different fruits to her, which she desires to consume along the way, and as an example explains one such fruit that is tasty when roasted.There is no reference to animal flesh anywhere. निषसाद गिरिप्रस्थे सीतां मांसेन छन्दयन् . Sita is not hungry, but desirous as Rama explains her. This should not be interpreted as desire for animal meat. मांस is a generic term for fleshy. Eg in Aranyakanda canto 68 (33) Rama and Laxmana cremate Jatayu and offer flesh of the Rohi root to it's soul. रोहिमांसानि चोद्धृत्य पेशीकृत्वा महायशाः 13) Ayodhyakanda Canto 109(26-27) Rama addresses Bharata's troupe that he has controlled his diet by means of sacred roots, flowers and fruits to remain pure and pay due respect to the God and his predecessors. वनवासं वसन्नेव शुचिर्नियतभोजनः । मूलपुष्पफलैः पुण्यैः पितॄन् देवांश्च तर्पयन् ॥ 14) Aranyakanda canto 12(31) Sage Agastya offers Rama with different fruits, roots and flowers. एवमुक्त्वा फलैर्मूलैः पुष्पैश्चान्यैश्च राघवम् । पूजयित्वा यथाकामं ततोऽगस्त्यस्तमब्रवीत् ॥
Valmiki ramayana was changed a lot as time passed by and people started changing the texts as per their agenda. Many parts that mention meat eating were removed or changed or differently interpreted
Lord Rama is a Kshatriya (I will not say was as he is still around his true devotee) and his diet non vegetarian food. He cannot fight Ravana by eating Curd rice. He needs muscle and strength to fight Ravana. He did hunt only for his food and not for pleasure. Swami Chinmayananda once answered this question in his sermons 🙏
Sure mate, of course you need muscle and strength to fight Ravana, or you could have immense bhakta and Invoke the power of Mantras to enhance your Bow which is immensely more powerful that eating some meat for muscle and strength, he would not have even eaten it that often only for rituals and as you know that was not that often. Even still if he needed muscle and strength he literally had Hanuman as his right hand man.
Bro you don't need meat to be a good fighter or to have a strong body. Even today in Haryana there are wrestlers who are completely vegetarian. The body needs macro and micro nutrients and this need can be met by both a carnivorous and a vegetarian diet . In both cases however you need to eat smart .
To be precise meat is important for human body to fulfill daily protein requirement, Being vegetarian is alright for Human if he can complete his protein and vitamin requirements
well i dont mind or care people eat meat or if they are vegetarian! protein from meat is complex proteins that comes with cholesterol! 2nd its a joke that meat have more proteins than plants! the actual fact is meat have more ratio of proteins! not more proteins! its just they are tasty and easy sourse today that doesnt means they have more proteins. on the other side PLant have more proteins than meat but Ratio wise it becomes lower due to its carbs and other minaral contents as well! 70+% of plant based food have more proteins than meat! and meat will defiantly gives you cholesterol which is more dangerous than carbs from plant! well anyways enjoy your meat and use this video as excuse to eat meat guilt free!
@@rajivaiyer5010 That’s why Indians despite having such a large vegetarian population, it has the highest amount of people with issues such as diabetes and what not. It is also scientifically proven that a vegetarian diet leads to lower testosterone in men. Lack of protein and high carbs in a typical Indian diet has led to many Indians becoming skinny fat with pot bellies. India despite having a population in billions still struggle in sports and hardly wins any medals in the olympics. Even Neeraj Chopra a gold medalist had to switch to eating non veg in order to improve his performance as an athlete. Eating meat for protein is essential in order for the body to grow adequately. Stop imposing your narrow minded views on others and enjoy your low muscle mass physique with diabetes.
@ sure agreed! vegetarians consumes diary fats too! again its animal fat! Ghee butter paneer, Curd, Cream , Milk! Anything too much is bad, even complex proteins, that is animal proteins!
I think modern industrial factory farms is a problem which is causing mass carbon emmission and cruelty towards animal. We should support small scale organic animal husbandry by village communities which will solve the ethical dilemma
Only a stupid vegan would project human emotions to an animal Killing is killing so keeping them in industrial farms is not cruelty it's just convenience
thank you for the video. I used to believe in the notion that vegetarian diet is the best but I no longer subscribe to that notion anymore. And it is perfectly okay. I also love how unapologetic you are, that truth is truth and it doesn't matter if people's feelings get hurt. Keep up the good work.
I always think of following the actions like bravery, truth and goodness instead of focusing on the food habits. Eat local, eat fresh, eat good things. Be strong, be good, that should be enough. Jai Shree Ram.
@@JagadguruSvamiVegananda well, there are 2 ways to define it as per myself: 1. Either you believe someone/some text and take that as truth based on your belief. 2. Either you base things on what you have experienced and rationalized from lived experiences. I personally prefer to test things that I have experienced and keep other things as a 'maybe'. Like, I have experienced gravity, so it is true that gravity exists, but I have not experienced heaven or hell, so that may or may not be true.
The Valmiki Ramayana does not explicitly state the ages of Lord Rama and Sita at the time of their marriage. However, various scholars and religious interpretations have offered insights based on contextual analysis: Sanskrit Terms and Context: In the Yuddha Kanda (Book of War), when Rama and Lakshmana meet King Janaka, the term "समुपस्थितयौवनौ" (samupasthita-yauvanau) is used, indicating that both had reached youth. This suggests that Rama was approximately 25 years old at the time of marriage. SANATANA DHARA Ayurvedic References: According to Ayurvedic texts like the Sushruta Samhita, a male reaches youth at 25 years of age, and a female at 16 years. This aligns with the interpretation that Rama was around 25 years old and Sita about 16 years old at the time of their marriage. SANATANA DHARA Sita's Perspective: In the Aranya Kanda (Book of the Forest), Sita mentions that Rama was 25 years old when they left for exile, and she was 18 years old at that time. This implies that their marriage occurred when Sita was around 18 years old. JAYASREE SARANATHAN These interpretations suggest that Rama was approximately 25 years old and Sita around 16 to 18 years old at the time of their marriage. It's important to note that these are interpretations based on contextual analysis, as the Valmiki Ramayana does not provide explicit ages.
She also states that she spent 12 years in Ayodhya after marriage and before being expelled to the forest by Kaikeyi. So yes, she was 18 when she went to forest and 6 at the time of her marriage.
Brother, read the part, where Devi Sita gives her introduction to Ravana, when he visited Panchavati forest. She states her age of marriage, also how many years she'd spent in Ayodhya, before Vanvaas.
I am an ardent listener of your videos. I am from Bengal, just like you Sir Shri Ntisingha Prasad Bhaduri is a great authority on Ramayana & Mahabharat & the Puranas. I follow his videos very closely also. The explanations offered by both of you are almost identical. It seems very interesting to me to find how the Sanskrit language has produced two such identical scholars from two very different parts of Bharat. If only Sanskrit could be introduced intto our syllabi of every state how much stronger would our bonds become throughout Bharat.
The one difference is that unlike Anna here who is an unapologetic sanatani and has devoted his life for dharmic causes ....Narsingha Bhaduri is a Choti Chata who is simply a Sanskrit acamedecian
@ProjectShivoham In fact Rama did not eat meat. please see videos of youtuber venkata chaganti(venkata chaganti youtube channel) he explained very well in Telugu. You will get enlightenment. In fact Rama did not eat meat. You are taking the wrong verses of ramayan.
@@ProjectShivoham It is not important to read but to understand things properly. If you don't like Sanathan Dharm, ignore it but please don't mislead people with conspiracy. Sanatan Dharm never encourages harming innocent animals for our pleasure.
@@ProjectShivoham I am not blindly believing into anything. He is quoting real ramayan where lord ram is saying that he eats only fruits and plant roots like potatoes etc. and not meat. Guha never gave meat to either toram or to bharath. They are sanatan dharm followers then how can they eat meat. Do you have mind ?? Ramayan was written by many foolish people you better learn Sanskrit before reading then you will realise correct things. Please stop posting videos on lord ram ate meat. Your channel may get strike.
💥In Hindu Puranas, Vishnu is a strict vegetarian god, but Shiva eats whatever he is given and the Goddess loves blood‼️ 💥In nature, flesh is neither holy nor unholy. It is just flesh. This is acknowledged in yoga texts. Food is anna and flesh is anna-kosha in which the atma (soul) resides. We eat food and that food contributes to flesh. What is flesh for us is food for another beast. In nature’s eye, saint or sinner, we are simply another creature’s food❕🤔
Exactly... and that influence came primarily from jainism and some from budhism also... north indians like up bhaiyas , mp rajasthan, punjab haryana are vegans due to this influence 🙄... South and eastern part this influence count impact as much as north ...
you said in one shloka, Bharadwaj maharshi offered meat-dish to king Bharata when he came to ashram, can you refer and tell if Maharshi also used to eat ?? I understand Bharadwaj is one of Saptarshis, so am curious eating patterns of sages.
My main question here is why? Sri Ramayanam offers so much to talk about. There are so many topics to talk about. Many problems today have solutions which can be found in this great epic. There can be discussions for hours on end. Why leave all that aside and talk about this topic in particular?
Because it is important to know and understand that Rama is very much Human, yet he struggled all his life to stay on the path of Dharma , no matter how many tough situations he came across….
Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
"Krishna" means "black" accepted. But "Mrigam" doesnt neccesarily mean only antelope right? how did you deduce that it is an antelope and not any other Mrigam?
I used to watch your vdos, took time off yt and today happened to see this vdo. Last one I watched was abt Qutub mimar. Now, first thought after watching vdo why is he making irrelevant stuff. This is neither a dharmasandeha nor pressing issue that effect civilisation! Are Hindus already understood Bhagwan Rama, following his ideals that only this aspect is left? No. Sita maa wished to offer meat pulao to Ganga maa, as you claim, so shall we at Mahakumbh now? Since Rama hunted black deer as you claim, shall we lift ban on it's hunting? What value addition this vdo to Sanatan Dharma, leaving it to you. You are better than this, I feel. During aranyavasa they led life of ascetics but at other times lived lavishly, isnt it obvious given they are Kshatriyas. What if tbey are not meat eaters? so be it. What is important, value appreciate his efforts to upkeep Dharma despite loosing his personal life, happy family. Coming from a state where rulers call Dharma as virus, eradicate it you know better importance of Dharma's survival. Iam meat eater, have no qualms, neither I feel proud nor I promote it. For me whether Bhagwan Ram ate meat or not, he remains Avatar " Ramo vigrahvan dharmah " 🙏
Really appreciate your research brother, I myself was curious for what constituted sanctified meat and I got my answers. Not to forget the mist you cleared about Shri Rama's meat consumption
Various scholars, religious leaders, and interpretations over time have provided different estimates for the ages of Rama and Sita at the time of their marriage, based on indirect references and context within the Valmiki Ramayana and other texts. Rama's Age: Many interpretations suggest that Rama was around 25 years old at the time of his marriage to Sita. This estimate is based on references to his age when he was crowned as the heir apparent of Ayodhya, as well as the general timeline of events in the Ramayana. Sita's Age: Similarly, Sita is often assumed to be around 18 years old at the time of her marriage to Rama. This is based on the common practice in ancient texts where women were married at a young age, as well as the description of her youth and beauty when she was chosen for marriage. Rama and Sita's Marriage: The marriage occurs during the Swayamvara, where Sita is to marry the prince who can string and break a mighty bow. Rama, at the time, was a young and capable prince, and his victory in this contest was a pivotal moment in the story. The marriage is depicted as happening soon after this event. Scholarly Opinions: While the Valmiki Ramayana does not provide specific ages, scholars have inferred from the context of the text that Rama was in the prime of his youth (around 25), while Sita, being the daughter of King Janaka, was a young adult, possibly around 18 or 19. This is based on the age of adulthood in the context of the time period and Sita's physical and emotional maturity as described in the epic. Religious Leaders' Views: Various religious leaders and commentators have not focused too heavily on exact ages, as they emphasize the divine nature of Rama and Sita's union. However, many follow the general consensus that Rama was in his mid-20s and Sita in her late teens at the time of marriage. In summary, while there is no definitive statement about their ages in the Valmiki Ramayana, most interpretations and scholarly views place Rama at around 25 and Sita at around 18 at the time of their marriage, based on the context of their characters and the narrative of the epic.
I do not know which valmiki ramayan you read, i read the full text but could not find meat anywhere. For my satisfaction, i will go through the text again
@@siwanian Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
Jai Sri Ram🙏 Well-studied as usual! It doesn't matter if Ram ate meat or not. He re-established Dharma and will continue to do it as he promised in his next avatar. Regarding Vastu pravesh, I have noted that in North India, everything is 'pure veg'. But at least in Andhra, I noticed some house-owners allowing masons to have sheep/goat sacrifice and have party before griha-pravesh. Regarding Gita Press, I have the same opinion as you. But they are much much better than ISKCON. Last note, those who criticise Ram for meat consumption have no courage to condemn torturous afro-asiatic methods of slaughter.
Many many mistakes from you. 1. There are many verses in Ramayana which are interpolated. Given this uou cannot say which verse is interpolated unless you have read Sanskrit and especially vedas. 2. Vedas and Veda mantras are the only pramaana because they cannot be changed. 3. One who follows Vedas is Dharmic and shree Raam is Dharmic. 4. There is no where in vedas that you have to eat meat. In fact it is said to eat only that which grow from soil,(purusha suktha) and milk related products.(Many yajna related activities). I dare project shivoham to show me the veda mantra which says you can eat meat. Please stop this nonsense.
My grand parents & my father regularly read Ramayana & Bhagavat Gita. We agree with most things you said in video, except at the marital age (as little children) of God Rama & Ma Sita. Ma Sita was atleast a matured & an intelligent teenager, & not a little child!! Kshatriyas were not mostly vegetarians. But, People should NOT get misguided to offer non-vegetarian foods to God Vishnu (as well as his Avataras) & Goddess Lakshmi Devi. It will definitely destroy the divinity of doing pooja !!
I think, 2000 humans are unable to comprehend But people during that time may be getting matured early as compared to our time But Sita ma was 6 years old and clearly mentioned no doubt regarding that
Manusmriti clearly prohibits Meat Eating., Shri Ram being a follower of Manusmriti and himself being in the lineage of Manu would not go against the Manu Code of Conduct. I agree that there were many distortions introduced in Manusmriti later in Kaliyug particularly against Shudras but the Verses prohibiting the Meat Eating are genuine and accepted by all Scholars of Manusmriti.
Ram eat meat or not. Question should be how to develop better human being from past. Not make human being worst than past. When it comes to eat food what should stop is waste of food whether veg Or non veg.
Bold attempt at diffusing the biases crept in over time. I love the way to straighten things up fearlessly and comprehensively. It's an erudition that speaks ..
Shlokas mentioned, showing Rama abstained from consuming meat n Rama Sita consumed meat, do not find place in Valmiki Ramayana. Could u pl give correct ref. I can read Ayodya Kaand 50-44 n 65-33. Correct me if I have read it wrong !
Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
@@DevMishra-nt3es Critical edition for online pls check iit Kharagpur version available free online. For offline copy of Critical edition you can check Bibek debroy book
yes he did eat meat for the sole purpose of sacrifice . Looks like you have very primitive knowledge of the scriptures. The sacrifice is done as a part of ritual where the sacrifice animal soul is elevated to higher evolved beings in the next birth and the results of sacrifice at the same time has the capacity to satisfy the demigods. He did not eat meat for the sense pleasure. There is a HUGE difference between the two. Please educate yourself !! SMH
In tantric practices, you can give non veg to any Gods. In some tantric vishnu temples in West Bengal, bali (goat sacrifice) and rudhirotsarga (goats blood) are given to Vishnu and his Avatars like Rama and Krishna. Famous Kali temple of Tarapith of Birbhum fishes are given as bhog to Maa Kali.
Agreed but Tantric practices are not Vedic in nature . The main scripture of tantra are known as Agamas . While it's true tantra does respect the Vedas and the Upanishads its path is different. Tantra is a sadhna which is more geared towards kalikal while Vedic safhanas are geared toward satya and treta yug.
@kumarpurohit7379 whatever the system, in eastern India, it’s mainstream. In deepavali night, almost every village of Bengal have Kali puja, and goats are sacrificed. Does is matter whether it is tantric or puranic or anything else, as long as it is proud hindu culture? Even in vedic puja, like Siva ratri or Durga puja, animal sacrifice and non veg "nivedan" as bhog.
You are misleading people Mr project shivoham with wrong artifacts. Please correct yourself. O am reporting your video as misleading. you will definitely delete my comment but be careful of sanatana Dharma. Research correct ramayan books like iit kharagpur ramayan.
@ProjectShivoham please see videos of youtuber venkata chaganti(venkata chaganti youtube channel) he explained very well in Telugu. You will get enlightenment. In fact Rama did not eat meat. You are taking the wrong verses of ramayan.
Insightful, it's interesting to hear from you in your video, as well as read conflicting comments. But I can see this discussion go down an endless rabbit hole. For me, I am just a simple guy, all I can do is love and devotion to my dear Shree Ram. Thank you for the video. Jai Shree Ram.
@ProjectShivoham Sorry bro I don't agree with you, killing innocent animals for our pleasure is totally wrong. It's misunderstanding of Sanskrit words. Example "Medhyam" means sacred food but everyone writing it as quality meat. Jai Shree Krishna🙏
Jai Shreeman Narayana, I would like to add that, if Rama did hunt for meat, that is absolutely fine because any living being killed by Shree Hari will gain Moksha. Secondly, the hunting style of obtaining meat is acceptable, however nowadays, animals are forced into small areas and forcily bred for their meat (meat is mass produced now). They never get to see the light of the day and get killed within a year of birth. This is unaceptable. This is manipulation. So, if you want to eat meat, please go and hunt with a bow and arrow.
@@Amarok-EgY So, you're saying that earlier kings hunted animals ethically, whereas now we raise them on farms, using chemicals and hormones to produce more meat and eggs, forcing these poor creatures to suffer, right? But what about plants? Almost every plant we eat today has been artificially modified for higher yields. On top of that, we use chemical fertilizers to boost production even further, causing severe ecological damage both below and above the soil, killing countless birds, insects, and other innocent creatures. If you're advocating for vegetarianism, why not grow your own crops, fruits, and vegetables? Go ahead, pick up a plow and a shovel. Now, you may argue, "Ah, but plants don’t feel pain, blah blah." However, as per Hinduism, plants also have life and a soul. Who gave you the right to take their life? Look, we live on Earth, where each living being depends on another for food-it's called the food chain or web. This whole debate about vegetarianism and non-vegetarianism began in Hinduism due to competition with Buddhism and Jainism. In fact, it’s well-documented that even Brahmins ate non-vegetarian food for a certain period and only later abstained. What originally started as a way to preserve Hinduism against Buddhism and Jainism is now being used by casteist Brahmins to discriminate against others.
@@Amarok-EgY what balance!! is the balance destroyed now because government has made hunting illegal. Aren't there carnivorous animals to maintain the balance.
@@kesardogra5529 I said what was said in Itihasas, read them. You'll understand. If you can't understand and agree to them just gtfo. I'm done explaining to every half-knowledged idiot.
Just wanted to state that the chicken we see nowadays has been bred enough that it can't survive the wilderness at all. Look at the mass it has gained. The goats are essential for Bali in Vamachara. And with certain mantras, they come themselves to be sacrificed in some places like Kamakhya. Though Kamakhya is a different topic, because there Bali can NEVER stop.
One of the reasons we call Sri Ram 'Maryada Purushottam' is because of his unmatched kindness and virtuous character. In my view, if he were a meat eater, people wouldn’t regard him with such reverence. After all, if we call him God, we believe he possesses superior qualities. It’s hard to imagine him eating the flesh of any being that he himself created. In Sanskrit, a single word can have multiple meanings, which is why proper knowledge is essential. Simply reading random translations or commentaries isn't enough to truly grasp the meaning of the shlokas. For example, in the shloka "मांसभूतोदनेन," the word "मांस" can imply the fresh, pulpy flesh of fruits, and "सुराघटसहस्रेण" can refer to a divine elixir or even the holy water of the Ganges. Therefore, we can't conclusively say the word "meat" is implied here based on just one source or translation. As followers of Sanatan Dharma, we should always seek the truth. I strongly believe that Sri Ram, Sita Mata, and Lakshman never consumed meat. I don't understand why some people are now trying to prove otherwise, but it's wrong to misinterpret such sacred texts. Here are some references that support my view: 1. www.scribd.com/document/616759423/Did-Lord-Rama-Eat-Meat 2. th-cam.com/users/shorts0UET8LXQBvw?si=6_ZvlUN7kFLXHz8J 3. th-cam.com/video/RbVYcD7m55I/w-d-xo.htmlsi=eGEDyQe9JSJXMz7O 4. www.ramcharit.in/valmiki-ramayana-ayodhyakanda-sarga-chapter-52-slokas-with-hindi-meaning/ It's important that we don’t blindly trust any one's interpretation. Instead, we should do our own research and read the original Valmiki Ramayana in Sanskrit with a proper Sanskrit dictionary to understand the true meaning and context of the text.
@@NikhilV-zj6oz Manusmriti clearly prohibits Meat Eating., Shri Ram being a follower of Manusmriti and himself being in the lineage of Manu would not go against the Manu Code of Conduct. I agree that there were many distortions introduced in Manusmriti later in Kaliyug particularly against Shudras but the Verses prohibiting the Meat Eating are genuine and accepted by all Scholars of Manusmriti.
@NikhilV-zj6oz There's nothing mentioned that to be connected with my ego here, I have just given counter of this video, why it's not factually correct. Study, learn, research first, then keep your pov. And Yes I'm a proud Bhakt of my Sanatan Dharma and culture.
Literally, Ravana tricks Sita disguised as a beautiful deer and thus she begged Lakshmana to hunt it. Why is this even a debate? Ksatrias ate meat and hunted. It’s all over the Vedas. 🤷🏻♂️
We clearly see a difference between early vedic culture and later vedic culture in vedic hymns. Its cultural evolution. It doesn't mean we should try to impose our views or judge the past on modern understanding. In ramayana Horse is very sacred as well.
I am not really concerned about what any particular person BELIEVES. You may believe that there is an old man with a white beard perched in the clouds, that the Ultimate Reality is a young blackish-blue Indian guy, that the universe is eternal, that Mother Mary was a certifiable virgin, or that gross physical matter is the foundation of existence. The ONLY thing that really matters is your meta-ethics, not your meta-physics. Do you consider any form of non-monarchical government (such as democracy or socialism) to be beneficial? Do you unnecessarily destroy the lives of poor, innocent animals and gorge on their bloody carcasses? Do you believe homosexuality and transvestism are moral? Do you consider feminist ideology to be righteous? If so, then you are objectively immoral, and your so-called "enlightened/awakened" state is immaterial, since it does not benefit society in any way.
@@abhindasa.d1902 Rama was from east how is aryan invasion theory relevant lol. They clearly mention they imported horses from aratta region of gandhara.
@abhindasa.d1902 Greek philosophers were also vegetarian but most greeks ate meat. Culture evolve and exist side by side as well. Monotheistic views won't work in studying history and culture.
@@gravewalker34 Where did the Vedic period begin? Lol, it was western side then it's moved to east too... That doesn't not means Rama was the first one came here, maybe his ancestors. (This is how Aryan invasion stuffs used to say)
I wish i could express how much greatufull I am to you for putting out these documentries, all I can say is: शं नो मित्रः शं वरुणः शं नो भवत्वर्यमा। शं न इन्द्रो बृहस्पतिः शं नो विष्णुरुरुक्रमः।।
Lots of triggered so-called sattvik kitchen hindus crying in the comments. Yes Sri Ram hunted, offered sacrifice of animals and ate the meat prasadam. If u dont want to eat meat then dont...why cry about Sri Ram's diet 🤷♂.
This video should be eye opening for many people, and encourage them to read Valmiki Ramayan in Samskritam. Also people should keep an open mind and read what Valmiki writes about the society at the time, the prevalent practices, and the incidents which make up the Ramayan.
We should not get into such arguments. Rama was a kshatriya and hence ate meat. So what ? It does not reduce his importance in any way. Do we look down upon Einstein or Newton because they might have eaten meat ?
I have no interest in food servings of Treta Yug era, I understand that humans were closer to cave / primitive living in that age. But very happy to see the shlokas and illustrations respectfully presented, it only enhances Bhakti to Bhagwan Shri Rama.
16:02 - 16:24: What if Bhagvaan Sri Rama & Maa Sita (, and Sri Lakshmana) *did not consume* the meat that was offered to Agni devata, but just offered it as part of the ritual alone? The question arises because all the quotes / sources cited have *"medhyam"* associated with maamsam (where Sri Rama & Maa Sita are referenced) and don't seem to appear independently to suggest consumption to satisfy hunger or to enjoy a feast.
Manusmriti clearly prohibits Meat Eating., Shri Ram being a follower of Manusmriti and himself being in the lineage of Manu would not go against the Manu Code of Conduct. I agree that there were many distortions introduced in Manusmriti later in Kaliyug particularly against Shudras but the Verses prohibiting the Meat Eating are genuine and accepted by all Scholars of Manusmriti.
You eat what ever offered to God as Prasada ! That's ritual in Hinduism and common sense and we take alcohol as Prasad at kalbhairav temple ! Nothing goes wasted you offered to God !
@INDYEAH That's the general practice. However, there could be exceptions. If the Prasad is distributed entirely, it is alright. Also, it is not clear if Sri Rama offered the meat to Agni devata (as aahuti), in which case, there won't be anything left to consume.
Same thoughts as well. Its good we ask questions on this but I dont see any sloka in video that directly says Bhagvaan consumed. Would love Shivoham thoughts on this.
1st mistake. Mamsam literally traslates to flesh or meat. Doesn't say animal meat. Have you ever heard of the word coconut meat? 2nd mistake: it was written that Rama offered meat for vasthu pooja but not mentioned that he consumed it after offering. Is offering in ritual same consumption for you in your imaginary world? There 0 ambiguity that in entire Valmiki Ramayanam, there is no mention of lord shri Ram consuming meat. And there is no ambiguity that Rama did not consume meat during aranya vasam. Also you should refer to what Bhishmacharya talked about animal meat consumption in Mahabharatam. Although it is a different era, you get basic understanding of how meat consumption was seen by tapasi and muni people. Rama keeps his promise. He promised about what food he would eat. And he keeps his word no matter what! It is straight forward. You are the one trying to create ambiguity. You just imposed your individual opinions on Valmiki Ramayanam! Also pundareekam means white lotus. Not the pink one. Pink lotus is Rakthotpalam. Black/ blue lotus is Neelotpalam.That is the most important part and you haven't even mentioned it. This shows you don't try to understand proper meanings. That is why you don't understand context of medhyam.
A very great insightful video. Just a note that everything relating to Mamsa may have it roots to Tantric scriptures too which believed to be in practice and appeared during pre-Vedic and Vedic era. Vegetarianism evovled time to time when meat were mentioned to be a form of inducing Tamasic and Rajasic Guna in common humans and thus Satvik guna was taught to be followed to reduce the obssesion on bloody meat that may possibly lead to Asura lifestyle for e.g. increasing the need on slaughter for flesh. And that is also why among the Varnas, Kshatriyas(beastly among other varnas) has the habits of consuming meat, including sacrificing animals to Maa Kali(Rajasic) before wars. Kashmiri Shaivism also had consumption of meat to adapt themselves to the cold climates. Therefore, meat is a part of Hindus diet but no scriptures celebrated since it has to be always taken in limits thus Vegetarianism came into a large practice prrovided by several sects mostly by Vaishnavism, Jainism, Siddhanta, Buddhism...etc.
Actually you can ate meat after offering to gods this is Vedic ritual without offering to gods it is not dharmic that's why it is categorised under tamsik and in kaliyuga the scriptures says that these rituals are prohibited
Your Sanskrit pronunciation is great. It's wonderful to listen to. I've read the Valmiki Ramayana. There are clear evidences of eating meat in that early epic.
Do you believe that Hanuman is actually a monkey, or perhaps a forest dweller who adorns himself with a tail? And what about Jambavanta? (In Europe, there are tribes with similar characteristics.)
@@G.S.30vanaras are not monkeys study our texts and talk when lord Brahma created creation his creations were listen and monkey and vanaras were mentioned separately.
this video is a hoax and propaganda to dislodge hindus from their ancient traditions and culture. our culture has came long way. and at first i liked his videos, but now i see that he is ,making videos just for views. please get your knowledge from GURUS not from young boys who were born tommorow.
"dislodge hindus from their ancient traditions" lol no. Eating meat was in our culture. Instead, We have dislodged ourself from eating meat which has caused mass protein deficiency and stunted growth in our country.
@parthkhanolkar7916 even in vedas it is written to learn from a guru. Your scriptures says this, why are you neglecting the culture of your own country? EVEN those scriptures were written by those gurus, babas, rishis whatever you call them. The problem is, because of people like you Hindu culture is becoming more abrahamic( book centred). Child, instead go to a gurukul and study from there.
@ProjectShivoham please make a video on the history of Telugu language and our culture. Im really curious of our Telugu's history, our kingdoms, literature, lifestyle and language please do it !😊🙏🏻
@@user-mc3nh2hm6p Satavahanas aren't telugu dude the official language of court in satavahana empire is Maharashtri prakit and the people spoke tamizh there are coins about satavahanas But your andhra government and low iq telugu scholars fraudulently said it's "proto telugu"'
Just one thing , Narayan is satv guna. He didnt eat meat. But Ram avtar he dont know he is vishnu as it is against boon of ravan. So Rama even if he eat meat during rama avtar , shouldnt be a rule for vaishnavas
Here is the truth, straight from Valmiki Ramayanam. Not in line with your view? Well, truth is above individual opinions. I will be happy if this video makes to open Valmiki Ramayanam and read for yourself. Atleast, this video could be a reason for you to read Ramayanam.
Good Girl! 👌
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
Please provide resources for authentic translation of manusmriti. I want to know about it. Every asshole is talking about it in wrong way
Hey you said at 11 but you forgot that kshatriyas count their age after unpanay sankaram so do research sir you missed this point😇
The sole reason Viswamitra took Rama and Lakshmana is to guard the yajna from the rakshasas as they were pouring blood and flesh in the yajna.
What makes you think that offering meat into the yajna as the Integral part of the ritual. It is strictly anti- vedic.
@@sb-bw4lpOh so this is a new piece of dumb nonsense?
Ok let me take it….
So you are trying to justify that Rama married at (8+12) 20 years age?
Dasaratha says that he is just 12 and doesn’t have much knowledge about Dhanurvidya (Warfare) and asks Viswamitra to excuse Rama. So according to your dumb logic, Rama doesn’t know Dhanurvidya even after 12 years of Upanayanam?
Dude, get over this nauseating piece of nonsensical interpretations about Ramayan.
Go read it and get a life!
Eating meat is normal in ancient India especially for kshatriya as it's important for their diet
Nothing wrong in it
Right and wrong are RELATIVE. 😉
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
Everyone ate meat be it shudra or Brahmins, no such thing as caste specific diet in Vedic times.
@@mtarkes exactly vegetarian diet gained prominence much much later like after buddha
@Sigma01350 the idea is that you eat more and more sattvik food if you are a saint. But again if no other food source then they too can eat meat for their nourishment and sustenance
@@Anshulhesorry brother I again checked my facts. You are right.
Even saints did eat meat for Vedic rituals as a prashad.
I am now understanding the true Sanatan Dharma
Ayodhya Kanda (Chapter 20, Verse 29)
In this verse, Bharata describes the hardships Rama and Sita may face in the forest and mentions possible food items:
"Phalamoolashanau daantau tapasau brahmacharinau"
Translation: "They will live as ascetics, consuming fruits and roots.
@@ParvathyKapoor yes you are correct. These people don't know
Meat is delicious. No harm in eating it. Lord Rama ate it too.
@@soumyakumar1049 According to both RAMAYANA & MAHABHARATA - Rama can't/never eat meat.
Kishkindha kaand 17.33
Anushasan Parv 115.66&67
@@soumyakumar1049 "One who is intelligent sees no need in killing an innocent animal for the satisfaction of the tongue" - beauty of Sanatan Dharma, based on intelligence and logic.
चतुर्दश हि वर्षाणि वत्स्यामि विजने वने।
मधुमूलफलैर्जीवन्हित्वा मुनिवदामिषम्।।2.20.29।।
अमिषम् all meat, हित्वा abstaining, मुनिवत् like a hermit, मधुमूलफलैः honey, fruits and roots, जीवन् while living on, चतुर्दश fourteen, वर्षाणि years, विजने in a solitary, वने in the forest, वत्स्यामि am to dwell.
Abstaining from eating meat like hermits and living on honey, fruits and roots, I am to live in the solitary forest for fourteen years.
If he did not eat meat, why he abstained?
This is also explained in the video.
What is the problem with Shree Ram eating meat?!! Why are people outraging over this? Bhakta Kannappa fed pork or pig meat to Shiva while the temple priest fed bel patra. People need to stop thinking like Christians or Muslims. Just they have to follow their books doesn't mean we have to do that too. We are not the same. All religions are not the same. We are a Dharma, They are a Mazab.
Bakta Kannappa fed meat to Shiva because of his innocence. Whatever he was eating daily he fed the same to Bhagawan. And Kannappa himself prays to Shiva that he doesn't know anything about rituals. It is like a child feeding meat to his father. It's pure innocence and lack of knowledge.
So people who are knowledgeable, know the rituals, daily going to the temples cannot follow Bhakta Kannappa. Because we didn't come from sentinel island all of a sudden.
the problem is that rAma is satvik and he doesnt eat meat or spittle
@ProjectShivoham I feel so sad for you ! You will never know understand Lord ram and Kashivishwanath (lord shiva ) ! Hari anant hari katha ananta ! Kalp bhed ! You are tellling people to read valmiki's ramayan but ramcharitmanas is the best book - greater than all vedas , upnishads, puran . Kashi is the oldest city , where lord shiva give moksha to people by chanting/giving ram tarak mantra to the souls . Kashi vishwanath wrote satyam shivam sundaram on the ramcharitmanas . Its the best for everyone it binds the entire sanatan ! It has chaupais written by lord hanuman himself ! You are a kalyugi shudra who will never understand the kumbh mela ! Chant sitaram , krishna and shiv any sagun sakar form of nirgun nirakar brahm i wish you get nirmal mati ( understanding ) .
@maruthimacha1847 then say it matters to you. Don't speak for Shree Ram. Don't force your biases on others. You don't speak for anyone other than yourself.
@@maruthimacha1847Define the term Satvika. Literally as per the Samskrta definition of the word.
Meat eating is permitted for Kashatriyas and Bhagwan Ram was a Kshatriya.
I don't know who has made this hinduism=Vegetarianism.
There are some sects in Hinduism which are Vegetarian and some are Non-Vegetarian.
If you are a vegetarian, then that's totally fine. And if you are a non-vegetarian THEN THAT'S TOTALLY OKAY.
People don't read religious text and then say Hinduism=Veg.
Jainism and Buddhist rule
buddhism i guess
These things came into Hinduism when things like animal sacrifice and eating were challenged by Buddhism and Jainism, then brahman came up with these things like Hinduism=vegetarianism and many others like cow is scared in the process of revival of the Hinduism.
@@Abhishek_Singh_OG Cow is sacred even in the Rig Veda.
Buddhism has nothing to do with vegetarianism. Most buddhists are non-vegetarians. Buddha himself is known to have eaten pork.
@@Abhishek_Singh_OGI may agree with the first part but the cow being a sacred animal was not newly added. A cow has always been a sacred animal.
Rama did not eat meat, and that is a fact. The Uttarakanda is not part of the original Valmiki Ramayana, and that is also a fact. The verses you provided do not show anywhere that there is a mention of meat consumption. Hunting for carcasses only occurred for sacrifices, rituals, or maintaining a balance in the forest. Below, I will respond to your attempts to portray Rama as a meat-eater. Additionally, it is important to acknowledge that the original six kāṇḍas (books) of the Valmiki Ramayana do contain later additions, and this is evident from the Balakanda (Canto 4, Verse 2). It mentions that the text comprises 24,000 shlokas and 500 sargas (chapters), plus the Uttarakanda. However, the version we currently have contains an extra 100 shlokas. Therefore, one should not simply read the existing version stamped as Valmiki’s Ramayana but should refer to the critical edition of the Valmiki Ramayana, which is closer to the original source.
Now let me respond to all your arguments attempting to portray Rama as a consumer of meat. Here are your points and my answers, with evidence to prove that Sri Rama was indeed a vegetarian and the embodiment of dharma:
Argument 1: Sita offered meat with cooked rice to the River Ganga (Ayodhya Kanda 52:89).
Answer: Even in the English language, the term “flesh” (māṃsa) does not exclusively refer to animal flesh. According to the Oxford Dictionary, it also means the edible part of a fruit or vegetable. In Monier Williams’ translation, māṃsa can mean the fleshy portion or pulp of a fruit. In this context, Sita promised to offer 1,000 pots of sacred water (not alcohol-since sura can also refer to pooja water), different types of fruits mixed with milk (māṃsa bhūtaidena ca), and honey for making panchamrita. There is no mention of cooked meat or rice in the verse. Offering cooked meat to the River Ganga, especially in this context, is absurd and inconsistent with the customs of dharma. Thus, your interpretation-likely based on Western translations-is flawed.
Argument 2: The hospitality of Maharishis involved flowers, drinks, and meat of different kinds (Ayodhya Kanda 91).
Answer: While it is true that kshatriyas (like Bharata) were not prohibited from consuming meat, this does not mean that Rama, a dharma-mūrti (embodiment of dharma), followed the same practice. Bharata’s actions or diet cannot be equated with Rama’s. In fact, Bharata adored Rama as the ultimate symbol of dharma and even placed Rama’s footwear on the throne during his exile. Bharata’s reverence for Rama demonstrates that he looked up to him as a role model of virtue. Thus, the hospitality extended to Bharata has no bearing on Rama’s vegetarianism.
Argument 3: Guha offered meat and other forest produce to Bharata (Ayodhya Kanda 84:17).
Answer: Similar to the previous argument, Bharata’s consumption of meat does not indicate that Rama did the same. In fact, Rama explicitly told Guha (Ayodhya Kanda 50:44):
“Know me to be under a vow to live as an ascetic, wearing robes of bark and deerskin. I am determined to live in the forest by eating roots and fruits only.”
In the next verse, Rama asked for as little as what is fed to horses, which was satisfactory for him. This shows that Rama adhered to the life of austerity and avoided hunting animals for food or sport.
Argument 4: While walking by the banks of the Yamuna, Rama hunted deer and consumed it (Ayodhya Kanda 55:33).
Answer: The Sanskrit word “cheratu” in this verse is singular and does not imply that the deer was consumed. The actual translation is that Rama and Lakshmana drove away (or dispersed) many (bahūn) sacred (medhyan) animals while walking along the Yamuna. If we interpret this as hunting for consumption, it raises several inconsistencies:
Why would many sacred animals be hunted in large numbers for food?
Why is there no mention of cooking or eating in the subsequent verses?
This argument is further invalidated by the fact that Rama lived on roots and fruits, as stated in other verses.
Argument 5: Rama remarked that the meat was sacred, savory, and roasted on fire (Ayodhya Kanda 96:1,2).
Answer: The Sarga after the 95th Sarga is considered Prakshepa (interpolation) by revered Acharyas for generations. In any case, the second Sloka that starts with “Edam medeyamidam…” means: Dharmapurusha Sri Rama stated, “This area is burned by Yajnic fire (Edam agninanishtapatham), this place is pleasant (swathuIdam), it is purified (Medhyam).” By stating all these, Rama seated himself with Sita.
Notice that the second Sloka makes more sense when read with the first Sloka: Rama showed the river by the mountain to Sita (Sitam tham girinimangam thada). Rama showed the fruitful trees by the river (Giriprasena Mamse), being enthusiastic (Chandayan) while seated there.
Argument 6: Rama and Lakshmana hunted animals for sport and consumed their meat (Ayodhya Kanda 52:102).
Answer: This argument has a fundamental problem, and it is evident that you’ve taken the mistranslation of “Varaha” as another name for deer instead of boar. The Sloka has the word “Thathra,” which means “even though,” so it should be read as “even though they were tired of hunger.”
True Kshatriyas are not removed from their duties even in the harshest situations, such as hunger, sleep, and pain. That’s why Karna suffered the pain of a worm infestation on his thighs to avoid awakening his master Guru Parashurama. Even today,
hunters hunt certain predators for conservation and ecological balance. This is to avoid mostly preys from going extinct. Notice that the forest is still under Ayodhya's Jurisdiction and therefore authorities have the right to behold dharma duties and balance. As per the Sloka, the words used are “Mahamrigham” or “Dushtamrigham,” which include boars and three types of vicious deer. The word “Maharurum” is used to interpret a giant Ruru deer. Logically, why would someone hunt four different types of giant animals when just one large, 600kg deer would last over 100 days if consumed three times a day? Without refrigeration, a normal animal carcass would decay within 10-30 days.
The correct interpretation is: having hunted down those Dushtamrighas, Rama immediately went near a sacred (medhyam) tree. The next Sarga (53rd), first Sloka, clarifies Rama’s actions right after reaching the sacred tree. Did he start cooking meat immediately? Any mention of meat at all? The Sloka says:
“The benevolent Sri Rama consorted with the tree, after which he meditated on Sandhya and started advising Lakshmana.”
There is no mention of a carcass being taken, meat being cooked, or eaten. Hence, it is proven again that Rama never consumed meat.
Argument 7: Lakshmana Hunting Deer for a Sacred Offering (Ayodhya Kanda 56:26)
Answer: It’s true that Lakshmana hunted a deer for a sacred ritual offering (Vaasuthuhomam). However, these offerings were part of rituals like housewarming or entering a new shelter (Ayodhya Kanda 56:25). What’s offered in a ritual doesn’t necessarily reflect the offerer’s diet. Hence, claiming this proves Rama or Lakshmana consumed meat is baseless.
Argument 8: Offering Cooked Meat to the Devatas (Ayodhya Kanda 56:37-38)
Answer: This passage mentions offerings of fruits, flowers, water, and yes, cooked meat, to Bhootas along with Vedic mantras. However, there’s no mention of the Vedas mandating meat sacrifice. Handling or offering meat in rituals does not mean it was consumed. For example, Dharmavyada, the butcher in the Mahabharata, sold meat but did not eat it. Similarly, this verse doesn’t prove that Rama ate meat.
Argument 9: Hanuman’s Description of Rama’s Diet (Sundara Kanda 36:41)
Answe: Hanuman describes Rama’s ascetic lifestyle to Sita, stating he no longer indulges in luxuries like “meat” or “Madhu.” Some misinterpret “Madhu” as alcohol. But if we look back at Ayodhya Kanda 20:29, Rama promises Mother Kausalya that he’ll survive on water, honey, roots, and fruits during his exile. Clearly, “Madhu” refers to honey or sacred water here, not alcohol.
Further, Hanuman’s words in Sundara Kanda 36 imply that Rama had even relinquished fruits and honey, relying solely on roots, adhering to Vanaprastha laws. Rama’s promise to Kausalya is reinforced in Ayodhya Kanda 2:54-16, where he tells Sage Bharadwaja, “We are entering the forest to live on roots and fruits.” Suggesting he broke this vow is simply inaccurate.
Many of these claims are based on mistranslations and misinterpretations of Sanskrit terms. For example:Words like gavya are misread as cow meat when they actually refer to products derived from cows, like milk or butter.Mahisha, often misinterpreted as “bull,” actually means “one who serves” in Vedic Sanskrit. Similarly, colonial-era translations have distorted meanings in the Ramayana. To conclude, the narrative that Rama consumed meat is based on mistranslations, interpolations, and a lack of understanding of the original Sanskrit text. The critical edition of the Valmiki Ramayana, along with commentaries from revered Acharyas, clarifies that Rama adhered to a vegetarian diet throughout his life.
Rama's conduct was governed by dharma, simplicity, and ascetic values, which are incompatible with the notion of consuming meat. He explicitly stated his commitment to living on roots and fruits during his exile. Misinterpretations of certain verses, influenced by colonial-era translations, have propagated the myth that Rama ate meat. However, a thorough and critical analysis of the original text dispels such claims and reinforces Rama's adherence to a vegetarian lifestyle as part of his commitment to dharma.
By rejecting these unfounded arguments and referring to authentic sources, we uphold the true essence of the Valmiki Ramayana and the virtuous character of Sri Rama.
From where to buy the critical version of Ramayana . Please respond. 🙏
Well-done ❤
Direct translation is the problem.
"Knowledge is knowing Tomato is a fruit and wisdom is not to put it in the fruit salad"
Bro is in form❤
I was unsure after the video, but reading your comment made it clear. I appreciate your help
all of ur "answers" are based on speculations and "bias".. bias of lord Rama being a vegetarian.. u cannot digest the fact that lord rama indeed consumed meat as a kshatriya, or that pashu bali and meat eating are indeed incorporated in vedic rituals, sacrificial altars can be found in harappa and rakhigarhi excavations.. u defeated the whole purpose of this video, that is to accept the verses at its face value.. i mean how stupid u have to be with ur "yes they hunted animals but didn't consume it" ?? tf they hunted the animal for then?? "bharata eat meat but that doesnt mean rama ate too" ?? even if i agree with this, then also it means that people did consume meat at that times and they were much more sanatanis and u and me and hence people consuming meat today should not be mocked... and pls stop adding translations like u please.. every word is a mistranslation but "mamsa" means fruit pulp only right?? i mean if mamsa means fruit pulp then what is the word exclusive for meat?? and if u forgot lemme remind u that "phal" is already a word for fruit
The problem is that many people don't know Sanskrit, so they rely on translations, which often reflect the translator's biases. It's like watching a movie review before seeing the movie itself-you end up influenced by reviewer's perspective. To truly understand the original meaning, it's essential to learn Sanskrit. I have no personal issues with Geeta Press, but they cater to a specific audience and adjust the interpretations accordingly. For those genuinely curious, I recommend reading the original Sanskrit Ramayana with a Sanskrit dictionary instead of depending on any translated material.
Becoming vegetarian is not about going to our ancient India roots it's about becoming more moral/ethical human being, back then we don't have any that we have today (it can be food, basics common laws, tecnology, transportation anything) but we are choosing what is morally best for us and for our surroundings. Being a vegetarian or vegan is a choice to be a better thoughtful person not just going back to what our ancestors used to eat
Eating meat, or not eating meat doesn’t make any change. Rama is always Rama for me. “Ramo vigrahavaan dharmaha” 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Amount of hate getting just for telling the truth.
Meat consumption is never prohibited but just avoided by brahmins and other vegetarians.Even Brahmins used to eat meat. I think Ramayana itself have the story of Vaatapi .
I myself am a staunch vegetarian but truth should not change according to our preferences
1: Only Brahmanas and Vaisyas were vegetarians. Kshatriyas and Sudras were meat eaters - some selected types of meats. Sri Rama was a Kshatriya. - They or other ancient Hindus did not eat Cow-meat or Pig meat. Only Fish and birds. Western authors translated Sanskrit words like "Dairy food" as Animal Food or "Cow meats".
bro kashmiri shaivs and bangali shakts bhramans has always been eating meat
Brahmanas were also meat eater specifically from coastal regions of vanga, Kalinga, and many more. Meat eating always was common it's just that north indians today are reminiscent of the cryptic buddhic Jain past nothing else. Also there was no rule for any Varna to not eat this or that anyone can eat anything
In Magadh/Bihar the main dish was peacock and deer meat for everyone.
@@parassharma2240 bro tamil kerala Brahmins are beef eaters
th-cam.com/video/rIrLhYCdArg/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Tvoc-YJIyfvX3qmL
The Mahabharat states that Yudishthir as a pious king hosted banquets feeding the Brahmins where he provided inexhaustible quantities of meat, including all domestic species and supplemented by all species hunted in the forest, in addition to many many types of liquor described.
1:06 Not that accurate representation. You may wanna hire an artist than use an AI. Because if I'm aware like Krishna, Ram was also dark skinned?
Yes. And here he said gold, but the picture is of rudraksh necklace
Krishna was dark as his name is also saying that. While Shree Ram was a little bit white with Eyes to that of Blue lotus colour
Valmikis ramayana says Rama was dark skinned and Sita was fair skinned.
@Sigma01350
Please read Valmiki Ramayan when Hanuman meets Sita in Lanka, introducing himself as a doot of Sriram, doubting if he is an agent of Ravan, she asks him to tell her how Ram looks like. Hanuman says that Ram is dark skinned and Lakshman is fair skinned.
@@adarshvazhakandy6734 Sita is described as having dusky complexion.
The issue with Vaishnavites is that they are trying so hard to portray Rama and Krishna as being vegan, which is historically inaccurate. Where Vaishnavites go wrong is assuming that Rama and Krishna followed Vaishnavism. In reality, Vaishnavism, like Jainism, is a philosophy founded by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in early 16th Century CE. Both Rama and Krishna were Kshatriyas and followed the Shakta tradition. It’s crucial to study the original Sanskrit texts with the help of a Sanskrit dictionary rather than relying on translations, which often distort the translations with personal bias.
I think you're mistaken-Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu lived from 1486 to 1534, so the 4th century BCE is an incorrect timeline. I am opposing nothing else but this, and to avoid any misunderstanding, I want to explicitly state that I fully support this comment except for the timeline.
@@arghyadeepguria7509🎉
Have you read Bhagavad Gita? Does Krishna mention Shakta tradition? Even in Bhagavad Gita Krishna talks about foods in the mode of goodness as being fruits, roots, etc... no mention of meat as being part of mode of Goodness.
@@sakshig6858 do you know basic science, humans were hunters and gatherers, not only gatherers, that means everyone has been a non vegetarian at one time or another. The real question is what you choose to become, at this era we do anything and everything we want, at our will. Why do you even care, tell me are you the perfect human according to bhagwat anyway? Then why tryna be the veggie ehh?? Okay, let me tell you something you can't deny, Lord krishna did consume milk products, and you know which industry is known for the most cruelty? The dairy industry... Now the question comes- should you be vegan then? Am supporting the vegans?? Hell no, you know what else science says? It says plants also have life, and they pretty much feel everything like any animal, they just can't express it in a way we understand. That means vegans support exploiting those who can't speak for themselves... Ohh shitt... That's really sick... So should you stop eating then? Hell no... You know nature made everything, and it manages everything too, that's why it made humans omnivores, that's why you have those two sharp pairs of canine teeth, we humans are meant to eat meat, so the whole point is I don't care if lord rama or lord krishna ate meat, that doesn't make them good or bad, this doesn't change the fact they were great... they just consumed meat even if they did, not cocaine... And being vegetarian or vegan won't make you something more pure than you're already, you're committing hundreds of other real sins everyday anyway... And if all this talk hurts your fragile ego, then dump your comments, I'm jobless anyway... And I don't like it when people admiring original leather purses, and fur jackets talk nonsense on youtube... And if you've read till here, answer me have you read bhagwat yourself, no need to answer me actually, just ask yourself how much greatness have you actually gained from it that you're discussing gods here? Imbeciles judging god... Poor souls.
stop reading isckon's geeta or mahabharata, read the original sanskrit version with a sanskrit dictionary@@sakshig6858
Thank you for this. The original text is the most authoritative source and we have to study Sanskrit to know the truth
Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
@@KrishnaKaliyuga Great point sir. The Gita Press one was such a let down for me, they clearly have an agenda and removing slokas and misinterpreting them as per convenience. The “Critical Edition” is published by whom? Would love to buy it? I went online iitk hosted Valmiki Ramayan site and everything said here contradicts Gita press
@rajdeepsaha5607 Critical edition was collected by Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute of pune. Iitk online version is good for offline hard copy you can check by Bibek Debroy. Gita press in it's older versions have the shlokas intact in later versions they have sanitized by removing meat related verses and interpreting as fruit pulp. 'Hatva' or kill cannot be used for fruit pulp
Hunting animals for FOOD is much much better than just killing animals for amusement....
Ramachandra hunted animals for food..
The very popular Ashvamedh Yagna is a horse sacrifice ritual in which the horse is sacrificed after one year of traveling. Ram and Yudhisthir both performed the Ashvamedh Yagna & Meat is permitted in the Shakta Sect, but it must be Bali meat. After presenting Bali to the goddess, only that meat may be consumed; no other meat is permitted. Bali is required for both Maa Kaali and Devi Durga; without it, Devi pooja cannot be performed (not daily household poojas). After Bali, the animal's soul takes a higher birth with Devi's grace, and the flesh becomes Mahaprasad. According to Manusmriti, Onion and Garlic are considered Amisa (Tamasic Food), hence neither onion or garlic is used in the cooking of Mahaparad (Bali meat).
There is a complete process of bali; only male animals can be sacrificed; before giving bali, the animal is worshipped; and the priest speaks the bhoot apasaran mantra into that animal's ear so that its soul can take a higher birth after leaving that body; bali sould be done in one go so that the animal does not feel much pain; if the weapon is missed, the priest will receive a lot of negative karma, indicating that the goddess rejected that bali. Bali is offered to the goddess not because we enjoy eating meat, but because it is part of the ritual; we only receive the meat as prasad, much as Shiva abhishek cannot be performed without milk. If someone is offering bali only because of his craving for meat or there is greed behind it, then bali has no value and is a sin.
@@frozentube gita taught us to believe in ahimsa
a guilty Non-vegetarian trying to justify his bad habits. *PROPAGATING FAKE NARRATIVE*
@@VanaraVegeta There’s nothing fake in it. Bali pratha is part of Dharma whether you like it or not.
You have been brainwashed into thinking these things doesn’t exist
See, I have no guilt, while you have less information and an existential crisis. You preach about saving lives while eating vegetables, which have their own lives. Millions of germs, other organisms, and thousands of pests have already killed in order to safeguard your gorgeous tomato. So, congratulations, you are a killer as well; but If you're that committed, then stop eating and instead drink water and breathe air. if you feel you are booking a ticket to paradise by eating plants, you know who will arrive first? A Goat.
This only eating vegetarian food is making us weak, normal people should eat jhatka meat. People on a spiritual path sanyasi etc should avoid meat. Watch neeraj chopra interview on why he converted from vegetarian to meat eater.
Depends upon body to body
There are and were so many pehelwans in haryana , who can defeat a bull and they all are vegetarians.
The more Dharmic I am becoming, the more meat eating I am becoming too as I am realising the vegetarian propaganda against Hindus being done by the vegetarian lobby. According to Ayurveda we should consume meat in limited quantities and different types of meat are recommended for different body types. Our diet should be a proper balance of veg & non-veg
Also our scriptures never mentioned veg or non-veg food. Food is divided into 3 types - saatvik, rajasik and taamsik. Saatvik is pure veg, Rajasik contains some veg foods & some types of meat like mutton, fish, etc while Taamsik includes onion, garlic, mushroom and some meats like chicken
For normal people meat is meat
This halal and jhatka is non sense
@@dv9239it's not nonsense.
Jhatka causes least amount of pain whereas Halal causes direct suffering.
So yeah they are different. Hindus should have food which causes least harm to the animal.
Then why halal@@dv9239
What is the fuss about? What do you expect him to do in forest, grow rice and vegetables?
There are many mathas in remote forests in India, do you think they resort to eating meat? Get some brains
How can he fight a war while just living on fruits and vegetables. Not even milk products were available to him, muscle mass will drop. How can he fight without a high protein diet
@@kesardogra5529 idk man
He had magic arrows and stuff
I also feel the same, growing protein rich pulses and vegetables takes lot of time. While animals like rabbit and deer are available abundantly. It required great marksman skills to hunt those animals.
@param_jnana mathas are situated in important urban center ? Shankaracharya situated his four Mathas in the forest, you stupid fellow? He most likely hunted deer or other forest dwelling animals for food... Face the facts ... All Kshatriyas are ate meat, even Ramakrishna Paramahamsa ans Swami Vivekananda ate meat... Nothing wrong with it.. forcus on the lesson of their lives rather that what they ate.. Idiots like you is the reason why Hinduism declined
The irony is when Rama is Vegetarian, Ramayana is a Mythical story and when Rama is Non-vegetarian, Ramayana becomes our history.
What is ur nonsense
Brilliant point sir!
As you can see here that according to translations ram says that he will not eat meat in exile but as soon as he left and reach forest his friend offered him meat , the fisherman offered him meat , This clearly means that this meat word could be interpolation or mistranslated….
No.....in sundara Kanda sri hanuman describe the state of sri ram to Sita, that he doesn't eat or drink........ given inference on His food.... also certain description in the previous kanda says about hunts..
So, it was way of life
Moreover Ram was a kshatriya...the present food habits of Brahmins in many parts of India now is veg. and sura is prohibited as a sin. This is only for certain communities.
@@krishnamoorthyvaradarajanv8994 pl refer my one more comment with details
In Valmiki Ramayan, Balakanda 20.2, Dashrath mentions to Vishwamitra that Ram is less than 16 years old. However, in another instance, Marichi tells Ravana that Ram was only 12 years old. This discrepancy seems intentional, as Marichi might have been trying to intimidate Ravana.
As far as I know 12 years is less than 16 years. So where is discrepancy?😂
@@arunkumar-vx8ml He means that a smaller kid of 12 yrs is so fierce.
Maricha does not know the age of Shri Ram. He simply might have mentioned "a 12 yr old kid".
Yes it is.. 4-year gap is quite unusual when specifying someone's age. Raja Dashrath might have used 16 symbolically to represent Yuvavastha.
@@arunkumar-vx8ml Not "less than 16 years" but Dashrath meant to say tahtRam was just short of 16 years of age. So he was 15 years old.
@@shashankshorya122 16 was probably the age when a boy was considered an adult the time Ramayan was written so Ram being younger than that had to be mentioned just like people today would say under 18 and not specify the age of a minor
In Bengali Ramayana translation it clearly states that Ram used to go to ‘Varaha Shikaar’ regularly during the Vanavaas phase. I would think that Varahaa meat was not to feed the trees in the forest.
No wonder why more than half of Bengalis converted to the relgion of invaders and the trend continues.
Correct. Kshatriyas are expected to have Mutton, Pork, Venison, Fish, Duck, Pheasant etc.
th-cam.com/video/rIrLhYCdArg/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Tvoc-YJIyfvX3qmL
With my limited knowledge, only Kshatriya was allowed to eat meat as per shastra. Also, instances said in video meat consumption was at the time of rituals only and when bharata went to some Rishi's place... Now a days also it is easy to prepare meat and offer to our guest to please them (if they eat nov nveg) than making 4,5 items in veg for guests...
Kshatriya's were having duty to protect kingdom and its people. For the same, they have to roam everywhere and it may not always possible to provide enough food to the army so hunting would be best way to feed army...
Brahmanas were generally vegetarian, but with some exceptions. They could consume meat from Havishesha (Prasada) from certain Yajnas or from Shraddha. Sometimes they would also consume meat from Bhiksha, depending on the situation.
Kshatriyas also consumed meat from hunting, which was a common practice to keep them sharp.
Vaishyas could some times purchase meat from the market.
Shudras could also slaughter domesticated animals and sell their meat. However, not all animals were considered fit for consumption.
Now, although some varnas were permitted to consume meat in their own ways, the shastras encourage them to follow the example of the Brahmanas if possible and minimize animal suffering.
Shudras and lower classes (according to ancient hierarchy) are also allowed.
Excellent video. Newer versions of Raamayana leave out certain shlokas which talk of meat eating entirely; I know as I have two versions of Vaalmiki Raamayana at home. I cannot understand this obsession with making entire Aarya vartana and vedic culture vegetarian. Folks are commenting below that Manu smriti prohibits eating meat; but manu smriti lists which meats are allowed for consumption for different purposes. So does garuda purana and others. Mind boggling really.
Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
@KrishnaKaliyuga Shlokas have been removed from the full version of Raamayana from Gita Press itself. So, yes, I have two different, full versions. I also have 3 versions of Sundara kaanda from Vaalmiki Raamayana.
@@nagendrachemuturi9145
Multiple direct references for your information
th-cam.com/video/JJZoGn7vLKA/w-d-xo.html&lc=UgyvrgV4vzhuTHkxBOh4AaABAg&si=tBjR3Hqkh3vIq8h2
@nagendrachemuturi9145
Thanks for confirming what we believed. Someone needs to debunk Gita press in this for safety of future generation who may not know. As I understand the older versions of Gita press had meat eating verses and newer latest versions it is removed. If a video can be done of Gita press removal of verses showing proof it will be helpful for future generations. None has right to remove shlokas which Valmiki wrote not even Gita press.
What do you think where this obsession comes from?
What you are telling is hundred percent true. I have read Valmiki Ramayanam several times and found that all people including Rama consumed MEAT.
And till 12 th century meat was offered to Gods in Hindu temples. It was Ramanujacharya who substituted vegetarian offerings in the place of animals and modified Slokas to suit the change.
Your work in this video program is commendable. 👍
@@JanardhanPrasadDVS
For your better clarity
th-cam.com/video/JJZoGn7vLKA/w-d-xo.html&lc=UgyvrgV4vzhuTHkxBOh4AaABAg&si=tBjR3Hqkh3vIq8h2
The link isn't working
What is wrong with Eating meat ??? Most people don't even know that in the name of Vegetables we only had Okra, Onion, White radish Eggplant 2-3 more etc. Potato, Tomato, Cauliflower, Cabbages & Peas weren't even Existed in Ancient India. They were later brought here by outsiders . Moreover, Justify that Fruits were available throughout the year isn't logical.
Please visit the Jagannath temple. There you will see that most of the vegetables you mentioned are not even offered to the lord and the reason is the same they are not ancient Indian vegetables . That being said the puri temple uses more than 40 different vegetables in the prasadam all of which are indigenous to Bharat . So to say Bharatiyas never consumed vegetarian diet because there were no vegetables in Bharat is very incorrect. Almost a thousand years of Abrahamic rule made us forget a lot of things about ourselves.
This is a critical point - Indians didn't even have potatoes, tomotoes or chillis until the Europeans set sail and started directly trading with us in the late 1400s. These vegetables in turn come from the Carribeans and Americas, which the Europeans had started discovering and were able to bring them here.
Vegetarianism would be worse than veganism for the average Hindu in ancient times. This is why most Jainis (who were the progenitors of vegetarianism) become less strict about their religion as the restrictions (garlic, onions, etc) are too suffocating.
@@akash_goel Akash ji How can having dairy and eggs along with plants be worse than having just plants? Also please let's not confile ancient Indian vegetables to maybe just cucumber and say we didn't have much options then as most veggies were brought later...that's far from the truth. Ancient Indian vegetarian cusien was very varied , perhaps more than the modern one. It's our fault that today we have limited ourselves to 25 or 30 vegetables many of which are indeed not native to Bharat .
@@kumarpurohit7379 I never said they didn't consume vegetarian diet but, it was quite less. Moreover, if Ancient Indians never consume Meat. How come almost everyone here has a Digestive system that's quite effective in Digestion of Meat?? 85% of Eastern Asians are Lactose Intolerants because, their ancestors didn't have access to Cows. Cows were actually introduced to Japan during the 2nd World war by the Indian National Army personnel near Thailand ( Rebels). Same with South Koreans, Chinese , Siberians & Native American 90% of them are Lactose Intolerants as their ancestors didn't have access to Cows & Hence, no Cow milk which led to Absence of an important enzyme which dilutes Milk Compounds.
@@kumarpurohit7379 Suppose, if from today onwards u pledge that you & your upcoming 4th will completely abscond Meat/ Non vegetarian diet. From, the 5th generation onwards the Enzyme that's responsible for the digestion of Meat products will start depleting in the DNA of your Bloodline Until a Generation ( maybe 13th or 16th ) that will completely rely on Vegetarian sources. Ahimsa Never meant "No Violence" ( that's for Jains ) it's Meant "Least Violence possible" ( Hindus ). Yes, plenty of Hindus didn't Consume Non Vegetarian diet in Ancient times & killing or cooking meat was forbidden in Houses. But, our ancestors never completely abandoned it & retained it in the form of Animals Sacrifice Once or Twice a Year.
Takes guts to explain this truth to the modern Sanatanis. My deepest respect brother 🙏🏻
The idea of associating vegetarian diet with purity is indeed very new to our ancient civilization.
@@sarojeetdash
For your better understanding
th-cam.com/video/JJZoGn7vLKA/w-d-xo.html&lc=UgyvrgV4vzhuTHkxBOh4AaABAg&si=tBjR3Hqkh3vIq8h2
Is a moderate without full packed bro u info is not so beefy uh!!??
@@sarasara5151
Rama, Sita & brothers indeed ate vegetarian food. Find below mentions in Valmiki Ramayana to bust this video:
1) AyodhyaKanda canto 20 (29,31) Rama says to Kausalya that he will live in lonely forest like an ascetic eating bulbs roots and fruits. चतुर्दश हि वर्षाणि वत्स्यामि विजने वने। कन्दमूलफलैर्जीवन् हित्वा मुनिवदामिषम् and wear bark of tree. आसेवमानो वन्यानि फलमूलैश्च वर्तयन्
2) AyodhyaKanda canto 50 (44) Rama embraces Guha, his close friend and says that he survives on fruits and roots alone, leads an ascetic life and wears tree bark and kusa grass कुशचीराजिनधरं फलमूलाशनं च माम्। विद्धि प्रणिहितं धर्मे तापसं वनगोचरम्
3) AyodhyaKanda canto 52 (68-71) Rama and laxmana vow and become ascetics by locking their hair into a mass by applying milk of banyan tree.
4) AyodhyaKanda canto 52 (88-89) Sita worships river Ganga and says that once they are back from exile, she will donate cows, food, clothes to brahmanas & others, and offer drinks and meat to yakshas and Demi Gods. गवां शतसहस्त्रं च वस्त्राण्यन्नं च पेशलम् । ब्राह्मणेभ्यः प्रदास्यामि तव प्रियचिकीर्षया ll
सुराघटसहस्त्रेण मांसभूतौदनेन च। यक्ष्ये त्वां प्रीयतां देवि पुरीं पुनरुपागता ll
5) Ayodhyakanda canto 52 (101,102) They reach a place called Vatsa which is a place of natural abundance and beautiful crops. They hunt 4 different animals (Higher species difficult to catch in sport). ततः समृद्धान् शुभसस्यमालिनः क्रमेण वत्सान् मुदितानुपागमत्
तौ तत्र हत्वा चतुरो महामृगन्
वराहमृश्यं पृषतं महारुरुम्
They perform evening Sandhya and give offerings (eg नैवेद्य) before dinner and stay. आदाय मेध्यं त्वरितं बुभुक्षितौ वासाय काले ययतुर्वनस्पतिम्
This last para of Canto is a summary of activities over the day till evening. One should not assume that the hunted animals were offered as नैवेद्य and eaten in dinner, as there is no such mention of eating meat, especially when it's clearly mentioned that Vatsa is a land of natural abundance and having beautiful crops. Also, a single animal would have been enough in dinner, if it was a case of eating their meat. In next canto, Rama meets Sage Bharadwaja and clearly mentions that he is living on roots and fruits only.
6)Ayodhyakanda canto 54(16) Rama says to Sage Bharadwaja that they are living on fruits and roots only पित्रा नियुक्ता भगवन् प्रवेक्ष्यामस्तपोवनम् धर्ममेवाचरिष्यामस्तत्र मूलफलाशनाः and Bharadwaja offers them various fruits and roots नानाविधानन्नरसान् वन्यमूलफलाश्रयान्
7) Ayodhyakanda canto 56(22-32) At Chitrakuta, considering a long stay, Rama instructs Laxmana to erect a hut and arrange for offerings of flesh to the yakshas and spirits.
ऐणेयं मांसमाहृत्य शालां यक्ष्यामहे वयम् । कर्तव्यं वास्तुशमनं सौमित्रे चिरजीविभिः ॥
Laxmana arranges it. Rama performs Vastushanti rituals and satisfies all presiding Gods.
वैश्वदेवबलिं कृत्वा रौद्रं वैष्णवमेव च। वास्तुसंशमनीयानि मङ्गलानि प्रवर्तयन् ॥
जपं च न्यायतः कृत्वा स्नात्वा नद्यां यथाविधि l
पापसंशमनं रामश्चकार बलिमुत्तमम् ll
Till this day a Bali is offered during Vastushanti puja.
8) AyodhyaKanda canto 60 (22) Sumantra reports to Kausalya that the trio are fully implementing the sacred vow of their father and living only on wild fruits.
वने रता वन्यफलाशनाः पितुः l
शुभां प्रतिज्ञां प्रतिपालयन्ति ते ॥
9) Ayodhyakanda Canto 84 (10,17) Guha being a fisherman offers fish, roots, wild fruits etc towards Bharata's contingent.
10) Ayodhyakanda canto 87 (18) Guha recalls to Bharata that even after arranging different fruits for Rama, he did not take it and the trio did fasting.
औपवास्यं तदाकार्षीद् राघवः सह सीतया
11) Ayodhyakanda canto 88(26) Bharata alongwith Shatrughna vows to live on fruits and roots like an ascetic.
अद्यप्रभृति भूमौ तु शयिष्येऽहं तृणेषु वा । फलमूलाशनो नित्यं जटाचीराणि धारयन् ॥
12) AyodhyaKanda canto 96 (1-2) This opening paragraph summarizes the time spent by Rama and Sita at Chitrakuta. Rama shows Sita the beauty of Chitrakuta, and explains different fruits to her, which she desires to consume along the way, and as an example explains one such fruit that is tasty when roasted.There is no reference to animal flesh anywhere.
निषसाद गिरिप्रस्थे सीतां मांसेन छन्दयन् .
Sita is not hungry, but desirous as Rama explains her. This should not be interpreted as desire for animal meat.
मांस is a generic term for fleshy.
Eg in Aranyakanda canto 68 (33) Rama and Laxmana cremate Jatayu and offer flesh of the Rohi root to it's soul.
रोहिमांसानि चोद्धृत्य पेशीकृत्वा महायशाः
13) Ayodhyakanda Canto 109(26-27) Rama addresses Bharata's troupe that he has controlled his diet by means of sacred roots, flowers and fruits to remain pure and pay due respect to the God and his predecessors.
वनवासं वसन्नेव शुचिर्नियतभोजनः ।
मूलपुष्पफलैः पुण्यैः पितॄन् देवांश्च तर्पयन् ॥
14) Aranyakanda canto 12(31) Sage Agastya offers Rama with different fruits, roots and flowers.
एवमुक्त्वा फलैर्मूलैः पुष्पैश्चान्यैश्च राघवम् । पूजयित्वा यथाकामं ततोऽगस्त्यस्तमब्रवीत् ॥
Valmiki ramayana was changed a lot as time passed by and people started changing the texts as per their agenda. Many parts that mention meat eating were removed or changed or differently interpreted
Lord Rama is a Kshatriya (I will not say was as he is still around his true devotee) and his diet non vegetarian food. He cannot fight Ravana by eating Curd rice. He needs muscle and strength to fight Ravana. He did hunt only for his food and not for pleasure. Swami Chinmayananda once answered this question in his sermons 🙏
Sure mate, of course you need muscle and strength to fight Ravana, or you could have immense bhakta and Invoke the power of Mantras to enhance your Bow which is immensely more powerful that eating some meat for muscle and strength, he would not have even eaten it that often only for rituals and as you know that was not that often. Even still if he needed muscle and strength he literally had Hanuman as his right hand man.
Bro you don't need meat to be a good fighter or to have a strong body. Even today in Haryana there are wrestlers who are completely vegetarian. The body needs macro and micro nutrients and this need can be met by both a carnivorous and a vegetarian diet . In both cases however you need to eat smart .
❤❤❤
Bro listen to premanand ji maharaj
@@ShailendersinghhWo komjor kardega sabko
Ok, Bhishma says that eating meat is great sin except sacrifice . So, everyone who eats unsanctified meat lands up in hell.. What is your opinion ?
To be precise meat is important for human body to fulfill daily protein requirement,
Being vegetarian is alright for Human if he can complete his protein and vitamin requirements
well i dont mind or care people eat meat or if they are vegetarian! protein from meat is complex proteins that comes with cholesterol! 2nd its a joke that meat have more proteins than plants! the actual fact is meat have more ratio of proteins! not more proteins! its just they are tasty and easy sourse today that doesnt means they have more proteins. on the other side PLant have more proteins than meat but Ratio wise it becomes lower due to its carbs and other minaral contents as well! 70+% of plant based food have more proteins than meat! and meat will defiantly gives you cholesterol which is more dangerous than carbs from plant! well anyways enjoy your meat and use this video as excuse to eat meat guilt free!
@@rajivaiyer5010 That’s why Indians despite having such a large vegetarian population, it has the highest amount of people with issues such as diabetes and what not. It is also scientifically proven that a vegetarian diet leads to lower testosterone in men. Lack of protein and high carbs in a typical Indian diet has led to many Indians becoming skinny fat with pot bellies.
India despite having a population in billions still struggle in sports and hardly wins any medals in the olympics. Even Neeraj Chopra a gold medalist had to switch to eating non veg in order to improve his performance as an athlete.
Eating meat for protein is essential in order for the body to grow adequately. Stop imposing your narrow minded views on others and enjoy your low muscle mass physique with diabetes.
Meat having protein is an idea propagated by the meat industry.
@rajivaiyer5010 I have seen people who are vegetarian have high cholesterol.
@ sure agreed! vegetarians consumes diary fats too! again its animal fat! Ghee butter paneer, Curd, Cream , Milk! Anything too much is bad, even complex proteins, that is animal proteins!
19:49 Madhu explaination pending?? or did I happen to miss it later?
I think modern industrial factory farms is a problem which is causing mass carbon emmission and cruelty towards animal.
We should support small scale organic animal husbandry by village communities which will solve the ethical dilemma
Organic and small scale is much less efficient and more carbon intensive
Only a stupid vegan would project human emotions to an animal
Killing is killing so keeping them in industrial farms is not cruelty it's just convenience
Can I raise a question about the colour of Rama? Wasn't he dark?
thank you for the video. I used to believe in the notion that vegetarian diet is the best but I no longer subscribe to that notion anymore.
And it is perfectly okay. I also love how unapologetic you are, that truth is truth and it doesn't matter if people's feelings get hurt.
Keep up the good work.
💯
Can you provide the source for age of marriage of Lord Ram and Mas Sita?
I always think of following the actions like bravery, truth and goodness instead of focusing on the food habits. Eat local, eat fresh, eat good things. Be strong, be good, that should be enough. Jai Shree Ram.
In your own words, define “TRUTH”. ☝️🤔☝️
@@JagadguruSvamiVegananda Dedication towards knowledge leads to the truth that we r not the ego but the observer.
@@JagadguruSvamiVegananda well, there are 2 ways to define it as per myself:
1. Either you believe someone/some text and take that as truth based on your belief.
2. Either you base things on what you have experienced and rationalized from lived experiences.
I personally prefer to test things that I have experienced and keep other things as a 'maybe'. Like, I have experienced gravity, so it is true that gravity exists, but I have not experienced heaven or hell, so that may or may not be true.
@@NoobGamerPlaysValorant, what is this “EGO” of which you speak? 🤔
@@aritrabhattacharyya94 TAUTOLOGY. 🙄
How can we ensure that you get the original Valmiki Ramayana
th-cam.com/video/09L0kb8D51c/w-d-xo.htmlsi=wp5uZdQRQw9QgkzH
The Valmiki Ramayana does not explicitly state the ages of Lord Rama and Sita at the time of their marriage. However, various scholars and religious interpretations have offered insights based on contextual analysis:
Sanskrit Terms and Context:
In the Yuddha Kanda (Book of War), when Rama and Lakshmana meet King Janaka, the term "समुपस्थितयौवनौ" (samupasthita-yauvanau) is used, indicating that both had reached youth. This suggests that Rama was approximately 25 years old at the time of marriage.
SANATANA DHARA
Ayurvedic References:
According to Ayurvedic texts like the Sushruta Samhita, a male reaches youth at 25 years of age, and a female at 16 years. This aligns with the interpretation that Rama was around 25 years old and Sita about 16 years old at the time of their marriage.
SANATANA DHARA
Sita's Perspective:
In the Aranya Kanda (Book of the Forest), Sita mentions that Rama was 25 years old when they left for exile, and she was 18 years old at that time. This implies that their marriage occurred when Sita was around 18 years old.
JAYASREE SARANATHAN
These interpretations suggest that Rama was approximately 25 years old and Sita around 16 to 18 years old at the time of their marriage. It's important to note that these are interpretations based on contextual analysis, as the Valmiki Ramayana does not provide explicit ages.
She also states that she spent 12 years in Ayodhya after marriage and before being expelled to the forest by Kaikeyi.
So yes, she was 18 when she went to forest and 6 at the time of her marriage.
Brother, read the part, where Devi Sita gives her introduction to Ravana, when he visited Panchavati forest. She states her age of marriage, also how many years she'd spent in Ayodhya, before Vanvaas.
@@harithascorpYeah 12 years after marriage 😂😂😂18+12= 30 not 18-12😂😂
Great video.
This destroys every attempt of people who misuse Lord Rama name for political purposes.
it is great for those who are fools and can be easily fooled ! I assume you did not check after watching this video
This video is misleading.
I know you are a fool😂
The video is dedicated to the people like you who don't cross check the information 😂
@@berserkbaahu2187 sayd brainless idiot who foes not have guts to accept facts
I am an ardent listener of your videos. I am from Bengal, just like you Sir Shri Ntisingha Prasad Bhaduri is a great authority on Ramayana & Mahabharat & the Puranas. I follow his videos very closely also. The explanations offered by both of you are almost identical. It seems very interesting to me to find how the Sanskrit language has produced two such identical scholars from two very different parts of Bharat. If only Sanskrit could be introduced intto our syllabi of every state how much stronger would our bonds become throughout Bharat.
True
Agree. I said the same recently
The one difference is that unlike Anna here who is an unapologetic sanatani and has devoted his life for dharmic causes ....Narsingha Bhaduri is a Choti Chata who is simply a Sanskrit acamedecian
Any supporting statements to prove your point regarding the two scholars?
I agree.
@ProjectShivoham In fact Rama did not eat meat. please see videos of youtuber venkata chaganti(venkata chaganti youtube channel) he explained very well in Telugu. You will get enlightenment. In fact Rama did not eat meat. You are taking the wrong verses of ramayan.
First stop blindly believing random TH-cam videos (my videos or his videos) Go and read Valmiki Ramayanam which clearly explains Rama consumed meat
@@ProjectShivoham
It is not important to read but to understand things properly. If you don't like Sanathan Dharm, ignore it but please don't mislead people with conspiracy. Sanatan Dharm never encourages harming innocent animals for our pleasure.
@@ProjectShivoham I am not blindly believing into anything. He is quoting real ramayan where lord ram is saying that he eats only fruits and plant roots like potatoes etc. and not meat. Guha never gave meat to either toram or to bharath. They are sanatan dharm followers then how can they eat meat. Do you have mind ?? Ramayan was written by many foolish people you better learn Sanskrit before reading then you will realise correct things. Please stop posting videos on lord ram ate meat. Your channel may get strike.
@@Hello08976 yes exactly you are 💯 percent correct.
First of all who said Santan Dharma means only Vegetarian… I will bring a lot of content more on how Bhagavan Sri Rama consumed meat in future
💥In Hindu Puranas, Vishnu is a strict vegetarian god, but Shiva eats whatever he is given and the Goddess loves blood‼️
💥In nature, flesh is neither holy nor unholy. It is just flesh. This is acknowledged in yoga texts. Food is anna and flesh is anna-kosha in which the atma (soul) resides. We eat food and that food contributes to flesh. What is flesh for us is food for another beast. In nature’s eye, saint or sinner, we are simply another creature’s food❕🤔
If Khsatriya who's a profound worshipper of Shakti, eats meat in then that doesn't defy any Hindu beliefs.
As noth-Indians are mostly vegetarians so they projected Vedic people as vegetarians.
Exactly... and that influence came primarily from jainism and some from budhism also... north indians like up bhaiyas , mp rajasthan, punjab haryana are vegans due to this influence 🙄...
South and eastern part this influence count impact as much as north ...
@tafri961 . Indeed
@@tafri961 huh
Also Northern Indian, meat business is controlled by M so our elders made us vegetarian
and most bengalis are muslim, those who are not are either commies of try to justify their lustful habits by misinterpreting shastras
you said in one shloka, Bharadwaj maharshi offered meat-dish to king Bharata when he came to ashram, can you refer and tell if Maharshi also used to eat ?? I understand Bharadwaj is one of Saptarshis, so am curious eating patterns of sages.
@@rajendra8814 yes you are correct
My main question here is why? Sri Ramayanam offers so much to talk about. There are so many topics to talk about. Many problems today have solutions which can be found in this great epic. There can be discussions for hours on end. Why leave all that aside and talk about this topic in particular?
Because it is important to know and understand that Rama is very much Human, yet he struggled all his life to stay on the path of Dharma , no matter how many tough situations he came across….
Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
yes, very important which edition is used
Geeta Press Gorakhpur made gross fraud in translation
Thank you so much for the amazing work you have always been doing on this channel.
"Krishna" means "black" accepted. But "Mrigam" doesnt neccesarily mean only antelope right? how did you deduce that it is an antelope and not any other Mrigam?
Mtigam meand animal.
Krishnamriga literally means black antelope
The age of Siyarama at marriage is said to be 13 and 6, isn't is the age after being dwije? Or after birth?
One Edition says they are 16
He forgotten about the Vedic process of upanayanam which was done by the kids before before they began their study
Plz release the vedio in telugu as well
Kindly repeat that in ENGLISH, Miss.☝️
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
I used to watch your vdos, took time off yt and today happened to see this vdo. Last one I watched was abt Qutub mimar.
Now, first thought after watching vdo why is he making irrelevant stuff. This is neither a dharmasandeha nor pressing issue that effect civilisation! Are Hindus already understood Bhagwan Rama, following his ideals that only this aspect is left? No.
Sita maa wished to offer meat pulao to Ganga maa, as you claim, so shall we at Mahakumbh now? Since Rama hunted black deer as you claim, shall we lift ban on it's hunting? What value addition this vdo to Sanatan Dharma, leaving it to you. You are better than this, I feel. During aranyavasa they led life of ascetics but at other times lived lavishly, isnt it obvious given they are Kshatriyas. What if tbey are not meat eaters? so be it. What is important, value appreciate his efforts to upkeep Dharma despite loosing his personal life, happy family. Coming from a state where rulers call Dharma as virus, eradicate it you know better importance of Dharma's survival.
Iam meat eater, have no qualms, neither I feel proud nor I promote it.
For me whether Bhagwan Ram ate meat or not, he remains Avatar
" Ramo vigrahvan dharmah " 🙏
Really appreciate your research brother, I myself was curious for what constituted sanctified meat and I got my answers.
Not to forget the mist you cleared about Shri Rama's meat consumption
Various scholars, religious leaders, and interpretations over time have provided different estimates for the ages of Rama and Sita at the time of their marriage, based on indirect references and context within the Valmiki Ramayana and other texts.
Rama's Age:
Many interpretations suggest that Rama was around 25 years old at the time of his marriage to Sita. This estimate is based on references to his age when he was crowned as the heir apparent of Ayodhya, as well as the general timeline of events in the Ramayana.
Sita's Age:
Similarly, Sita is often assumed to be around 18 years old at the time of her marriage to Rama. This is based on the common practice in ancient texts where women were married at a young age, as well as the description of her youth and beauty when she was chosen for marriage.
Rama and Sita's Marriage:
The marriage occurs during the Swayamvara, where Sita is to marry the prince who can string and break a mighty bow. Rama, at the time, was a young and capable prince, and his victory in this contest was a pivotal moment in the story. The marriage is depicted as happening soon after this event.
Scholarly Opinions:
While the Valmiki Ramayana does not provide specific ages, scholars have inferred from the context of the text that Rama was in the prime of his youth (around 25), while Sita, being the daughter of King Janaka, was a young adult, possibly around 18 or 19. This is based on the age of adulthood in the context of the time period and Sita's physical and emotional maturity as described in the epic.
Religious Leaders' Views:
Various religious leaders and commentators have not focused too heavily on exact ages, as they emphasize the divine nature of Rama and Sita's union. However, many follow the general consensus that Rama was in his mid-20s and Sita in her late teens at the time of marriage.
In summary, while there is no definitive statement about their ages in the Valmiki Ramayana, most interpretations and scholarly views place Rama at around 25 and Sita at around 18 at the time of their marriage, based on the context of their characters and the narrative of the epic.
all parampara dharmacharyas said maa sita age is 6 only..
I do not know which valmiki ramayan you read, i read the full text but could not find meat anywhere. For my satisfaction, i will go through the text again
this person is a propagandist
@@siwanian Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
@@aaravrajput7777he is Spreading mis information about sanatana Dharma
Read bori edition
He has written the Shloka number and all what is the problem in finding the text.
Jai Sri Ram🙏
Well-studied as usual!
It doesn't matter if Ram ate meat or not. He re-established Dharma and will continue to do it as he promised in his next avatar.
Regarding Vastu pravesh, I have noted that in North India, everything is 'pure veg'. But at least in Andhra, I noticed some house-owners allowing masons to have sheep/goat sacrifice and have party before griha-pravesh.
Regarding Gita Press, I have the same opinion as you. But they are much much better than ISKCON.
Last note, those who criticise Ram for meat consumption have no courage to condemn torturous afro-asiatic methods of slaughter.
Many many mistakes from you.
1. There are many verses in Ramayana which are interpolated. Given this uou cannot say which verse is interpolated unless you have read Sanskrit and especially vedas.
2. Vedas and Veda mantras are the only pramaana because they cannot be changed.
3. One who follows Vedas is Dharmic and shree Raam is Dharmic.
4. There is no where in vedas that you have to eat meat. In fact it is said to eat only that which grow from soil,(purusha suktha) and milk related products.(Many yajna related activities).
I dare project shivoham to show me the veda mantra which says you can eat meat. Please stop this nonsense.
I guess he is side kick of BJP
Exactly , not everything on internet is trustable !
And ik he will not reply so anyways !
Jai shree ram !
Who is? I don't think BJP promotes this
@@nitish915 nd how does bjp is related with it ? ?
Show me the verse that says to eat food that is grown in soil
please made a video on maha Kumbha Mela whether it is mentioned in Vedic texts and other history books. and significance
My grand parents & my father regularly read Ramayana & Bhagavat Gita. We agree with most things you said in video, except at the marital age (as little children) of God Rama & Ma Sita. Ma Sita was atleast a matured & an intelligent teenager, & not a little child!!
Kshatriyas were not mostly vegetarians. But, People should NOT get misguided to offer non-vegetarian foods to God Vishnu (as well as his Avataras) & Goddess Lakshmi Devi. It will definitely destroy the divinity of doing pooja !!
Yes I also disagree on this.
Except that He is 100% right
I think, 2000 humans are unable to comprehend
But people during that time may be getting matured early as compared to our time
But Sita ma was 6 years old and clearly mentioned no doubt regarding that
Manusmriti clearly prohibits Meat Eating., Shri Ram being a follower of Manusmriti and himself being in the lineage of Manu would not go against the Manu Code of Conduct. I agree that there were many distortions introduced in Manusmriti later in Kaliyug particularly against Shudras but the Verses prohibiting the Meat Eating are genuine and accepted by all Scholars of Manusmriti.
@@HiddenHistoryofBharat vedas are greater than manusmriti
Ram eat meat or not. Question should be how to develop better human being from past. Not make human being worst than past. When it comes to eat food what should stop is waste of food whether veg Or non veg.
Excellent content. I just finished reading Valmiki Ramayana last month. I 100% agree with you. ❤
@@dipankarpaul756 This is for your reference.
th-cam.com/video/JJZoGn7vLKA/w-d-xo.html&lc=UgyvrgV4vzhuTHkxBOh4AaABAg&si=tBjR3Hqkh3vIq8h2
Thankyou for the explanation. Please let me know the printers name so that I can get this Valmiki Ramayana as well.
Still all after this fax check up.
I will still say.
Jai Shree Ram 🚩🚩🗿
Bold attempt at diffusing the biases crept in over time. I love the way to straighten things up fearlessly and comprehensively. It's an erudition that speaks ..
Shlokas mentioned, showing Rama abstained from consuming meat n Rama Sita consumed meat, do not find place in Valmiki Ramayana. Could u pl give correct ref.
I can read Ayodya Kaand 50-44 n 65-33.
Correct me if I have read it wrong !
Critical edition of Valmiki Ramayana is to be read, there are many abridged versions now called as Valmiki ramayana where many meat related verses are removed including Gita press versions
Could you please tell me more about the most authentic critical edition?I would love to read it. Thank you.@@KrishnaKaliyuga
@@DevMishra-nt3es Critical edition for online pls check iit Kharagpur version available free online. For offline copy of Critical edition you can check Bibek debroy book
yes he did eat meat for the sole purpose of sacrifice . Looks like you have very primitive knowledge of the scriptures. The sacrifice is done as a part of ritual where the sacrifice animal soul is elevated to higher evolved beings in the next birth and the results of sacrifice at the same time has the capacity to satisfy the demigods. He did not eat meat for the sense pleasure. There is a HUGE difference between the two.
Please educate yourself !! SMH
In tantric practices, you can give non veg to any Gods. In some tantric vishnu temples in West Bengal, bali (goat sacrifice) and rudhirotsarga (goats blood) are given to Vishnu and his Avatars like Rama and Krishna. Famous Kali temple of Tarapith of Birbhum fishes are given as bhog to Maa Kali.
Agreed but Tantric practices are not Vedic in nature . The main scripture of tantra are known as Agamas . While it's true tantra does respect the Vedas and the Upanishads its path is different. Tantra is a sadhna which is more geared towards kalikal while Vedic safhanas are geared toward satya and treta yug.
@kumarpurohit7379 whatever the system, in eastern India, it’s mainstream. In deepavali night, almost every village of Bengal have Kali puja, and goats are sacrificed. Does is matter whether it is tantric or puranic or anything else, as long as it is proud hindu culture? Even in vedic puja, like Siva ratri or Durga puja, animal sacrifice and non veg "nivedan" as bhog.
Hi would you suggest Valmiki Ramayana from the Gita Press or some other publishing house? Thanks in advance.
You are misleading people Mr project shivoham with wrong artifacts. Please correct yourself. O am reporting your video as misleading. you will definitely delete my comment but be careful of sanatana Dharma. Research correct ramayan books like iit kharagpur ramayan.
Go and read Valmiki Ramayanam
@ProjectShivoham please see videos of youtuber venkata chaganti(venkata chaganti youtube channel) he explained very well in Telugu. You will get enlightenment. In fact Rama did not eat meat. You are taking the wrong verses of ramayan.
Valmiki Ramayan which Publication you refer ?
@@rajendra8814original one dummy...
@@deepakk9087what explanation!!! Flesh means fruits.. Hunting means chasing these kind of misinterpretation
Insightful, it's interesting to hear from you in your video, as well as read conflicting comments.
But I can see this discussion go down an endless rabbit hole.
For me, I am just a simple guy, all I can do is love and devotion to my dear Shree Ram.
Thank you for the video.
Jai Shree Ram.
@ProjectShivoham
Sorry bro I don't agree with you, killing innocent animals for our pleasure is totally wrong. It's misunderstanding of Sanskrit words. Example "Medhyam" means sacred food but everyone writing it as quality meat. Jai Shree Krishna🙏
Thanks!
Valmiki speaks the Truth.
Thank You So Much for Your Wonderfull Video with the Combination of Truth, Certification and Research... Jai Sriram 🙏🚩
Jai Shreeman Narayana,
I would like to add that, if Rama did hunt for meat, that is absolutely fine because any living being killed by Shree Hari will gain Moksha. Secondly, the hunting style of obtaining meat is acceptable, however nowadays, animals are forced into small areas and forcily bred for their meat (meat is mass produced now). They never get to see the light of the day and get killed within a year of birth. This is unaceptable. This is manipulation. So, if you want to eat meat, please go and hunt with a bow and arrow.
@@Amarok-EgYare you on drugs?
@@Amarok-EgY
So, you're saying that earlier kings hunted animals ethically, whereas now we raise them on farms, using chemicals and hormones to produce more meat and eggs, forcing these poor creatures to suffer, right?
But what about plants? Almost every plant we eat today has been artificially modified for higher yields. On top of that, we use chemical fertilizers to boost production even further, causing severe ecological damage both below and above the soil, killing countless birds, insects, and other innocent creatures. If you're advocating for vegetarianism, why not grow your own crops, fruits, and vegetables? Go ahead, pick up a plow and a shovel.
Now, you may argue, "Ah, but plants don’t feel pain, blah blah." However, as per Hinduism, plants also have life and a soul. Who gave you the right to take their life? Look, we live on Earth, where each living being depends on another for food-it's called the food chain or web. This whole debate about vegetarianism and non-vegetarianism began in Hinduism due to competition with Buddhism and Jainism. In fact, it’s well-documented that even Brahmins ate non-vegetarian food for a certain period and only later abstained. What originally started as a way to preserve Hinduism against Buddhism and Jainism is now being used by casteist Brahmins to discriminate against others.
@@Amarok-EgY what balance!! is the balance destroyed now because government has made hunting illegal. Aren't there carnivorous animals to maintain the balance.
@@kesardogra5529 I said what was said in Itihasas, read them. You'll understand. If you can't understand and agree to them just gtfo. I'm done explaining to every half-knowledged idiot.
Just wanted to state that the chicken we see nowadays has been bred enough that it can't survive the wilderness at all. Look at the mass it has gained.
The goats are essential for Bali in Vamachara. And with certain mantras, they come themselves to be sacrificed in some places like Kamakhya. Though Kamakhya is a different topic, because there Bali can NEVER stop.
A kshatriya can always eat meat
One of the reasons we call Sri Ram 'Maryada Purushottam' is because of his unmatched kindness and virtuous character. In my view, if he were a meat eater, people wouldn’t regard him with such reverence. After all, if we call him God, we believe he possesses superior qualities. It’s hard to imagine him eating the flesh of any being that he himself created.
In Sanskrit, a single word can have multiple meanings, which is why proper knowledge is essential. Simply reading random translations or commentaries isn't enough to truly grasp the meaning of the shlokas. For example, in the shloka "मांसभूतोदनेन," the word "मांस" can imply the fresh, pulpy flesh of fruits, and "सुराघटसहस्रेण" can refer to a divine elixir or even the holy water of the Ganges. Therefore, we can't conclusively say the word "meat" is implied here based on just one source or translation.
As followers of Sanatan Dharma, we should always seek the truth. I strongly believe that Sri Ram, Sita Mata, and Lakshman never consumed meat. I don't understand why some people are now trying to prove otherwise, but it's wrong to misinterpret such sacred texts.
Here are some references that support my view:
1. www.scribd.com/document/616759423/Did-Lord-Rama-Eat-Meat
2. th-cam.com/users/shorts0UET8LXQBvw?si=6_ZvlUN7kFLXHz8J
3. th-cam.com/video/RbVYcD7m55I/w-d-xo.htmlsi=eGEDyQe9JSJXMz7O
4. www.ramcharit.in/valmiki-ramayana-ayodhyakanda-sarga-chapter-52-slokas-with-hindi-meaning/
It's important that we don’t blindly trust any one's interpretation. Instead, we should do our own research and read the original Valmiki Ramayana in Sanskrit with a proper Sanskrit dictionary to understand the true meaning and context of the text.
So meat eating people are uncivilized and brutes?
mental gymnastics
I THINK HE ALREADY CLEARED THIS IN THE VIDEO, RE WATCH THE VIDEO AGAIN, ITS YOUR EGO WHICH YOU CAN'T ACCEPT CERTAIN TRUTHS, ANDH BHAKTH
@@NikhilV-zj6oz Manusmriti clearly prohibits Meat Eating., Shri Ram being a follower of Manusmriti and himself being in the lineage of Manu would not go against the Manu Code of Conduct. I agree that there were many distortions introduced in Manusmriti later in Kaliyug particularly against Shudras but the Verses prohibiting the Meat Eating are genuine and accepted by all Scholars of Manusmriti.
@NikhilV-zj6oz There's nothing mentioned that to be connected with my ego here, I have just given counter of this video, why it's not factually correct. Study, learn, research first, then keep your pov. And Yes I'm a proud Bhakt of my Sanatan Dharma and culture.
Literally, Ravana tricks Sita disguised as a beautiful deer and thus she begged Lakshmana to hunt it. Why is this even a debate? Ksatrias ate meat and hunted. It’s all over the Vedas. 🤷🏻♂️
We clearly see a difference between early vedic culture and later vedic culture in vedic hymns. Its cultural evolution. It doesn't mean we should try to impose our views or judge the past on modern understanding. In ramayana Horse is very sacred as well.
I am not really concerned about what any particular person BELIEVES. You may believe that there is an old man with a white beard perched in the clouds, that the Ultimate Reality is a young blackish-blue Indian guy, that the universe is eternal, that Mother Mary was a certifiable virgin, or that gross physical matter is the foundation of existence.
The ONLY thing that really matters is your meta-ethics, not your meta-physics.
Do you consider any form of non-monarchical government (such as democracy or socialism) to be beneficial?
Do you unnecessarily destroy the lives of poor, innocent animals and gorge on their bloody carcasses?
Do you believe homosexuality and transvestism are moral?
Do you consider feminist ideology to be righteous?
If so, then you are objectively immoral, and your so-called "enlightened/awakened" state is immaterial, since it does not benefit society in any way.
This is how the Aryan invasion is very relevant 👀
@@abhindasa.d1902 Rama was from east how is aryan invasion theory relevant lol. They clearly mention they imported horses from aratta region of gandhara.
@abhindasa.d1902 Greek philosophers were also vegetarian but most greeks ate meat. Culture evolve and exist side by side as well. Monotheistic views won't work in studying history and culture.
@@gravewalker34 Where did the Vedic period begin? Lol, it was western side then it's moved to east too... That doesn't not means Rama was the first one came here, maybe his ancestors.
(This is how Aryan invasion stuffs used to say)
I wish i could express how much greatufull I am to you for putting out these documentries, all I can say is:
शं नो मित्रः शं वरुणः शं नो भवत्वर्यमा।
शं न इन्द्रो बृहस्पतिः शं नो विष्णुरुरुक्रमः।।
Lots of triggered so-called sattvik kitchen hindus crying in the comments. Yes Sri Ram hunted, offered sacrifice of animals and ate the meat prasadam. If u dont want to eat meat then dont...why cry about Sri Ram's diet 🤷♂.
Absolutely.
They can't DIGEST Facts😂😂😂
Finally found a good comment in this scrap comments
This video should be eye opening for many people, and encourage them to read Valmiki Ramayan in Samskritam.
Also people should keep an open mind and read what Valmiki writes about the society at the time, the prevalent practices, and the incidents which make up the Ramayan.
But then which of the Ramayana should we follow?
Even preists eat meat in vedas.
Yes
We should not get into such arguments. Rama was a kshatriya and hence ate meat. So what ? It does not reduce his importance in any way. Do we look down upon Einstein or Newton because they might have eaten meat ?
next video: ancient Dressing, grooming like hair styles products chapas they use beauty products ornaments .
Yeah I also thought that.
Like I heard that Draupadi Vastraharan never happened. And she was wearing garment, etc, etc
Dreadlocks were the trending hairstyle in gupta empire. We can see many coins and sculptures with kings having dreadlocks. Like Chandragupta II
I have been waiting for this 🙌 Thanks
What do you think they did with the horse at the Ashwamedha?!
Not good things
What?? Explain
I have no interest in food servings of Treta Yug era, I understand that humans were closer to cave / primitive living in that age. But very happy to see the shlokas and illustrations respectfully presented, it only enhances Bhakti to Bhagwan Shri Rama.
16:02 - 16:24: What if Bhagvaan Sri Rama & Maa Sita (, and Sri Lakshmana) *did not consume* the meat that was offered to Agni devata, but just offered it as part of the ritual alone? The question arises because all the quotes / sources cited have *"medhyam"* associated with maamsam (where Sri Rama & Maa Sita are referenced) and don't seem to appear independently to suggest consumption to satisfy hunger or to enjoy a feast.
Manusmriti clearly prohibits Meat Eating., Shri Ram being a follower of Manusmriti and himself being in the lineage of Manu would not go against the Manu Code of Conduct. I agree that there were many distortions introduced in Manusmriti later in Kaliyug particularly against Shudras but the Verses prohibiting the Meat Eating are genuine and accepted by all Scholars of Manusmriti.
You eat what ever offered to God as Prasada ! That's ritual in Hinduism and common sense and we take alcohol as Prasad at kalbhairav temple !
Nothing goes wasted you offered to God !
@INDYEAH That's the general practice. However, there could be exceptions. If the Prasad is distributed entirely, it is alright. Also, it is not clear if Sri Rama offered the meat to Agni devata (as aahuti), in which case, there won't be anything left to consume.
Exactly my thoughts....nowhere it's mentioned they consumed it was only a sacrificial ritual...
Same thoughts as well. Its good we ask questions on this but I dont see any sloka in video that directly says Bhagvaan consumed. Would love Shivoham thoughts on this.
1st mistake. Mamsam literally traslates to flesh or meat. Doesn't say animal meat. Have you ever heard of the word coconut meat?
2nd mistake: it was written that Rama offered meat for vasthu pooja but not mentioned that he consumed it after offering.
Is offering in ritual same consumption for you in your imaginary world?
There 0 ambiguity that in entire Valmiki Ramayanam, there is no mention of lord shri Ram consuming meat. And there is no ambiguity that Rama did not consume meat during aranya vasam. Also you should refer to what Bhishmacharya talked about animal meat consumption in Mahabharatam. Although it is a different era, you get basic understanding of how meat consumption was seen by tapasi and muni people.
Rama keeps his promise. He promised about what food he would eat. And he keeps his word no matter what! It is straight forward. You are the one trying to create ambiguity.
You just imposed your individual opinions on Valmiki Ramayanam!
Also pundareekam means white lotus. Not the pink one. Pink lotus is Rakthotpalam. Black/ blue lotus is Neelotpalam.That is the most important part and you haven't even mentioned it. This shows you don't try to understand proper meanings. That is why you don't understand context of medhyam.
A very great insightful video. Just a note that everything relating to Mamsa may have it roots to Tantric scriptures too which believed to be in practice and appeared during pre-Vedic and Vedic era. Vegetarianism evovled time to time when meat were mentioned to be a form of inducing Tamasic and Rajasic Guna in common humans and thus Satvik guna was taught to be followed to reduce the obssesion on bloody meat that may possibly lead to Asura lifestyle for e.g. increasing the need on slaughter for flesh. And that is also why among the Varnas, Kshatriyas(beastly among other varnas) has the habits of consuming meat, including sacrificing animals to Maa Kali(Rajasic) before wars. Kashmiri Shaivism also had consumption of meat to adapt themselves to the cold climates. Therefore, meat is a part of Hindus diet but no scriptures celebrated since it has to be always taken in limits thus Vegetarianism came into a large practice prrovided by several sects mostly by Vaishnavism, Jainism, Siddhanta, Buddhism...etc.
Replacing the word "beastly" with "valarous" as it is grammatically wrong. 😊
Actually you can ate meat after offering to gods this is Vedic ritual without offering to gods it is not dharmic that's why it is categorised under tamsik and in kaliyuga the scriptures says that these rituals are prohibited
Your Sanskrit pronunciation is great. It's wonderful to listen to. I've read the Valmiki Ramayana. There are clear evidences of eating meat in that early epic.
Do you believe that Hanuman is actually a monkey, or perhaps a forest dweller who adorns himself with a tail? And what about Jambavanta? (In Europe, there are tribes with similar characteristics.)
Hanuman and vanara are humans. Monkeys cannot learn Vedas. Hanuman is a top scholar.
@G.S.30 I'm a believer of Hanuman as a human
@@G.S.30vanaras are not monkeys study our texts and talk when lord Brahma created creation his creations were listen and monkey and vanaras were mentioned separately.
They are forest men who have tails
He is definitely related to Humans and very close to them. He is not a monkey but a human having tail. By the way they are extinct now.
this video is a hoax and propaganda to dislodge hindus from their ancient traditions and culture. our culture has came long way. and at first i liked his videos, but now i see that he is ,making videos just for views. please get your knowledge from GURUS not from young boys who were born tommorow.
"dislodge hindus from their ancient traditions" lol no. Eating meat was in our culture. Instead, We have dislodged ourself from eating meat which has caused mass protein deficiency and stunted growth in our country.
lol the gurus don't know anything either. They will give you information according to their agenda. Instead learn sanskrit and do research yourself
@parthkhanolkar7916 even in vedas it is written to learn from a guru. Your scriptures says this, why are you neglecting the culture of your own country? EVEN those scriptures were written by those gurus, babas, rishis whatever you call them. The problem is, because of people like you Hindu culture is becoming more abrahamic( book centred). Child, instead go to a gurukul and study from there.
😂
Learn Veda and about Vedic era dear. Dhongi gurus doesn’t help.
@ProjectShivoham please make a video on the history of Telugu language and our culture. Im really curious of our Telugu's history, our kingdoms, literature, lifestyle and language please do it !😊🙏🏻
No history for telugu before 2000 years ago
@@Bhuvanfirethen who are shatavāhanās you kiddo😂😂😂
@@user-mc3nh2hm6p Satavahanas aren't telugu dude the official language of court in satavahana empire is Maharashtri prakit and the people spoke tamizh there are coins about satavahanas
But your andhra government and low iq telugu scholars fraudulently said it's "proto telugu"'
Tell me where you get this BGM from
Please suggest us an author for Valmiki ramayanam original texts hope you reply it will help us
21 notes
Just one thing , Narayan is satv guna. He didnt eat meat. But Ram avtar he dont know he is vishnu as it is against boon of ravan. So Rama even if he eat meat during rama avtar , shouldnt be a rule for vaishnavas
as per this video, you will have to rely on google! and translation from Internet! this video is a joke and best buy for fools
Is anyone know the mantras in background.? Its very captivating.