Thursday, December 25, 2014

Indians are damn fools: What is the heck is wrong is Indian women? Exhibit A: Anceeta Martis

It seems you cant swing a dead cat without coming across an article about the various foibles of Indian men, most of these written by Indian women. Apparently we are unattractive,stingy,cruel, misogynistic,cowardly, weak , unhygienic,geeky and a plethora of other unappealing characteristics.
Far be it from me to disagree with much of a great deal of this. Sure, to some extant I actually agree with many of the complaints Indian women have with their men. But I would like to remind the ladies of Spenglers Laws of Gender Parity which states that
"In every corner of the world and in every epoch of history, the men and women of every culture deserve each other. "
In other words, Indian ladies you aren't exactly perfect either. Your flaws and virtues are the mirror image of those of Indian male. Indeed I will articulate the same in this article

Im not really a fan of this individual Barrister Mohandas Gandhi(I am informed he is referred to by another title) but he was quite prescient when he noticed that Indians have the knack for the picking up the vices of the Western world sans its virtues. Well that applies as much to Indian women as it does to the men.
It has been about time that someone point out the drawbacks of Indian women. Since very few are forthcoming ,let me do the honors.
Seeing as how Im an NRI and many of the female blog deals mostly with NRI men, my intention was to highlight the less than desirable qualities of NRI women to emphasize the defects of Indian women in general.
Why NRIs you may ask? Because I strongly believe in Abraham Linclons dictum that a person's true nature is revealed when he is given power. Because in achieving any sort of power be it financial, political, military,social or a combination of the above, all of our glories and warts are magnified.
And sad to say while Indian NRI men don't fare very well, Spenglers Law pretty much guarantees that Indian women don't either.
I came across the blog of this young college age woman called Anceeta Martis(age 19/20 as of late 2014) and she is pretty much typical of the NRI female of upper middle class background.
Normally I would  have someone older in mind such as graduate student in U.S as that is a very unique and sad category as I would soon explain but this one is pretty much already there.
Like most young Western educated Indian women these days she is a feminist and like most Indian feminists , she has a bizarre sense of entitlement and decries the lack of chivalry where men pay her way for dinner, drinks, gifts and open the door and stand up when a lady enters the room.
This tired entitlement trope has been skewered so frequently and mercilessly on the 'mansophere' and the MRM that it seems almost painfully redundant to address it here again. But I will say this much she seems the type of woman who thinks feminism is whatever should maximally benefit woman. Logic, ethics and standards be damned. So it is no surprise she feels she is equal and yet entitled.
And then there is this obessession and open talk about menstruation .MY GOD WHAT IS WRONG WITH INDIAN WOMEN THAT THEY ARE SO SHAMELESS AND SO UTTERLY LACKING IN DISCRETION IN THIS REGARD. She actually complained that women are stigmatized from talking about it. IN WHAT PARALLEL UNIVERSE IS SHE LIVING IN , PRETTY MUCH EVERY INDIAN WOMEN OUT THERE HAS NO ISSUE DISCUSSING THIS MOST INTIMATE DETAILS WITH MALES PRESENT!
There was this girl who I went out with last year. No she didn't claim to be a feminist and yes I paid for everything. After a few drinks she actually whispered that I should remind her in a hour to change her pad (and no I am talking about an iPad!). Yes this was on a date. And yes she thought this was completely acceptable conversation to engage with a man you are trying to attract.
Needless to say , I never called her again after that day despite her frantic text messages.
And our women wail : how come romance is dead? They say this while wistfully watching old romantic movies with Audrey Hepburn. Say remember when Audrey Hepburn had to inform Cary Grant in Charade that she couldn't find a reasonably priced box of Tampax in Paris? No? neither do I. Why because ladies(Indian ladies especially), that is being classy and graceful. Discretion and mystique are a big part of it.
Look, menstruation is unpleasant and frankly gross. You know it is , so why do you need to yell it to the world? It deals with with your nether regions which us men prefer to think of in contexts as removed from bleeding as possible. What part of this don't you get exactly?
And there is the business of cussing and use of the f bombs. Perhaps I am a bit old school (I am on the "wrong" side of 30 after all) but I think a woman cussing is very unbecoming. Heck I don't cuss much myself and certainly not in my blog posts(comments section is another matter as some major league idiots and cretins only understand this language).
And Indian ladies please stop deluding yourself. Not everyone is trying to hit on you! You are not that hot. Due to the repressed nature of Indian society and skewed sex ratio and lack of proper grooming not to mention Australoid intrusion in our genetics, its pretty much slim pickens for Indian boys or girls in university. But keep in mind girls are the choosers and pursuees especially in a country like India so their sexual market value is inflated to absurd degrees
And when many of these women come to U.S for graduate studies, oh do they experience a brutal shock. Here the sex ratio is very much in favor of men and feminine appearance and beauty is held to a much higher standard than in India. Hence our self proclaimed beauty queens suffer a tremendous fall in stature -they are now literally a face in a crowd if even that. And these Indian female graduates ALMOST ALWAYS DRIFT TOWARDS MISANDRIST FEMINISM.
Oh good god do they become shrill, bitter and abrasive. At this point I should bring up another law of an astute American social commentator. In this case Sailers Law of Female Journalism
"The most heartfelt articles by female journalists tend to be demands that social values be overturned in order that, Come the Revolution, the journalist herself will be considered hotter-looking."
In this case when applicable to Indian female graduate students it may read as " The most heartfelt pleas by female South Asian graduates tend to be demands that societal structures be overturned in order that, the social of milieu of an Indian university will be recreated and she will be considered desirable again."
Ms Martis considers herself to be rather attractive and thinks of her self as bit of a prima donna all the while maintaining the pretense of a down to earth individual. Such hypocrisies and fake modesty is rife amongst Indian women!
One comical yet simultaneously sad aspect of Indian women is where actually believe they actually possess qualities of more accomplished Indian women as if by osmosis!Therefore you have Indian women believing they are incredibly gorgeous SOLELY ON THE FACT THAT A FEW INDIAN WOMEN HAVE WON MISS UNIVERSE/MISS WORLD CONTESTS.
This insanity really started in 1994 when Sushmita Sen and later Aiswarya Rai swept the Universe and World titles respectively. God forbid women ever concentrate on the geo political and socio economic aspects of those awards. Is it a coincidence that these events heavily promoted by cosmetic brands honored Indian women thusly after India opened up its economy in 1991 and thus paving the way for foreign cosmetics.
Again women, especially feminists , have this perverse habit of taking credit for the sacrifices and achievements of other women and wishing to be complimented or compensated as if they have they themselves have done the same.
I see that Ms Martis has time to read Cosmopolitan and Vogue magazine but considers subjects like history and politics boring. Now I don't have any issue if you find something boring but then DONT MAKE PRONOUNCEMENTS ON MATTERS WHICH PRESUPPOSE A KNOWLEDGE OF AFOREMETIONED "BORING" SUBJECTS!
This chick like most Indian women has zero knowledge of not just history or politics but also religion,geography,geo politics, economics, military strategies, sociology and anthropology to name a few. But oh she sure does have an opinion on religion(its all a fraud don't you know) and nationalism is bunk(prevents her from supporting studly Australian cricketers). Is it any wonder she ends up sounding like a complete and utter bimbo. No scratch that, atleast bimbos are beautiful
Pretty much every Indian woman pretty much sounds like a complete and utter dits. If Indian men lack gravitas, Indian women correspondingly are lacking in proper grace and decorum. They do not subscribe to the dictum- Better to be silent and have people suspect you as a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt. Anytime I hear Indian girls talk in front of foreigners, I just want to hang my head in shame as they sound like such fools. And the absolute worst part is they actually think they are intelligent because they have an MBA or some other masters degree and work in some Fortune 500 company. Therefore their word is bond!They have zero knowledge of say the history Israel/Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, American defense establishment, Wall Street, the economy in general, the varying climate patterns of the last 10000 years BUT THEY HAVE AN OPINION ON EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE ISSUES AND THEN SOME! And pretty much all of them brainless left wing talking points. This is not to say all left wingers are brainless. Indeed some like Hitchens and Mickey Kaus are quite formidable intellectuals. But women , Indian women, pick the Left because that is what the celebrities espouse and it is socially acceptable in major metropolitan areas where they congregate. And to it feminism being the subset of the left and all the you go girlism associated with it.

I don't have a masters degree as it is not my cup of tea and frankly it didn't make sense to me from a cost benefit standpoint. There was this one chick who was interested in me but then had a change of heart because I didn't have a masters degree even as her degree was in absolutely lame field such as social studies! Hahahahaha! And I was earning 3 times what she was earning. Either way I never reciprocated as such because I had no idea of it at the time(a mutual friend revealed it to me later on) and while she was attractive  she was nothing really to lose sleep over so I quickly forgot about her.
This brings to the utterly crass wannabe elitism of Indian women. They get their nose up in the air so very quickly once they achieve some status.
One example of this is how Indian American girls treated FOB(fresh off the boat) Indian boys in university vs how Indian girls treat them who just landed in America a few years or even a few semesters prior! There is just no comparison. Indian Americans(and no they are not NRIs) of either sex are actually polite, well mannered and friendly with relatively few airs much like white or black Americans of the same background.
But Indian girls, good god! They wouldn't even look at these guys much less date. They actually felt entitled to date the white guys. Again no scratch that, they actually felt that white guys should be CHASING THEM because they are from the land of Aishwarya Rai and Sushmita Sen!
When very few white guys take the bait, they often turn to militant feminism.

And who hasn't noticed Indian women who hang out with white chicks pretty soon start thinking of themselves as somewhat white and in turn ..you guessed it...thumb their noses at Indian men (often to the latter's amusement). The same women who rage against admittedly silly products such as Fair and Lovely(unless you are talking about the potentially destructive practice of bleaching, no product makes you fairer, at best they neutralize the effects of and protect you from the darkening courtesy of the sun) quite often use it in private. But when it come to U.S and learn that their skin in somewhat considered exotic, they quickly ditch and harangue eager audiences about the racism of Indian society.
                                               "STOP STARING AT MY TITS YOU CHAUVINIST PIG!"


Darling you are at best slightly above average looking. Make up can help you when you are young but as you age and god will you age quickly and badly,trust me I know, your looks will take a severe beating and when you are finally ready to have children and settle down after your career(
hahahaha) is stable, do you really think any man worth his salt will want you.
Ive seen this play out all too often including some close female relatives. There is a bizarre tendency to select freak anecdotal evidence of women behaving or achieving in a unique manner and assume that applies to the entire gender! "But my aunt had a baby at 45"! they inform oh so earnestly, so surely I can wait for my prince as well " . Ms Anceeta suffers from the same delusions

Sorry sugartits, the chances are you are going to die alone(your cats which would feed on your corpse dont count). And when I see the low birth rate of Indians these days, scores of Indian women might as well join her. We will get by ...


Friday, December 19, 2014

Why are our super patriots so insecure?

 
Im sure you have come across fire breathing anti Western Hindutva who goes on and on about "imperialism" as if it is still 1924 but loses no opportunity to provide the following quotes
 
  1. Mark Twain: "So far as I am able to judge, nothing has been left undone, either by man or nature, to make India the most extraordinary country that the sun visits on his rounds. Nothing seems to have been forgotten, nothing overlooked."
  2. Will Durant, American Historian: "India will teach us the tolerance and gentleness of mature mind, understanding spirit and a unifying, pacifying love for all human beings."
  3. William James, American Author: "From the Vedas we learn a practical art of surgery, medicine, music, house building under which mechanized art is included. They are encyclopedia of every aspect of life, culture, religion, science, ethics, law, cosmology and meteorology."
  4. Max Muller, German Scholar: "There is no book in the world that is so thrilling, stirring and inspiring as the Upanishads." ('Sacred Books of the East')
  5. Dr Arnold Toynbee, British Historian: "It is already becoming clear that a chapter which had a Western beginning will have to have an Indian ending if it is not to end in the self-destruction of the human race. At this supremely dangerous moment in history, the only way of salvation for mankind is the Indian way."
  6. Sir William Jones, British Orientalist: "The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity is of wonderful structure, more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin and more exquisitely refined than either."
  7. P. Johnstone: "Gravitation was known to the Hindus (Indians) before the birth of Newton. The system of blood circulation was discovered by them centuries before Harvey was heard of."
  8. Emmelin Plunret: "They were very advanced Hindu astronomers in 6000 BC. Vedas contain an account of the dimension of Earth, Sun, Moon, Planets and Galaxies." ('Calendars and Constellations')
  9. Sylvia Levi: "She (India) has left indelible imprints on one fourth of the human race in the course of a long succession of centuries. She has the right to reclaim ... her place amongst the great nations summarizing and symbolizing the spirit of humanity. From Persia to the Chinese sea, from the icy regions of Siberia to Islands of Java and Borneo, India has propagated her beliefs, her tales, and her civilization!"
  10. Schopenhauer: "Vedas are the most rewarding and the most elevating book which can be possible in the world." (Works VI p.427)
  11. Romain Rolland, French scholar : "If there is one place on the face of earth where all the dreams of living men have found a home from the very earliest days when man began the dream of existence, it is India."
  12. Henry David Thoreau, American Thinker & Author: Whenever I have read any part of the Vedas, I have felt that some unearthly and unknown light illuminated me. In the great teaching of the Vedas, there is no touch of sectarianism. It is of all ages, climbs, and nationalities and is the royal road for the attainment of the Great Knowledge. When I read it, I feel that I am under the spangled heavens of a summer night.
  13. R.W. Emerson, American Author: In the great books of India, an empire spoke to us, nothing small or unworthy, but large, serene, consistent, the voice of an old intelligence, which in another age and climate had pondered and thus disposed of the questions that exercise us.
 
Quite a bit of hyperbolic praise! But exactly why should I care too much about these esteemed people's opinion on India or Hinduism when in fact from perusing some of their works, it seems they know so very little of it!
 
Especially humourous is the inclusion of Max Muller who to many Hindutvadis is a monster for introducing the notion of Aryans as foreigners in our culture. So temporarily he is worthy of mention because he has said some kind words about Hinduism!
 
Mind you I like it foreigners praise us . It is of course human nature to seek out side validation. After a certain age we become skeptical of our parents praise of our abilities and seek outside approval for our abilities.
Similarly I understand why we are thrilled when foreigners praise our country and our scriptures and our civilization.
 
However there are some caveats to this particular situation
 
Firstly online Hindus in particular tend to be a rather anti Western people who often think of whites as barbarians who achieved their "ill gotten" wealth and status by plundering the East (especially India) of its riches,both material and intellectual. As an aside,this would be news to prosperous nations like Estonia,Hungary and Slovakia who had absolutely nothing to do with colonized countries but indeed they were colonized by Eastern Turks and Mongols! Even successful Italy was at best a third rate colonial power with limited holdings such as Libya and Ethiopia. Its success had more to do with Venetian trade and scholastic traditions which gave birth to the Renaissance than any colonial endeavor. Meanwhile the more successful colonial powers Spain and Portugal were basket cases by the 19th century.
So it is really curious that they would resort to Westerners for this self esteem boost.
 
Also as mentioned, these individuals have very little knowledge of Hinduism. I notice that most of these authors lived during the 1800s when Christianity was being discredited in the eyes of the intellectual elite. So with the influence of the Romantic movement they simply decided to move on to
(in their eyes) an exotic and living polytheistic religion.
It is little different from Richard Gere or Robert Downey Jr converting to Buddhism as they had become jaded by Christianity in America.
 
Note how ecstatic these proud Hindus become when some third rate ditz like Julia Roberts or Katy Perry convert to Hinduism!
THE WORLD IS COMING BACK TO HINDUISM they say in caps and larger font( they seem to be very fond of the caps lock)
 
I tried informing them that conversion of foreigners is NOT allowed in Hinduism. The only exception is for those who are vratya(fallen Kshatriyas, the residents of Magadha,Vanga and Dakshinapatha were often described thus) and the proper ritual is a vryatatsoma- a rather gruesome procedure involving the sacrifice of a few hundred oxen. At this they scream that I am a "hasbara troll/Christian convert" spreading misinformation about Hinduism and not only does Hinduism accept everyone in their midst without question but technically everyone was a Hindu at some point.
Also I am apparently a Rothschild agent for the spreading the misinformation that we sacrificed animals. I believe I addressed and demolished the nonsensical claim of "sacrifice less" sacrifices here, here and here.
 
To be fair, I do believe that as per some Vedic commentators , individuals following other religions but of Vedic lineage can be inducted back into Hinduism. Hence Sayana was able to convert Harihara and Bukka back to Hinduism from Islam in order to create the Vijayanagar empire which in the words of Sitaram Goel "stood a rock for 3 centuries against Islamic imperialism"
 
I am very suspicious of these Hindutvadi netters as I feel they are not so much interested in reviving and revitalizing Hinduism but using it as a sword, shield or even fig leaf for their own private inadequacies. As I was once could be counted as a uber patriot myself in my youth(shudder!) , I tried to be sympathetic to them but I know the mindset all too well.
 
They suffer from deep inferiority complexes- a legacy of Islamic and British rule. That itself should not be held against them obviously. But in these particular individuals, it can often be very severe.What we should criticize is their crude ,nationalistic and ultra conservative approach to Hinduism.
In this rigid approach to Hinduism, they are not all that different from Muslim fundamentalists whom they loath so much.
 
Their very language gives them away. When they say "animal sacrifices and meat eating were injected by whites to make Hindus self loathing" we have to ask a few questions
 
1)Why would whites do this when they themselves are meat eaters?
2) Why would meat eating or animal sacrifices compel Hindus to feel disgusted at themselves
 
The answer I believe brings us back to the aforementioned authors and their quotations. Left unsaid is that many of these individuals are considered proto hippies who heralded some notions prevalent in German and English such as vegetarianism and non violence( Mark Twain for instance wrote a satirical essay about the U.S invasion of the Phillipines)and were only too happy to present the same in an exotic Hindu package.
 
It is this recycled Hinduism that Hindu elites such as Gandhi,Aurobindo Ghosh Rabindranath Tagore, GK Gokhale and even "Vedic scholars" like Lokmanya Tilak fell for.
Savarkar(ironically founder of Hindutva) alone was a voice in the wilderness screaming about blood and soil Vedic culture and importance of eating meat and violence(in an encounter with then lawyer Gandhi in Savarkars residence in London, Gandhi noted his revulsion at Savarkar frying some prawns to which Savarkar responded"Jhingo ki baat chhodh ,hamhain aise logon ki zaroorat hain jo angrezon ko kacha kha sakhein!")
 
In the end, these Hindus are not interested in neither the philosophical aspects of Vedic heritage nor the hearty,robust and earthy exploits of our gods and kings but on impressing their Western hippie progenitors with their non violence and vegetarianism!
 
                                        Average online Hindutvadi's knowledge of Hinduism        
 
        
 
 
 
 
 
 

Thursday, December 11, 2014

Animal sacrifices were INTRINSIC to Vedic Hinduism -Part 3



Vimucchyadhvamaghnyaa devayaanaa aganmaYajurveda 12.73
The Aghnya cows and bulls bring you prosperity
 
The original translation:
Be loosed, inviolable, Godward-farers! We have attained
the limit of this darkness: we have won the light.

 
No cows or bulls here. Heck the Agniveer/Vadakayil quote isn't even the correct tense!
edit:The confusion may due to the exclusive use of the word aghnya to mention cows. What is dishonest here is add the word "cow" in the translation when none is available. aghnya simply means indestructible or "which should not be destroyed" which in some contexts refers to the divine Cow but here refers certainly not to cows but likely to practitioners of the sacrifice.

“Bhishma said: That man who wishes to increase his own flesh by the meat of another living creature is such that there is none meaner and more cruel than he. In this world there is nothing that is dearer to a creature than his life. Hence, one should show mercy to the lives of others as he does to his own life. Forsooth, O son, flesh has its origin in the vital seed. There is great sin attached to its eating, as, indeed, there is merit in abstaining from it. ( Mahabharata 116.11-13) 4000 BC
 
Is this Shanti Parva again?

 Maa gaamanaagaamaditim vadhishta - Rigveda 8.101.15
Do not kill the cow. Cow is innocent and aditi – that ought not to be cut into pieces
 Now Rigveda 8.101 ends at 5 but doing a quick control F for Aditi after what seems like 100s of hits and scanning through all I found this
 
Rg Veda 8.90.15
 

The Rudras' Mother, Daughter of the Vasus, centre of nectar, the Adityas' Sister-
To folk who understand will 1 proclaim it-injure not Aditi, the Cow, the sinless.

Once again. Very different from what was claimed. The verse doesn't say that the cow is Aditi but that Aditi is the Cow.  Aditi , the mother of gods is sinless and is as a Cow but it does not imply all cows therefore are Aditi!
It is as if to say that a mans daughter is the apple of his eye but it doesn't mean all apples become his daughters!
 
Note the capital letter for the Cow as if to emphasize a proper noun than a common one.
And to emphasize that further, the next line

 16 Weak-minded men have as a cow adopted me who came hither from the Gods, a Goddess,
Who, skilled in eloquence, her voice uplifteth, who standeth near at hand with all devotions.

Firstly note the insistence of using small letters for the cow here. And then chastising those as weak minded who think worshipping a common cow is as worshipping Aditi!
What more proof do you need of the difference between divine cow and a mortal cow?
 Don't believe me? here- knock yourself out
 
Antakaaya goghaatamYajurveda 30.18 Destroy those who kill cows

 The original and complete verse:
18 For the Dice-king a gambler; for the die Krita one who
contemplates his adversary's ill luck, for the Tretâ a
gamble-manager; for the Dvâpara a chief manager; for Askanda
one who will not leave the gambling-hall; for Mrityu one
who approaches cows; for Antaka a Cow-killer; for
Hunger one who goes begging to a man who is cutting
up a cow; for Misdeed a leader of the Charakas; for
Misery a robber;

If you read the entire Chapter 30 , it is salutation to Savitr and how different qualities and circumstances are attributed to different things. It is not clear when Cow-killer refers to divine or mortal cow but certainly it is a lot more nuanced that the translated given by AVs.
 
Dhenu sadanam rayeenaamAtharvaveda 11.1.34
Cow is fountainhead of all bounties
 
The actual verse:
May we adore thee, Sacrifice that yieldeth an everlasting son,cow, home of treasures,
 
This could well be a mistranslation due to bad grammar. Clearly this verse wishes that the sacrifice yields a son, a cow and treasures or bounties. Certainly doesn't imply cow is the source of bounties!And even if it did , so what? Cant its meat also be considered a bounty?

Aa gaavo agnamannuta bhadramakrantseedantu
Bhooyobhooyo rayimidasya vardhayannabhinne
Na taa nashanti na dabhaati taskaro
aasaamamitro vyathiraa dadharshati
Na taa arvaa renukakaato ashnute
na samskritramupa yanti taa abhi
Gaavo bhago gaava indro me achhaan
Yooyam gaavo medayathaa
Maa vah stena eeshata maaghanshasah--  28th Sukta of 6th Mandal,  Rigveda 5000 BC-

  Everyone should ensure that cows are free from miseries and kept healthy. 
 God blesses those who take care of cows. 
 Even the enemies should not use any weapon on cows 
 No one should slaughter the cow 
 Cow brings prosperity and strength 
 If cows keep healthy and happy, men and women shall also keep disease free and prosperous 
 May the cow eat green grass and pure water. May they not be killed and bring prosperity to us.
 
The original translation

I. THE Kine have come and brought good fortune: let them rest in the cow-pen and be happy near us.
Here let them stay prolific, many-coloured, and yield through many morns their milk for Indra.
2 Indra aids him who offers sacrifice and gifts: he takes not what is his, and gives him more thereto.
Increasing ever more and ever more his wealth, he makes the pious dwell within unbroken bounds.
3 These are ne'er lost, no robber ever injures them: no evil-minded foe attempts to harass them.
The master of the Kine lives many a year with these, the Cows whereby he pours his gifts and serves
the Gods.
4 The charger with his dusty brow o'ertakes them not, and never to the shambles do they take their
way.
These Cows, the cattle of the pious worshipper, roam over widespread pasture where no danger is.
5 To me the Cows seem Bhaga, they seem Indra, they seem a portion of the first-poured Soma.
These present Cows, they, O ye Indra. I long for Indra with my heart and spirit.
6 O Cows, ye fatten e'en the worn and wasted, and make the unlovely beautiful tolook on.
Prosper my house, ye with auspicious voices. Your power is glorified in our assemblies.
7 Crop goodly pasturage and be prolific drink pure sweet water at good drinking places.
Never be thief or sinful man your matter, and may the dart of Rudra still avoid you.
8 Now let this close admixture be close intermigled with these Cows,
Mixt with the Steer's prolific flow, and, Indra, with thy hero might.
 
What can kind of a mortal cow would yield milk only for Indra? How can no robber injure a mortal cow and how would a cow fatten the worn and wasted and make the ugly beautiful?
This is the Cow which exists in the realm of Indra and Rudra and is of tantric symbolism. Not a mortal cow.
 
The purchaser of flesh performs himsa (violence) by his wealth; he who eats flesh does so by enjoying its taste; the killer does himsa by actually tying and killing the animal. Thus, there are three forms of killing. He who brings flesh or sends for it, he who cuts of the limbs of an animal, and he who purchases, sells, or cooks flesh and eats it-all of these are to be considered meat-eaters.-    Mahabharata, Anu. 115:40

 I dont think I will be discussing Mahabharata quotes anymore for reasons mentioned before and the comments by Jam about how a good chunk of Mahabharata was actually composed in the medieval era.
 

ghrtam duhaanaam aditim janaayeti | . . . eshu lokeshwanam maa himsaareeti ||.
The one who provides ghee is aditi.  She is not to be harmed.- Shatapatha Braahmana

Please cite the verse

Na mamsam Raghava bhunkte, na chaiva madhu sevate, Vanyam suvihitam nityam bhaktamsnati panchamam.

“ Sri Rama does not take meat or honey. He partakes everyday of wild fruits and boiled (wild) rice fully sanctioned (for an ascetic) in the evening.”  Valmiki Ramayana, Sundarakanda, Skanda 36, Sloka 41 -4300 BC

Eh this does not mean Rama is by tradition a vegetarian but that his imposed ascetic lifestyle compelled him to be one temporarily.

 "You must not use your God-given body for killing God's creatures, whether they are human, animal or whatever." (Yajur Veda, 12.32)
 
The original translation:
Agni, go forth resplendent, thou with thine auspicious flames
of fire.
Shining with mighty beams of light harm not my people
with thy form.
 
Completely different . It is imploring Agni to keep his powers of light and fire in check not to harm people. Please note the lack of references to animals or "whatever"(didn't know Rg Vedic authors had Sanskrit equivalents for American slang  but then what do I know!)
 
 [Manusmriti, Mahabharat references deleted]

 
 “Having no ill feeling for any living being, in all manners possible and for all times, is called ahimsa, and it should be the desired goal of all seekers.”-  Patanjali Yoga Sutras (2.30)

One need not have ill feeling towards a cow in order to eat it!
 
[Manusmriti, Mahabharat references deleted]

Do not injure the beings living on the earth, in the air and in the water. - Yajur Veda- 5000 BC 
Chapter and verse please.

One is dearest to God who has no enemies among the living beings, who is nonviolent to all creatures.--- Bhagavad Gita 4000 BC
 
Wasn't this said just before Arjuna slaughtered his teachers, cousins, uncles and tens of thousands of warriors?
 
Anago hatya vai bheema kritye,  Maa no gaamashvam purusham vadheeh
It is definitely a great sin to kill innocents. Do not kill our cows, horses and people. Atharvaveda 10.1.29
 
The actual verse:
The slaughter of an innocent, O Krityā, is an awful deed. Slay not cow, horse, or man of ours.
Just FYI. The book X chapter 1 is titled Charm against witchcraft!
So that verse is a protection against spells by a witch not to harm property of kinsfolk. Certainly not an exhortation for pacifism!
 
Non-injury, truthfulness, freedom from theft, lust, anger, and greed, and an effort to do what is agreeable and beneficial to all creatures - this is the common duty .  Srimad-Bhagavatam
 
Medieval era text. Doesn't carry much authority compared to the Vedas or Upanishads

[Manusmriti, Mahabharat references deleted]
 
They who kill men or slay cows should be outlawed and ostracised (Rig I.16-114).
I.16 ends at verse 9.
 
[Manusmriti, Mahabharat references deleted]

Flesh-eating, drinking, gambling and adultery, all, destroy and mar the mental faculties of a man (Atharva VI.7-70-71)

There is no 70-71 for VI. Also 7 is the following

The Charm Brihaspati hath bound, the fatness-dropping citron-
   wood, the potent Khadira, for strength,
This Charm hath Indra put on him for power and manly
   puissance.
 t yieldeth strength to strengthen him, again, again, from morn
   to morn, having approached the deities.

Does not support vegetarian claims 

Protect both our species, two-legged and four-legged. Both food and water for their needs supply. May they with us increase in stature and strength. Save us from hurt all our days, O Powers! -  Rig Veda 10.37.11. VE, 319

The actual verse:

The hymn to Surya
Gods, to our living creatures of both kinds vouchsafe protection, both to bipeds and toquadrupeds,
That they may drink and eat invigorating food. So grant us health and strength and perfect
innocence.

How is imploring the Sun God Surya to protect men and livestock imply a lack of meat eating and be against war?

ashvam naa himseeh |
A horse is not to be harmed - Yajurveda. 13/42 -5000 BC
 
The actual verse:
 The wind's impetuous rush, Varuna's navel! the horse that
springs to life amid the waters!
The rivers’ tawny child, based on the mountain, harm not,
O Agni, in the loftiest region.
 
Ok what kind of mortal horse is born in waters, that too from Varuna? And it inhabits a mountain? And we implore Agni not to harm it?
How can anyone say with a straight face, that this is a flesh and blood horse?

 gaam maa himseeraditim viraajam ||
The cow is aditi. She is not to be harmed in any manner.  -Yajurveda. 13/43 
 
The actual verse:
 Unwasting Drop, red, eager, pressing forward, Agni I worship
with repeated homage.
Forming thyself with joints in proper order, harm not the
Cow, Aditi widely ruling!

We have already established the Cow and Aditi. Once again this is addressed to Agni to not harm Aditi, mother of Gods. Again note capital C for the Cow!
 
 When one’s food is pure ( devoid of meat ) , one’s being becomes pure – Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.26.2
 The verse cited

 'There is this verse, "He who sees this, does not see death, nor illness, nor pain; he who sees this, sees everything, and obtains everything everywhere.

 

Either the chapter and verse are incorrect or the interpreter is downright stupid and dishonest. Im leaning towards the latter.



LISTEN, I AM NOT IN THE HABIT OF PROVIDING PROOFS- when CHOOTS ask me for proofs my usual answer to them is "FU#K OFF!"
  It is quite obvious from your thoroughly idiotic blog and mentally unbalanced mindset that you are not even capable of providing proofs. Pretty much every quote provided was either a deliberate misinterpretation, misplaced quote, personal emotional bias(Manusmriti), outdated text(Manusmriti) or a saga with many dubious medieval era insertions(Mahabharata)
 
 Did you even check for yourself the veracity of the quotes or were you simply content to copy and paste them from the site of yet another ignoramus(Agni Veer) and yet again without giving due credit to the original author! How shameless can your plagiarism get?
 
So anyone who asks you for proof of your fantastic claims are choots apparently. You have all the sanity and megalomania of a cult leader but alas without the charisma. Reading your blog is like being cornered by a very dull ,self important talkative jackass at a party who only talks of himself and thinks he is endlessly interesting.
 
  I MAKE AN EXCEPTION IN THIS POST TO CONVINCE PM NARENDRA MODI
Hahahahahahahahahahaha! Thank you captain. I haven't laughed like this in a while. I do believe that you are actually deranged enough to think PM Modi has an obligation to religiously follow your site. And if he doesn't, dammit you will MAKE him follow it, hence the instructions to all your minions to post your regurgitated nonsense in the website and twitter feed in his and all the BJP party members.
Congratulations, you are already banned by any self respecting website as a spammer and now you have succeeded in convincing your foolish young followers into making an ass of themselves and perhaps even jeopardize their future in case they post something inflammatory!

 
In Vedic sacred Sanskrit texts  the cow is a symbol of the divine bounty of the earth and ALL the ancient scriptures prohibit the slaughter of cows.   The slaughter of any animal goes against the principle of ahimsa. 
 For the last time- Yes the cow is a symbol of the sacred. And guess what- so is the snake! So is the tiger, lion,monkey amongst a host of other animals which are associated with various gods and goddesses. Do you know which other species is associated with the divine- man! Are we supposed to stop killing criminals and murderers as well?

The white invader imported Gandhi from South Africa to secure Ahimsa for themselves , to save their own deceitful white asses . 
Gandhi was not an "import" from South Africa as he was neither Zulu nor Afrikaans/Boer but a person born in India to Indian parents. He inserted himself into the Indian freedom struggle at the right place and at the right time. - when the British pretty much squashed the remnants of the revolutionary insurgent movement and the nationalists were debating what to do next.

Ahimsa is not causing pain to any living being at any time through the actions of one's mind, speech or body.-   Sandilya Upanishad 5000 BC 

Chapter and verse. As you can see I have ZERO confidence in the veracity of the interpretation of the Vedic verses you provide.

 The Maharishis saw life as the very stuff of the Divine, an emanation of the Source and part of a cosmic continuum.  They held that each life form, even water and trees, possesses consciousness and energy.    

If trees and water also possessed consciousness , wouldn't be they criminals by your definition if they ate fruits, herbs and drank water?

Nonviolence, ahimsa, the primary basis of vegetarianism, has long been central to the religious traditions of India- especially Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism.  Religion in India has consistently upheld the sanctity of life, whether human, animal or, in the case of the Jains, elemental.
 
All rubbish! There are plenty of wars recorded in Hindu history ,many of these waged by prominent Hindu personalities later deified such as Rama and Krishna. They showed little hesitance in killing either animal or human when the need arose.

There is no greater sinner than that non-vegetarian man who seeks to increase the bulk of his own flesh by the flesh of other beings
 
There is actually no greater sinner than those who distort sacred texts to satiate their own personal biases thereby spreading ignorance. I sincerely believe captain that you will spend a considerable amount of time in hell. In Hinduism, spreading ignorance is amongst the highest of sins.And yes we do believe in hell. 

The word GAU also means the Earth and the yajna dedicated to keep the Earth the environment clean is called Gomedha Yajna.  To keep the food pure or to keep the senses under control, to keep the earth free from pollution is called Gomedha Yajna . 
 
Shut up! Just shut up!

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Animal Sacrifices were INTRINSIC to Vedic Hinduism- Part 2

[Irrelevant rubbish deleted]

 
Dharma has attributes like  rationality, sense of duty, justice, peace, truthfulness, hospitality, kindness , respect, compassion, non-violence, rectitude, humanity, spirituality, fairness , patience, self restraint , tolerance, ethics, service to others, right to life , natural justice, virtue, morality, bonafide work and philanthropy.  Dharma thus truly symbolises universal values of humanism and forms the basis of global ethics.

 
 
Tadrisho ayam anuprashno yatra dharmaha sudurlabaha
Dushkamha pralisankhyatum tatkenatra vysvasyathi
Prabhavarthaya bhutanam dharmapravachanam kritam
Yasyat prabhavasamyuktaha sa dharma iti nischayaha

 

 
It is most difficult to define Dharma. Dharma has been explained to be that which helps the upliftment of living beings. Therefore, that which ensures the welfare of living beings is surely Dharma.  The learned rishis have declared that that which sustains is Dharma.-- Bhishma to Yuddhistra -Mahabharata
 
Chapter and Verse would be helpful. But anyway..... This is taken from Shanti Parva in the Mahabharata. There are lots of things about this that are problematic. Firstly most scholars do not accept that this was part of the original canon of the Mahabharata but smuggled in during the Bhakti era.
Also it is written by not by hunters and warriors who populate the Mahabharata or atleast certainly not their POV. Otherwise how can a ruler ensure the welfare of ALL living things. You can protect only so many deer and buffaloes without starving lions ,tigers and other carnivores. And if left unchecked the deer destroy vegetation turning the landscape barren as what happened to great parts of North Africa when the Romans pretty much imported all the lions and the foraging animals ate up all the greenery turning that region barren.
 
[Irrelevant rubbish deleted]


 
All Mankind is One Family- Rig Veda 5000 BC, 1.164.46
 
Already discredited...
 
Hindu dharma has no founder, the word Sanatana implies that it always existed.  Dharma is anything that upholds or sustains a positive order. Hindus consider that loyalty to one's moral values is the highest loyalty, and of all the losses, loss of one's character and conscience are the worst. 

 
Morality proceeds from the inner spirit of man. In Hindu dharma , one's motive is as important in the performance of an action as the action itself. Harmlessness to all life on earth is of the highest morality . 
 
How absurd . Should we be harmless to wild animals that intend to attack us. The locusts that eat our crops? The bandits who attempt to steal and rape?
There is nothing in Hinduism that advocate such absurd pacifism.

 
Hindus place greater emphasis on the attitude of the mind rather than on postulation of the elaborate theories of what is right and what is wrong as in other religions (like the ten commandments ).  The purity of the heart is important.  Sanatana Dharma is not restricted to Indian boundaries but it is universal.
 
Have you not read the Manusmriti? It makes the Ten Commandments and Moses sound like a kindergarten teacher by comparison!

 
Hinduism is not just mere faith. It is the union of reason and intuition that cannot be defined but is only to be experienced.  When we live in accordance with the divine law of dharma, we are in harmony with truth and move toward spiritual advancement.
 
I don't know about you dear reader, but I feel my eye lids getting heavier as I read this feel good New Age rubbish

 
Since Christianity and Islam were born they have filled the earth with violence, drenched the soil with blood again and again . They have destroyed  civilizations, and sent whole nations to despair.
 
The record of Islam and Christianity isn't sparkling. But the civilizations they attacked mostly were already on the decline)Rome, Persia, India) or barbaric to begin(Germans, Central Asian).
 
 
The world is now coming back to the mother of all religions Hinduism—the west call as PAGAN.   
 
No. Apart from some Christian fundamentalists to whom even Catholicism is pagan, few in the West who have any knowledge of Hinduism do not confuse it with European Paganism. Pagan was simply the Latin word for country dweller as in the early Christian era, most Christians were concentrated in the city and the nature worshippers in the hinterland.
Any educated westerners considers Hinduism to be far superior to Paganism if not now but in the past.
 
 
Hindusim is 110 centuries old, while Christianity is 20 centuries old and Islam is 14 centuries old. This is the only religion without fundamentals or lack of compulsions.
 
Hinduism is based on Vedas and Puranas,the building blocks of Hindu religion. The moral codes is enshrined in the Manusmriti. Of course Smriti being law is not set in stone and Shruti such as Vedas and Puranas take precedence. And Yajnavalkya reformed that rather harsh code of Manusmriti.
 

 
Sanatana as “eternal moral order” encourages Hindus to seek truth wherever it might be found, each individual must realize this truth through his or her own systematic effort.
 
The problem with this claim is that Prophet Mohammad reached the truth by his own "systematic effort". Don't you see the contradiction in terms? If each person defines his personal system to his liking , how can it be systematic?

 
You don’t have to live in India to be a Hindu. You could be a Catholic living in England, as long as you have a conscience, live in harmony with nature ,  grateful for her natural bounties, do not dominate and harass other living beings, have inherent grace and know your “duties”.. You must understand that human beings are just but a link in this symbiotic chain of life and consciousness.
 
You cannot define Hinduism as you see fit. A Catholic in England(normally you have more Anglicans and Protestants in England but whatever) is NOT a Hindu. And please don't make up your own private definitions of what constitutes a Hindu.
Indeed if a Catholic in England is a Hindu what is the harm of those Chutney Mary and Pickle Johns who you hate so much moving to such countries or even a mass conversion of Hindus to Catholicism. Hey they are still Hindu after all!
 
Four qualities that keep a person the path of dharma are purity, compassion, austerity and truth- Bhagawad Purana.
 
Most of the Bhagawad Purana was compiled in the medieval Bhakti era when learning was well in the decline.
'आनृशंस्यं परो धर्म:


Compassion itself is ultimate Righteousness (Mahabharat 3.373.76)

I cannot find this verse. In which parva is it? As metioned before in the vasudhaiva kumtumbam passage , there is good reason to be suspicious of quotes taken out of context. 
Anumantaa vishasitaa nihantaa krayavikrayee,   Samskartaa chopahartaa cha khadakashcheti ghaatakaah-  Manusmrithi 5.51

 
Those who permit slaying of animals; those who bring animals for slaughter; those who slaughter; those who sell meat; those who purchase meat; those who prepare dish out of it; those who serve that  meat and those who eat are all murderers.
 
Manu like Ashoka was notorious for imposing his pet peeves on society. Just so you know Manuvaadi is a term of abuse by the Shudras and Dalits.
Either way, this was superseded by Yajnavalkya's reform of the moral code.
 
Breehimattam yavamattamatho maashamatho tilam,  Esha vaam bhaago nihito ratnadheyaaya dantau maa hinsishtam pitaram maataram cha-  Atharvaveda 6.140.2

O teeth! You eat rice, you eat barley, you gram and you eat sesame.  These cereals are specifically meant for you.  Do not kill those who are capable of being fathers and mothers.
 
My god what a mistranslation!
 
This is the actual verse

VI, 140. Expiation for the irregular appearance of the first pair of teeth.
1. Those two teeth, the tigers, that have broken forth, eager to devour father and mother, do thou, O Brahmanaspati Gâtavedas, render auspicious!
2. Do ye eat rice, eat barley, and eat, too, beans, as well as sesamum! That, O teeth.. is the share deposited for your enrichment. Do not injure father and mother!
3. Since ye have been invoked, O teeth, be ye in unison kind and propitious! Elsewhere, O teeth, shall pass away the fierce (qualities) of your body! Do not injure father and mother!


 
Please note there is nothing here about inhibiting of eating living things(capable of being fathers and mothers) but it is really a prayer for the first teeth of an infant. A somewhat playful plea to the baby to eat healthy grains and not bite its parents (mother and father)
 
 
 

 
Ya aamam maansamadanti paurusheyam cha ye kravih,   Garbhaan khaadanti keshavaastaanito naashayaamasi-   Atharvaveda 8.6.23

We ought to destroy those who eat cooked as well as uncooked meat, meat involving destruction of males and females, foetus and eggs.
 
I couldn't find this verse in Sacred Texts or any other original source. There is simply no 8.6.23 in the Atharvaveda.

 

 
Anago hatya vai bheema kritye,  Maa no gaamashvam purusham vadheeh  - Atharvaveda 10.1.29

 
It is definitely a great sin to kill innocents. Do not kill our cows, horses and people.
 
Ok once again. Serious mistranslation. Keep in mind Atharva veda is a book of "spells" or quite simply pleas to various gods to remove maladies and curse enemies
 
This is the original
 
29. Slaughter of an innocent is heinous, O spell: do not slay our cow, horse, or serving-man! Wherever thou hast been put down, thence thee do we remove. Be lighter than a leaf!
 
In other words it is a please via a purohit of Angiras lineage(mentioned earlier in the verse) to drive away curses inflicted upon the party. And no harm should their valuable property such as horse,cow or servant!
 
 
Aghnyaa yajamaanasya pashoonpahi-   Yajurveda 1.1
 
“O human! animals are Aghnya – not to be killed. Protect the animals”

From the Black Yajur(the above is no mentioned in the White Yajur)
 
i. 1. 1.
a For food thee, for strength thee!
b Ye are winds, ye are approachers.
c Let the god Savitr impel you to the most excellent offering.
d O invincible ones, swell with the share for the gods,
Full of strength, of milk, rich in offspring, free from sickness, from disease.
e Let no thief, no evil worker, have control over you.
f Let Rudra's dart avoid you.
g Abide ye, numerous, with this lord of cattle.
h Do thou protect the cattle of the sacrifice.
 
 
In other words far from imploring vegetarianism and ban on cow slaughter, actually it is prayer and oblation of cow sacrifice to Savir(proto Vishnu) and that Rudra(associated with Shiva but also wild animals and diseases) do not harm the cow so that is suitable and available for sacrifice.
Quite a different thing than what was implied by the captian/agniveer wasn't it?
 
Pashunstraayethaam-    Yajurveda 6.11
Protect the animals.
 
At this point I am really beginning to lose any benefit of doubt that all of these are mistranslations. These are clearly misinterpreted with an agenda in mind. And that is plain dishonesty , if not blasphemous
 
Here you have 6.11
 
Prajapati assigned the sacrifices to the gods; he thought himself emptied; he pressed over himself the power and strength of the sacrifice in sixteen ways; that became the Sodaçin; there is no sacrifice called Sodaçin; in that there is a sixteenth Stotra and a sixteenth Çastra, therefore is it the Sodaçin, and that is why the Sodaçin has its name. In that the Sodaçin is drawn, so the sacrificer bestows power and strength upon himself. To the gods the world of heaven [1] did not become manifest; they saw this Sodaçin, and drew it; then did the world of heaven become manifest to them; in that the Sodaçin is drawn, (it serves) for the conquest of the world of heaven. Indra was the youngest of the gods, he had recourse to Prajapati, he bestowed on him the Sodaçin, he drew it; then indeed did he attain the summit of the gods; he for whom knowing thus the Sodaçin [2] is drawn attains the summit of his equals. He draws at the morning pressing; the Sodaçin is the thunderbolt, the morning pressing is the thunderbolt; verily he draws it from its own birthplace. At each pressing he draws; verily from each pressing he produces it. At the third pressing he should draw (it) for one who desires cattle; the Sodaçin is the thunderbolt, the third pressing is cattle; verily by means of the thunderbolt he wins for him cattle from the third pressing. He should not draw (it) in the Ukthya; the Ukthas are offspring and cattle; if he were to draw (it) in the Ukthya [3], he would consume his offspring and cattle. He should draw (it) for one who desires cattle in the Atiratra; the Sodaçin is the thunderbolt; verily having won cattle for him by the thunderbolt, he calms them later with (the Çastras of) the night. He should also draw (it) in the Agnistoma for a Rajanya, for a Rajanya sacrifices desiring distinction; verily in the day rite he grasps a bolt for him, and the bolt kindles him to prosperity, or it burns him; the twenty-onefold is the Stotra used, for support; what is recited has the word 'bay' in it; he obtains the dear abode of Indra [4]. The smaller metres were among the gods, the larger among the Asuras; the gods recited the larger metre with the smaller on either side; then indeed did they appropriate the world of the Asuras. In that he recites the larger metre with a smaller metre on either side, verily thus he appropriates the world of his foe. They make six syllables redundant; the seasons are six; verily he delights the seasons. They place four in front [5]; verily he wins four-footed cattle; two last; verily he wins two-footed (cattle); they make up an Anustubh; the Anustubh is speech, therefore speech is the highest of the breaths. When the sun is half-set, he sets about the Stotra of the Sodaçin; in this world Indra slew Vrtra; verily straightway be hurls the bolt against his foe. The sacrificial fee is a reddish-brown horse; that is the form of the bolt; (verily it serves) for success.
 
Clearly this is a mystical scenario where Prajapati and Indra are concerned.
This has nothing to do with a prohibition of killing animals but ensuring that no harm comes to your own cattle and sons due to improper propitiation of the gods
Dwipaadava Chatushpaatpaahi-   Yajurveda 14.8
Protect the bipeds and quadrupeds!

The original:
8 Guard thou my breath. Guard my out-breathing. Guard
my through-breathing. Illume mine eye with far-reaching
vision. Give power of hearing to mine ear. Pour
forth waters. Quicken plants. Protect bipeds. Protect
quadrupeds. Send rain from heaven
 
This is the sacrifice during the monsoon season so. Note the order-pour forth waters. Protect bipeds, protect quadrupeds. Simply a prayer to protect humans and livestock from flooding.
 
Meat eaters have always been looked down in Vedic literature.  They have been known as Rakshasas, Pisacha and so on….All these words are synonyms of demons or devils that have been out-cast from the civilized human society.    

Sorry wrong. There were vegetarian Rakshasas as well. The ones who were out cast were usually those who stole and ate animals from sacrifices or practiced cannibalism.


 Yajna never meant animal sacrifice in the sense popularly understood.   Yajna in the Vedas meant a noble deed or the highest purifying action.

LOLL. Take up that definition with the authors of the Yajur Veda and see how far you get.

 Agne yam yagnamadhvaram vishwatah pari bhuurasi, Sa id deveshu gacchati-   Rigveda 1.1.4
 
 O lord of effulgence! The non-violent Yajna, you prescribe from all sides, is beneficial for all, touches divine proportions and is accepted by noble souls.

 
The actual verse




 

Agni, the perfect sacrifice which thou encompassest about

 
Verily goeth to the Gods.
Nothing to do with "non violent" yajna!


 


 


The Rigveda describes Yajna as Adhvara  or non violent throughout.  Same is the case with all the other Vedas.    

Adhvara in some contexts means non injuring. But in the context of a sacrifice it means uninterrupted.

The white invader injected poison into the Sanskrit verses using their arm twisted ( vulnerable ) stooges whom they took to England.  

How are sacrifices poisonous? Please explain

Not complying meant no return passage on a Rothschild ship , getting BURIED after death ( NO cremation ), which was unthinkable for a Hindu.

Children and sages who attain Samadhi are often buried.Lingayats are buried to this day.
 
The white invader used MEDH to befuddle.  The biggest accusation of cattle and cow slaughter comes in the context of the Yajnas that derived their names from different cattle like the Ashwamedh Yajna, the Gomedha Yajna and the Nar-medh Yajna.   Even by the wildest stretch of the imagination the word Medha would not mean slaughter in this context.

There is no bigger befuddler than you dear captain
 

Imam ma himsirekashafam pashum kanikradam vaajinam vaajineshu--- Yajurveda 13.48

Do not slaughter this one hoofed animal that neighs and who goes with a speed faster than most of the animals.
 
The full context:
47 Injure not, thousand-eyed, while thou art building for sacrifice,
this animal, the biped.
Accept as pith man's counterfeit the victim, Agni: therewith
building thy forms, be settled.
Let thy flame reach man's counterfeit: let thy flame reach
the man we hate.
48 Harm not this animal whose hooves are solid, the courser
neighing in the midst of coursers.

 
Ill be honest. I have little idea as to what all of this means. But do note the participant is imploring Indra not to harm the biped(man) or his horse.
Again I don’t see a specification against horse sacrifice as we have seen before those who wish to sacrifice would offer unblemished animals.

Ghrtam duhaanaamaditim janaayaagne maa himsiheehYajurveda 13.49
Do not kill cows and bulls who always deserve to be protected.
 
The original:
Thousandfold, with a hundred streams, this fountain,
expanded in the middle of the waters,
Infinite, yielding butter for the people, harm not, O Agni,
in the highest region.
This wild bull of the forest I assign thee: building thy
bodies up therewith be settled.

 
Once again, a misinterpretation. He is referring to one specific bull and certainly doesn’t say all bulls and cows deserve to be protected!

Aare gohaa nrhaa vadho vo astuRigveda 7.56.17
Cow slaughter is a heinous crime equivalent to human murder 
 The actual translation
So may the Maruts help us and be gracious, bringing free room to lovely Earth and Heaven.Far be your bolt that slayeth men and cattle. Ye Vasus, turn yourselves to us with blessings.
Yet again. The passage certainly doesn’t equate cows with humans but cautiously and sheepishly praises Maruts for NOT bringing their terrible weapons which can kill humans and cattle en masse!

Sooyavasaad bhagavatee hi bhooyaa atho vayam bhagvantah syaama,  Addhi trnamaghnye vishwadaaneem piba shuddhamudakamaacharantee  - Rigveda 1.164.40
The Aghnya cows – which are not to be killed under any circumstances– may keep themselves healthy by use of pure water and green grass, so that we may be endowed with virtues, knowledge and wealth.

A divine cow which is spoken of here is very different than the mortal cow!

 
Aghnyeyam saa vardhataam mahate soubhagaayaRigveda 1.164.27
Cow – The aghnya – brings us health and prosperity

“That wretched man who kills living creatures for the sake of those who would eat them commits great sin. The eater’s sin is not as great. That wretched man who, following the path of religious rites and sacrifices as laid down in the Vedas, would kill a living creature from a desire to eats its flesh, will certainly go to hell. That man who having eaten flesh abstains from it afterwards acquires great merit on account of such abstention from sin. He who arranges for obtaining flesh, he who approves of those arrangements, he who kills, he who buys or sells, he who cooks, and he who eats it, [acquire the sin of those who] are all considered as eaters of flesh. [Therefore] that man who wishes to avoid disaster should abstain from the meat of every living creature. (Mahabharata 115.44-48)  4000 BC


 Actually Mahabharata is dated around 3200 BC (Krishna died on 3102) but whatever. Please state the parva. As we have seen Shanti parva has been discredited.

Suprapaanam Bhavatvaghnyaayaah-   Rigveda 5.83.8
There should be excellent facility for pure water for Aghnya Cow

8 Lift up the mighty vessel, pour down water, and let the liberated streams rush forward.
Saturate both the earth and heaven with fatness, and for the cows let there be drink abundant.

Nothing against cow slaughter..
Yah paurusheyena kravishaa samankte yo ashwena pashunaa yaatudhaanah,  Yo aghnyaayaa bharati ksheeramagne teshaam sheershaani harasaapi vrishcha--  Rigveda 10.87.16
Those who feed on human, horse or animal flesh and those who destroy milk-giving Aghnya cows should be severely punished.


The fiend who smears himself with flesh of cattle, with flesh of horses and of human bodies,

Who steals the milch-cow's milk away, O Agni,-tear off the heads of such with fiery fury.
 


again DIVINE COW and DIVINE HORSE! Not the mortal cow as will become clear in the next verse

saMvatsarINaM paya usriyAyAstasya mAshId yAtudhAnonRcakSaH
pIyUSamagne yatamastitRpsAt taM pratyańcamarciSA vidhya marman
 
17 The cow gives milk each year, O Man-regarder: let not the Yatudhana
ever taste it.


A cow giving milk once a year? Isnt that a completely useless cow if one is to assume it is the mortal flesh and blood cow!

A Yatudhana is a breed of vampire or evil spirit(depends on usage). Why would one care if a supernatural entity drinks some milk lying around haha! But it makes sense if the divine cow spoken of is really tantric symbolism for your bodies healing and nourishing ability contributing to youth and a long life. Of course you would not want a vampire to taste the milk of THAT as his powers would be increased.

 To be continued..