1

Blessed are the Merciful

An earnest appeal by a truthseeker.
(Pandit Anandathirtha Sharma)

Ahims param dharmah Harmlessness is the highest

religion, has been from the very commencement of Hindu
religion is cardinal doctrine. Recognizing that the same life
exists in the lower (animals, birds, etc.) creation as in human
being, the Hindus have for ages accepted Ahims or
harmlessness alike towards the lower animals and to mankind,
as an act of supreme merit. The same moral principle which
makes the slaughter of one of the mankind, unjustifiable,
pervers, and criminal impels a Hindu to take a similar
cognizance, with respect to the brutes who are in every way as
sentiment as the most civilized of human beings. ----- "No animal
on earth deserves to be treated with cruelty" - Lord Sri.Vdavysa Blessed are the Merciful.

Creation itself is a divine act of YAJNA. The Yajna that

we perform as ritual is actual and at the same time a sacred
symbolic act of Cosmic yajna with three-fold purpose of divineworship, social cohesion and creation, environmental
replenishment and thankful giving. In such an act of positive
purpose there can be no admission of violence. Killing is
unthinkable just as a square-circle. --- YAJNA is described as
ADHVARA (Rgvda 5-51-2) in which violence of animals
can never be allowed. There is a positive injunction against
killing of animals in Yajurvda (12-32) and it is a sin to kill
the cow or any animal. In fact all animals must be protected
(Atharvavda 19-48-5), because as life they are par with us.
(Yajurvda 40-6,7). How can there be violence then in Yajna

with such provisions and injunctions? No sacred book of eternal

knowledge like the VDA (and other sacred works) can
contradict itself. How then has violence of animals crept into the
so called Vdic-tradition? It crept through the wrong
interpretations of the Vdic texts. It became a history and
tradition of practice since hundreds of years. History can be a
controlled horse; it can be a wild horse as well free from any
controller. It can initiate traditional and consequently malign
pure knowledge. Pure knowledge is self-existent like the
theory of Relativity and the theory of Gravitation. But as time
passes, local customs and traditions creep into practical
observances of Dharma and ritual.
Harken keenly :--Non-violence in sacred sacrifices is the gateway to the
Heaven the kingdom of God. (- From Mahabharata)
Harken to the Padmapurna-Bruhathkhanda (Adhyya 13323 and 13-267):Yajnam kritv pashn hatv kritv rudhirakardamam |
Yadyvam gamyath swargam narakam kna gamyath? ||
Nihatasya pashryajne swargaprptiryadeeshyath |
Swapith yajamnna kim v tatra na hanyath ? ||
And also harken to the Padmapurna - swargakhanda
(Adhyya 31-374) :-Pravishanthi yath nadyh samudramrijuvakragh |

Sarv dharm ahimsym pravishanthi tath dridham ||

And also harken: --Dayml bhavddharm day prnukampanam |
Dayyh parirakshrtham gunh shshh prakeerthh ||
Harken to the Skndamahpurna, 2nd Vaishnavakhanda,
Sri Vsudvamhtmya ( 6-20,21,28,29) :--Pratyakshapashumlabhya yajnasycharanam tu yat |
Dharmah sa vipareeto vai yushmkam surasattamah !
Tasmd vreehibhirvsou yajnah kshreena sarpish |
Medhyairannarasaischnyaih kryo, na pashuhimsay ||
Tatrpi beejairyastshtavyamajasajmupgatiah |
Trivarshaklamushitairna yeshm punarudgamah ||
And harken to the Skndamahpurna, 2nd Vaishnava
khanda, Sri Vsudvamhtmya (9-13,14,15,24 and 30) :--"Parkshavdavdrthn vipareethn prapdir |
Artham chjdishabdnm mukhyam chgdimva t |
Bubudhuschtha t prhuryajnn kuruta bho dvijh |
Y vdavihit hims na s himssti dshaj ||
Uddishya dvn pitrmscha tat ghnata pashn shubhn |
Prkshitam dvatbhyascha pitrubhyscha nivditam |

Bhunjata swpsitam mmsam swrtham tu ghnatha m pashn ||

Ittham himsmay yajnah sampravritt mahpadi |
Dharmasybhsamtrstht svayam tu shryamanvagt |
Tatah prabhriti lkshu yajndou pashuhimsanam ||
Lord Sri Vedavyasa proclaims:-Due to a huge misconception, misfortune and vicissitudes of
history some yjaks and ignorant people misunderstood the
hidden and secret meaning of the Vedic words LABHAT,
LABHTA, SAMJNAPT, MDHA, etc. Not with standing
this they understood the word AJA, as a goat. Those ignorant
and merciless people misrepresented these hidden and secret
Vedic words. LABHAT, LABHTA etc, in the sense of
slaughtering of animals in sacrifices i.e. Yajnas, and raised the
unnecessary points of the so called Utsarga and Apavada in
this context.

Great sages proclaim --Read and understand the sacred texts not to contradict and
confute, nor to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and
discourse; but to weigh and consider.
Parkshavdavdrthn vipareethn prapdir |
Artham chjdishabdnm mukhyam chgdimva t |
Yajna is not merely pouring some ghee into the fire.
Unfortunately its true meaning of invoking the spirit of
sacrifice in our life is forgotten, and the MANTRAS to

have become mere mechanical repetition. There is no heart

put into it.
It has become like a digital - versatile disc- record or
DVD. In fact, recorded MANTRAS have become Popular.
How can such programme have any effect?
Harken to the Brhmana, a sacred text:--Yajna sacrifice occupies a pivotal position in our cultural
heritage. The term YAJNA carries several meanings offering
ones individual life in the cause of social regeneration is
YAJNA. To offer as oblation all that is unworthy, undesirable
and unholy in us in the fire of VIRTUES; too, is YAJNA. And
to take a fiery path of dedication, sacrifice, service and penance
is the very essence of YAJNA. The presiding deity of YAJNA is
fire Agnyantargata Paramtm. Flame represents the fire
and the sacred Bhagawa - flag is the symbol of the orange
coloured sacrificial flames. Thus YAJNA is symbolized.
A Huge Misconception
Yet for the last hundreds of years a huge misconception of
animal sacrifices in Yagna took place in Bhrat, due to our
misfortune. And especially for the last two hundred and fifty
years this huge misconception arisen among some European
scholars also, and it is sad to say that this misconception has
convulsed even the minds of some of those highly educative
natives of India i.e. Bhrat, who prefer European guidance under
all circumstances in the interpretation of their sacred scriptures.
Some of the most eminent European savants think that although

the Hindu race has remained a strong advocate of AHIMS

rather than scriptural authority, and that original ARYANS
whose descendants Hindus claim to be, were people who
sacrificed animals for religious rites, nay they were
encouraged in so doing by express sanction of VDS, the
SMRITIS etc.
The root cause of misconception
In the Taittireeyasamhit we can find the sentences like --Agneeshomeeyam Pashumlabhta (Yajurvda 3-4-3-6),
Vyavyam shvtamlabta bhtikmah (Yajurvda 2-1-1),
Agneeshomeeyam pashum samjnapt (Yajurvda 1-8-18),
{Quoted in Brahmastrabhshya of Shankarchrya and others,
under Anujnparihrasutra (2-3-48) and Ashuddhamiti chnna
shabdt (3-1-27)}.
Here, Sri Shankarchrya and others, have given deviating
interpretation upon these Vdic lines, only on the basis of
Proudhivda, i.e. ''A bold assertion,". ------- But exact
meanings of the words labhat, labhta etc, are only to
touch, to receive, to acquire, and to adore. According to the
context i.e. prakarana. Nowhere these words reflects the
sense of the killing the animals. In another example Gghna
means One who conquered his indriys i.e. senses
(G=Indriya i.e. sense), and not at all a killer of a cow or bull.
And again "Goghn Atithih" means "an eminent guest who
deserve to be offered a gift of cow when he visited a household".
No other meaning should be done here in this context. Not at all
a killer of a cow or bull.
We can appeal with humility before all Vedantins as follows:-

Ashuddhamiti chnna shabdt ityasya Brahmastrasya

bhshy
aprkaraik
himsrup
yajnprasangaha
prodhivdamshritya
samuutthapitah.---Agnydhishitshu
prvavadabhilptiti hi prvastram || Athtra prakaran
Vreehydyshadhayah prakriyant || Tshm hi khalu
himsdshasyshank prayukt | Swamataviruddhascheha
yajnapakshah pshitah || Anarthitam hi stram tatra bhshy ||
Shrautayajneshu shitaretaih sarvatra sarvath sarvad
mmsapkapratishdh vihitah ||
But Shri Shankara Explains here as follows:-Shstrccha himsdyanugrahtmak jytisthm dharma
ityavadhrithah, kathamashuddha iti shakyat vaktum?
Agneeshmeeyam pashumlabhta iti hi shstram . iti ||
''Injunction and prohibition become effective owing to
physical association, just as it is in the case of light etc.'' - ''One
shall approach one's wife at a proper time'' is an injunction; "one
shall not approach one's teachers wife" is a prohibition.
Similarly, "One shall sacrifice an animal to Agni and Soma,'' is
an injunction; "One shall not injure any being,'' is a prohibition."
(Shnkarabrahmastrabhshya -- 2-3-48.)

And again in the Stra - Ashuddhamiti chnna shabdt (31-25) Shri Shankara says :-- ''If it be argued that rites
(involving killing of animals) are unholy, we say, no, since they
are sanctioned by scriptures."
Opponent says :-- By Saying-"One should not injure any of the
creatures," the scripture itself shows that injury done to any
creature is unholy.
Vedantin says :-- "True, but that is only general rule (Utsarga)
and here is the exception (Apavda) - "One should immolate an
animal for Agni and Soma." both the general rule and the
exception have their well defined scopes. Hence Vedic rites are
quite pure, since they are practiced by the good people and are
not condemned by them. Hence birth as plants cannot be their
corresponding result. Nor can birth as paddy etc, be on an equal
footing with birth as dogs etc(English translation by
Swami Gambhirananda)
This statement is absolutely Aprkaranika, means beyond
i.e. out of the context. And hence these statements of Shri
Shankara and others in this context based only on Proudhivda,
i.e ''A bold assertion," and on the basis of Loka-Sangraha And
it is very curious to know that the ancient commentators on
Taithireeyasamhith like Bhatta Bhskara, Mahidhara,
Uvvatchrya, Syana and others have given apt and correct
Vdnukoola meanings Samsprisht = to be touched, and
Viniyjayt = to be obtained for Pashubandha and
Paryagnikarana, to the words LABHAT, LABHTA .

And the supposed references to beef-eating are in fact

misrepresentations of the word "Gou" in Vedas, which means
the Indriyas, i.e., the senses. It is in the sense that Yagnavalkya
used it when he said he would eat "Gou", to conquer the senses
and make himself invincible. In fact Yagnavalkya never ate
beef. The misconstruing or ignorance has been conveniently
used by the pleaders for cow-slaughter to justify their case.
And the so called passages -Y vdavihit hims na s himsti keertyat |"
And
"Hims twavaidikee y tu taynarth dhruvam bhavt |
Vdktay himsay tu naivnarthah kathanchana ||
(Varhapurna sloka Quoted by Shri Madhwacharya.)
These lines also created a great confusion and misconception.
According to Vds there is no animal - sacrifice in Yagnas in
any yuga. There was a king named Uparichara. He performed an
AshwamdhaYajna which had been conspicuously described
as "Ahimsra" i.e. devoid of hims. Here, hims means slaughter
of animals. In the description of that Yajn, it is said No
killing of animals take place in shrouta yajns. Surely, human
mind gets polluted when it is lust-ridden and when it is set on
meat-eating, drinking of alchohol and playing dice (Vide
Mahbhrata Shnthiparva chapter 266). - Blessed are the
Merciful.

10

Harken to Bhgavatha (11-5-8, 12) :Living in homes where sexual pleasures predominate, those
people remain devoted women and talk among themselves of
the pleasures of senses alone . They perform sacrifices without
observing the rules and without distributing food and giving
money to the Brahmans and only kill animals for sustenance, not
realizing the sin involved in destruction of life. -- They do not
understand the pure essence of their religion only the smelling of
Sur i.e. KNJIKA is sanctioned in Sautrmani sacrifice and
only the Pashubandha for Paryagnikarna and receiving and
touching of animals is allowed in the adoration of the deities and
it is not permissible to kill them for meat in yajnas.
"Pashrlabhanam na hims ." Because, the Skndapurna (2nd
Vaishnavakhanda, Sri vasudevmahtmya. 9-13, 14, 15) etc
proclaims. --Parkshavdavdrthn vipareethn prapdir |
Artham chjdishabdnm mukhyam chgadimva t | etc.
Even though --- Sacrifice played a central role in many
ancient religions. Throughout history sacrificial offerings have
consisted of various animals, fruits, flowers, vegetables, and
even human beings. The Aztecs, for example, offered as many
as twenty thousand human sacrifices yearly to their sun god. The
Greeks sacrificed animals such has goats or cattle, sometimes
eating the sacrifice in a celebratory meal in honour of their
gods. Long ago the Chinese practiced human sacrifice and also
offered animals and food to their gods and ancestors.

11

"Ukshnam prinim apachanta veerh"

- Rigvda (1-164-43) In Sanskrit, the root "PACH" is primarily used in the sense of
cooking. Many a time (in Vdic Phraseology) it also gives the
sense of "ripening" or "maturing" as "Sasyamiva Martyh
pachyate" (Kathopanishad - 1/1/6), meaning "a mortal matures
like a corn". And also "Klah pachati bhtni" (Maitri
Upanishad - 1/15) meaning "time ripens all beings". In Rigvda
(1-164-43), there occurs a mantra "Ukshnam prinim apachanta
veerh". The word "Apachanta", here is a conjugated form of the
root "Pach". In this mantra, the root "Pach" is used in the sense
of ripening, not in the sense of cooking. Here, "Ukshan" means
clouds, which look like a Bull or an Ox in the sky, "Prinim"
means sky and grow with water and vapours present in the
atmosphere. In all Vds - Any cruelty to animals is prohibited.
Protection and Kindness is advocated - Blessed are the
Merciful.
"Gobhih shreeeeta matsaram"- Rigvda (9-46-4)
The meaning of the word "G" in Nirukta (11-5-4), Yska - the
greatest etimologist, comments upon the mantra "Gobhih
shreeeeta matsaram " as follows He took the word "Matsaram" as a herb, known as "Sma" and
rendering the quotation as: "He cooked "Sma", i.e., "Herb"
with cow. Finding this rendering not very clear, the great sage
Yska opined that this quotation in reality meant - "He cooked
Soma Herb with Cow's Milk". During the discussion, Yska

12

remarked that there were passages in the Vds where the word
"G" is used in the sense of its derivatives - Such as Cow's milk,
Cow's Ghee, etc., The great sage Yska remarks in this context
:- "Athpsym tddhitna kritsnavannigam bhavanti - "Gobihi
shreeeeta matsaramiti payasah" - In simple, these remarks
imply : "Vdic passages has a genius of using word in the sense
of a part of the object for which it is generally used". Animal
sacrifices are forbidden and none of Vdic rituals offer meat.
May, it has to be away from sacred Precincts. The sacred hymns
of Vds emphasise our homage to the animal kingdom. All life
is sacred. "Uksh", "Rishabha"(Vashnna) etc, are all Medicinal
Herbs according to the the context in the Vds and Upanishads.
They are not animals. - Blessed are the Merciful.
There is a line in Brihadrayakpanishad (6-4-18) "Mmsaudanam pchayitv sarpishmantamashnytm auksha v rshabha v". Here the words "auksha"
(uksh) and "rshabha" (Rishabha) : indicates only Medicinal
Herbs and not at all the flesh of animals. - Blessed are the
Merciful.
And the Holy Bible also proclaims: - "For meat destroy not
the work of God - "It is good neither to eat flesh nor to drink
wine nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is
offended or is made week (Romans 14-20,21)." - "I will have
mercy and not sacrifice - dont advocate compulsion and
violence (Matthew 9-13) - "He that killeth an Ox is as if he slew
a man, he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck"
(Isaiah 66-3). - Blessed are the Merciful.

13

And also harken to Zarathustra :"Animal sacrifices are forbidden and none of Zoroastrian
rituals ever offer meat. Nay, it has to be far away from sacred
precincts." - Blessed are the Merciful.
Harken to Yska Nirukta (Naigamakna 1-3) :--Adhvara iti yajnanma
dhvaratirhimskarma, tatpratishdhah ||
Adhvara means perfect yajna, where there should be no
violence of animals and other creatures.
Harken to Yajurvda :-He who sees all beings in the self and the self in all
beings, feels no hatred against any creature in the world, for he
realizes the similarity of all souls. ---- It is said Yajna should be
performed with the oblation of Aja (goat-meat). But this
interpretation is absolutely wrong. The word Aja in this
context means Three years old seeds which are not fit for
sprouting. Therefore oblation of goat-meat should not be put
into the sacred fire. But old seeds are poured in the sacred fire.
No killing of animals takes place in any yajna. Evil doers
commit slaughter of animals to satisfy their own desire for meat
eating. They gain their object under the pretext of performing
Pitriyajna and Bhtayajna. Those performers of Yajnas,
who kill animals while performing yajnas do not understand
the true spirit of Vds. - Blessed are the Merciful.

14

Ignorance of Vdic Phraseology

No true Hindu would believe such a statement at the
present day, even if it were strongly supported by the apparent
authority of the Vds. When however there is a reason to
believe that there is somewhere a wrong point in the
interpretation of the scriptures by the European scholars, the
Hindu mind would repudiate the statement as a national
vilification. The natural indignation would, however, speedily
mount into fanaticism, and religious frenzy - if it is be provd
conclusively from the fountain-head of the Hindu scriptures
that the European theory of pashu-hims in Yajns is in fact a
stupendous misconception, and due to the European reliance on
the testimony of misleading commentaries of Syana and
Mahdhara, etc in a very few places with biased minds, and a
total ignorance of the Vdic Phraseology.
Swmi Daynand Saraswati
Yet there is such a thing. Even after the appearance of
Swmi Daynand Saraswati on the religious horizon of India i.e.
Bhrat, the iconoclastic reformer in modern Hinduism, no
sensible Hindu gentleman has ever believd in the correctness of
the above theory. The Commentary on the Vds written by
Swami Daynand, has once for all provd that the very
assumptions of the European critics are incorrect, and if there
was anything yet remaining it was completed by Pandit Guru
Dutt Vidyrthi, the eminent scholar of Punjab whose
Terminology of the Vds was for a long time a textbook on
the subject at the University of Oxford. The Terminology gave
a death-blow to the theory we are dealing with, and hardly any

15

Hindu, in or out of the rya Samj, will do anything but smile,

if some one repeats to him the same to-day.
The method by which Swmi Daynand Saraswathi came
to a conclusion, the very opposite of the one adopted by Monier
Williams, was twofold: Firstly, he provd in his
Satyrthapraksha and Gkarunnidhi, that the very
assumption on which the European scholars started to make
further investigations, Viz, that the religion of the Vds was
polytheism, was based on a wrong interpretation.
And, secondly being already prejudiced, these Europeans
scholars gave a wholly version of those portions of the Hindu
scriptures which treated about sacrifices i.e. Yajnas. For
instance, they translated Ashwamdha as Horse-Sacrifice
and Gomdha as Cow-sacrifice respectively. ------ Why the
European scholars were misguided in their interpretations, is
explained by Pandit Guru Dutt in the following passages: ---The first cannon for the interpretation of Vdic terms which
is laid down by Yska, the author of Nirukta, is that Vdic terms
are all Yagniks (Yougiks), Yska, Vysa, Grgya,
Shkatyana, and all other grammarians and etymologists
unanimously maintain that Vdic terms are all ygnikas
(Yougikas). But Yska and Shkatyana also maintain that
Rudhi Rurhi terms are also ygnika, (yougika) The
European scholars have entirely ignored this principle, and
hence have flooded their interpretation of Vds with forged or
borrowed tales of mythology, with stories or anecdotes or
historic or pre-historic personage.

16

Thus, according to Dr. Muir, the following historical

personages are mentioned in Rig-Vda, the Rishis of Kanvs
in 1-47-2; Gtams in 1-71-16; Gritsdans in 2-39-8;
Bhrigvs in 4-16-23; and Brihadukhta in X-54-6. But what is the
truth! The word Kanva and Gritsa only signify learned men in
general (Nighantu iii-13); the word Bhrigvas only signifies men
of intellect (Nighantu 5); The word "Gtama" signifies one who
praises; and Brihdukhtha is simply one whose Ukthas or
knowledge of natural properties of objects is Brihat or complete.
A Ygnika (Yougika) term is one that has a derivative meaning,
that is, one that only signifies the meaning of root together with
the modifications affected by the affixes.
In fact, the structural elements out of which the words is
compounded, afford the whole and the only clue to the true
signification of the word. The word is purely connotative. A
Rudhi-Rurhi term is the name of a definite concrete object
where, the connotation of the word as structurally determined,
gives no clue to the object by the word. Hence, ordinarily it
means a word of arbitrary significance.
Pandit Guru Dutt in the (above) passage in his
Terminology has but followed Swmi Daynand. The later
showed on the authority of Shata-patha Brahmna(XIII,1,6,3;
IV,3,1,25) that the true meanings of the words such as
Ashwamdha, Gomdha, Naramdha, are :- Ashwamdha
means, properly, a Kings governing the people with justice and
equity, and according to the precepts of righteousness, a person
working in the cause of education and other beneficent reforms,
and the burning of clarified butter and odorous substances, in a
clear fire for the purification of the atmosphere. Gomdha

17

signifies the purifying of food substances, the subjugation of the

senses, and the use of the solar rays and the improving of the
world around. ---- Nrmdha Naramdha is the cremating
of the body of person, when dead in accordance with injunction
of the Vda. Satyrth Praksh (English-edition by Durga Prasad,
chapter XI) ---- How different is the interpretation of the
European scholars of Horse-sacrifice, cow-sacrifice and so
on! ----- Blessed are the merciful.
The contention of the Swmi Daynand was, that in the
dark ages ( ignorance ) of Hinduism, the system of animal
sacrifices was introduced ignorantly, and that to obtain a
sanction for their evil deed, these depravd Hindus interpolated
a great deal in various Hindu Scriptures except Vds and that to
gain sanction of the latter they made disorted versions and wrote
fallacious commentaries.
Among them, chief were, and are Vma-mrgis who have
adopted the animal sacrifice and flesh-eating, the drinking of
liquor and the committing of unbridled adultery, as the cardinal
doctrines of their faith, thus gaining a notoriety in Hinduism
only distantly equaled by the followers of Marmonism in the
West. Summing up this various arguments, Swmi Daynand
said in chapter XII of Satyartha Praksha - To sacrifice by
killing animals on the alter is not written in the Vda and other
books of truth. To offer food and drink to the manes or departed
spirits is purely the fabrication of the priestly imagination. This
ceremony is opposed to the teaching of the Vda and other
books of truth.

18

Protect the Brutes

In an Urdu book Mms Bhakshan K Nishd, the writer
gives examples how in the version of the Vds, malignant
people have disorted the truth. For instance, translating the 42nd
Mantra of Anurg (Anuvk) 4 of 18th Adhyaya of the Atharva
Vda, some people have translated JAT-MMSI as flesh
and written the butter, the rice and meat which I sacrifice for
Thee, while the correct version would be the butter, the rice
and the odorous substance. The Vds positively prohibit
anything which relate to flesh or sacrificing it.
Harken to Atharvavda( 7-5-5) :-Mugdh dev uta shunyajantta
grangaiah purudhyajanta |
Ya imam yajnam manas chiktha
pra vchastamimeha bravah||
The meaning is :-- With a huge misconception, the
foolish Devs (One who perform Yagna is called with the name
Deva usually in Vds), Who perform (Yagna) sacrifice,
utilizing the flesh of dogs or utilizing the organs of Cows and
Bulls as Hma Drays, for the purpose of sacrifice will certainly
attain the Hell. And those who perform (Yagna) sacrifice by
merely receiving, touching and adoinrg the Cows and other
animals with honour without any violence (after Paryajnikarana)
will certainly earn the Divine Knowledge by the Grace of the
Almighty God. Blessed are the merciful. And hence, be gentle,
kind and harmless towards all creatures. Harmlessness towards

19

all creatures is among Sdhans, a means towards the Life

Divine.
Harken to Mahbhrata ( Shntiparva 263-6) :---

Sur matsyh pashrmmsam dvijteenm balistath ||

Dhrthaih pravartitam yagn naitad vdshu kathyath ||
And also Harken to Mahbhrata ( Shntiparva 266-8,9,10) :--

Yadi yajnmscha vrikshmscha ypmschddshya mnavh ||

Vruth mmsam na khdanti naisha dharmah prashsyath ||
Surm matsyn madhummsam savam krisaroudanam |
Dhrthih pravarthitam heytad naitad vdshu kalpitam ||
Mnnmhaccha lbhccha loulyamtat prakalpitam ||
Vishnumvbhijnanti sarvayajnshu brhmanh ||
Means In sacrifice (YAJNS) and in other holy acts deceitful
and wicked people introduced wine, fish, flesh of animals, Bali
i.e. killing of birds and human beings and other filthy things.
The Holy Vedas do not allow these worst things in any Yuga.
The righteous and the holy people accept the worship of only
one God in all sacrifice, by offering pure Purodsha made of
flour and Ghee, Anna, milk, Ghee. Etc.
An Interpolated and deceitful verse
Below stanza was interpolated in Parsharasmriti. -- Ashvlambham gavlambham sannysam palapaitrikam ||

20

Dvarccha suttpattim kalou pancha vivarjayt ||

Killing of horse and killing of cows for the purpose of
yajna, Sannysa, offering of meat to Pitri-devats, and coition
with husbands younger brother to obtain children these five
things are forbidden in Kaliyuga. But these things were in
practice in previous yugs. But this Yugntarakalpan is
absolutely wrong, which is against to the eternal Holy Veds.
Harken to Mahbhrata ( Shantiparva 340-82,83) :-Idam kritayugam nma klah shrshah pravartitah ||
Ahimsy yajnapashav yugasmin ------------------------ ||
Naisha dharmah satm dv yatra vai vadhyat pashuh ||
Idam kritayugam shrsham katham vadhyta vai pashuh ? ||
And also harken to Charakasamhit (Chikitssthna 19-4) :dikl khalu yajnshu pashavah samlabhany
babhvuh || Na tvlambhya pravartant sma ||
So yugntarakalpana is a false statement. In all yugs, the wise
ygniks used to touch and to obtain the animals in
paryagnikarana. Those Vedic people i.e. ygnikas were not at all
killing the animals for the purpose of yajns in any yuga. ---Sannysa is not at all prohibited in kaliyuga.The offering of
flesh of animals to Pitri-devats is not at all permitted in the
Holy Veds. The coition with husbands younger brother to
obtain children is not at all permitted in Veds and Dharma
Shstrs. She will be a mother to him i.e. Devara (husbands
younger brother). Mtruvat Paradreshu Excepting ones

21

own wife, all other woman are equivalent to mothers. According

to Brahmavaivarta Pura, there are sixteen mothers who are
to be adored as Mothers.
There are sixteen kinds of mothers
Brahmavaivarta Pura as follows :--

mentioned

in

Stanyadtree Garbhadhtree Bhakshyadtree Gurupriy |

Abheeshtadevapatnee cha Pituhpatnee cha kanyak ||
Sagarbhajaa yaa Bhaginee Putrapatnee Priyaaprash |
Mturmt Piturmt Sodarasya priy tath ||
Mtuh Pituscha Bhaginee Mtulnee tathaiva cha |
Anyastriyo Vedavihith Mtarah Shodasha Smrith ||

(1) A woman who offers her breast milk, (2) A woman who
impregnate, (3) A woman who offers food, (4) Wife of a
preceptor i.e., Guru, (5) Wife of a favorite Deity, (6) Fathers
Wife, (7) An unmarried Girl, (8) A sister of whole blood, Sons
wife, (9) Wifes sister, (10) Mothers mother, (11) Fathers
mother, (12) Brothers wife, (13) Brother-in-laws wife, (14)
Mothers sister, (15) Fathers sister, (16) Wife of a maternal
uncle and Father-in-laws wife.
Other than his own legally married wife, all other women are
to be treated as Mothers as described in Vedic & Puranic
literature (Anyastriyo Vedavihith Mtarah Shodasha Smrith)
The one Rigvda mantra says that those people who know
how to prepare and cook corn and take pure water and leave
meat and become brave. The very first Mantra of Yajurvda

22

says Pashn Phi, i.e. Protect the brutes, and in a

subsequent portion of the same scripture it is written, Mantra 8,
Adhyya 36 O Lord! by your mercy may our two-winged and
bi-ped creatures, the human beings and the birds and our
quadruped creatures, the goats, the sheep, the swine and others
be happy a prayer which surely does not connote their
slaughter. The tenth Mantra, 121 Sukta of Rigvda, lays down a
penalty for those who kill animals while in the Mantras 43, 44,
47, Adhyya 13 of Yajurvda, it is written :-You are not to kill the cows
You are not to kill the goats and sheep
You are not to kill the birds.
And in 42, 48, 49 Mantrs it is written: --You are not to kill the horses
O Human being! Protect the deer that live in herbs.
You are not to kill the milk-giving the useful brute creatures.
Even prejudiced writers have to always admit, that in every
Mantra of the Vds there is an extraordinary love and devotion
to the cattle, especially the Cow, until this day termed as the
Mother-Cow. This very fact ought to have deterred the
European scholars from admitting animal-sacrifice, for; surely, a
Mother could not be sacrificed by Hindus. If Hindus could
think there was sanction in the Vds for sacrificing Mother
Cow, they would tacitly admit that the same scriptures admit
the sacrifice of the Mother from whose womb they were born!
The 28 Hymn, Book VI of Rgvda, is an instance of devotion
expressed by the ryans towards their cattle in eternal Vds.

23

Griffith has translated it in his own way, yet, even his bold
version cannot conceal the true fact that it was the milk of a
Cow which was to be put in the sacrifice in the form of
clarified butter, and not the cow.
The Manusmriti
Now we come down to the Manusmriti, the Great code of
law for Hindus. The shloka 170, Adhyya 4, lays down a total
prohibition against killing animals for any purpose, saying that
people guilty of the offence would never be happy. As for the
rules laid down for everyone of the four Ashrams or stages
among Hindus the Brahmacharis, the Grihasthis, the
Vnaprasthis and the Sanysis we find: -- The Brahmacharees
are totally forbidden from flesh, wine etc, ( Sloka 177, Adhyya
2). Shloka 246, Adhyya 4, says about Grihasthis He who is
firm in determination, courteous, gentle, abstainer from the
company of opressors, and from the slaughter of creatures gets
happiness.---- As for Vnaprasthis, shloka 8, Adhyya 4 says,
that they are to be busy in reading the Vds, and to be gentle,
kind and harmless towards all creatures.The 14th Shloka of the
6th Adhyya , is of a like tenor. As for the fourth order, the
Sanysis, Many says in Adhyya 6, Shloka 60, that harmlessness
towards all creatures, is among other things, a means towards
salvation.
There is yet a curious contradiction in the 5th Adhyya of
Manu-Smriti which treats largely of this question. Out of 56
shlokas the following 34 are interpolations, for they permit flesh
in one way or the other:--

24

7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29,
30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 52,56.
(Quote).
The following Shlokas totally forbid animal sacrifices and
flesh-eating: --45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 54, 55. (Quote).
Such a total contradiction could not exist except because
of the Interpolations. No sensible human being would permit a
certain thing and damn it at the same moment and much less
such a wise law-giver as Manu. Hence it is to be supposed that
all those portions which even distantly hint at the heinous crime
of animal sacrifice are later interpolations by such people as the
Vma-Mrgis. To the masses of India i.e. Bhrat only one
commandment of Manu is generally known and this is the
commonly quoted shloka: ---Harken to Manusmriti (5:51):--All are murders : the man who advises the killing of a
creature, the man who kills, the man who flays, the man who
purchases, the man who sells, the man who cooks the flesh, the
man who distributes and the man who eats.
And the great writer of Ygashstra, Patanjali lays down
harmlessness towards all creatures as the first essential of a
would be Ygi.

25

The Mahbhrata
The above statement of Manusmriti is supported by the
strong authority of Mahbharata One of the two sacred epics
of Bhrat. A reading of the book would not only disprove that
animal sacrifices ever existed but they would strengthen too
what we say about Manu. The Urdu Book Mms Bhakshan ka
Nishedh reffered to above thus transcribes in Urdu a passage
from the Shanti Parva of the Mahbhrata :--1. Those people, who have corrupted the Faith, who are fools,
atheists, selfish, and agonistics, and those who can speak
guilty, have introduced the eating of flesh by killing.
2. Righteous Manu has termed AHIMS i.e. Harmlessness
as the proper action in sacrifices and other noble
ceremonies selfish people covetous of flesh, kill animals
for sacrifice in and out of sacrifice.
3. It is therefore incumbent on wise people to place perfect
belief in the Vds and the Purans and to put reliance in
Skshma Dharma, religion of treating of animals, birds
etc,.and to serve them because for all beings the religion
of AHIMS has been laid down as the noblest.
4. In sacrifices and other holy acts, deceitful persons (people)
have made use of flesh, wine and other filthy things, -- yea,
the Vds do not allow this.
5. Wicked people who possess pride, ignorance and greed,
have introduced flesh, wine and such other things in the

26

sacrifices; and the righteous and holy people accept the

worship of only one God in all sacrifices.
6. A Brhman had wished to kill a deer in a sacrifice, on the
authority of several persons. There happened a serious
obstruction in the consumption of his great TAPAS i.e.
concentrated devotion, namely, the TAPAS was rendered
useless (Futile). Therefore, there should be no HIMS in
any sacrifice.
7. AHIMS is the righteousness in religion, and HIMS,harmfulness is verily wickedness and selfishness.
---- These ideas are still further strengthened by the story related
in the 115th Adhyya of the Anushasana Parva of the
Mahbhhrata which runs as follows: --Bhisma made a speech to Yudhistira on the evils of
flesh. Firstly Yudhistira put a question as to what harm there
was in taking flesh and what advantage accrued from its
abstention. Brave Bhishma replied Once in an assembly
Mareechi, Atri, Angiras, Polaba, Kritu,Vaishath who were of the
dynasty of Brahma and Marichi came to consider and discuss
the problem of flesh-eating and all of them unanimously decided
that it was righteous to abstain from (flesh) meat, and that these
two persons were equally meritorious the one who performed
Ashwamedha Yga every month, and the other who abstained
from flesh and wine. Manu who was the son of Brahma said that
that man was the friend of the whole creation who neither
killed nor got killed the brutes, and that no person was afraid of
such a man, on the other hand, all creatures would trust him. He

27

moreover said that good always abstained from flesh and that
Ahims was the first essential of religion according to the Holy
Vds and the Dharma Shastrs. ---- Surely these extracts from
the Mahbhrata prove once for all that if among the ancient
Aryans (Hindus) there were vestige of animal sacrifice, the
custom was not permitted by religion; on the other hand, it was
inter-directed by the Commandment of God. They strongly
support and corroborate what we have been contending that
Animal sacrifices were at no time permitted by the Vds
or the great Law-Code of Manu.
Some Ignorant Hindus
Some of The Hindu masses to-day is almost totally
ignorant of their original scriptures. They believe in the words,
the songs and the sermons of the great reformers in Modern
Hinduism as the commandments of God. For instance, hardly
one in hundred of the Hindus living on the banks of the Ganges
the banks which had once resounded with the glorious hymns
of the Vds knows no anything definitely of his religion from
such scriptures as the Smritis or the Vds; and yet a majority of
these Hindus have a number of the shlokas or lines such a saint
as KABIR, TULSIDS and others by heart which they will
quote as the commandment of God. Hence if the question with
which we have started is to be of any practical utility to Hindus,
we cannot ignore the authority of these Hindu reformers.
Happily all their authority supports our arguments. A notable
point in the life of such reformers is, that they never mentioned
animal sacrifice but with abhorrence, and that no follower of
their has dared to commit the above atrocity on the sanction of
any of these reformers. The followers of Shri Chaitanya strew

28

flowers on the alter of the Lord; they abhor the very idea of the
offering of animal to the Almighty. Tulasids, whose Rmayana
is as much read and admired among the peasantry and the Hindu
masses of North India says :-Mercy is the essence of Religion;
Pride that of Hell
Tulsi do not abandon mercy,
Until breath is in you.
And this he supports by his statement everywhere,
expressing the same doctrine as that of Ahims we have
mentioned (above) here in. Kabir speaks with bitter sarcasm, of
those who sacrifice animals, as HALL or permitted by
religion; and says:-O Kabir! The man (Human Being) who forcibly kills
creatures saying that it is HALL how they will be able to
pay their reckoning when they give the account? In a
following Shloka, Kabir vehemently says that all the acts of
devotions will avail nothing to the man who sacrifices animals.
Guru Nnak, the founder of the Sikh religion, similarly
declaims against animal sacrifices and pertinently exclaims:
He calls it HARM i.e. unlawful food--the corpse of
the man (Human being) whom God has killed but he kills it,
the live creature and calls it a lawful sacrifice. He pays his
devotions to God, and fasts, while he takes out the liver of a
creature. If heaven can be obtained, why not sacrifice the whole
of your family?

29

This as well as the many Shloks in the Holy di-Granth

Shib of the Sikhs shows clearly that Guru Nnak and his
successors prohibited animal sacrifice nay, they laid it down as
a general rule.
And hear:- Knowledge of scriptures is of no consequence
if the scholar is hard-hearted and cruel. Non-violence,
compassion and a merciful heart are of greater value on the
sacred path to God realization than intellectual knowledge and
analytical excellence.
Kabir adds:- If a person is devoid of mercy and kindness
and yet boasts of vast learning, he will go to hell in spite of his
knowledge even if Saints works. O my children, Never
criticize, never find fault, never abuse, never even blame
anyone, either to his face or behind his back; never hurt the
feelings of anyone, man or animal; never let a harsh or unkind
word escape your lips; But speak always words of love, truth
and kindness. Real sacrifice of ego comes in leading a life
devoted to service and inner meditation on Gods essence, in
submitting oneself to the will of God and not to the pleasures of
the world. The Prophets repeatedly reminded the people that the
real worship that pleases God, is kindness, humility and sacrifice
of ego - not animal sacrifices. The Bible (Hosea 6:6) proclaims:I desired mercy and not sacrifice; And the Knowledge of God,
More than burnt offerings. And in (Psalms 51:17) The
sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: A broken and contrite
heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise.

30

The purpose of Homa

The man who pays devotions of God should not consider
flesh as proper, for the Lord pervades all creatures. And thus
Sikh religion takes its place on the same assumption we are
doing, viz There is one Life, one Existence in human being
and lower creature and hence animal sacrifices cannot have the
sanction of God. Only by a thorough perversion of Hindu
Scriptures it could be proved that Hindu race never accepted
animal sacrifices acts of merit in religious rites. The real Vdic
sacrifice was for the purification of the atmosphere. The purpose
of HOMA and other sacrifices is well illustrated by the
following passages in Manusmriti, (3:76) (1825 edition, Ed by
Sir Williams Jones) :--Since oblation of clarified butter duly cast into the flame
ascends in smoke to the sun, from the sun it falls in rain, from
rain comes vegetable food and from such food animals derive
their subsistence. Through sacrifice the ryans thought they
could produce more corn.
The following extracts from the 3rd discourse (Slks 10,11
& 14) of Sri Bhagavad Gita, the most exclusively philosophical
scripture of the Hindus, corroborate what we have said about the
nature of sacrifice as known to Hindus :- Having in ancient times emanated mankind together with
sacrifice, the Lord of emanation said : By this shall ye
propagate; be this to you the giver of desires. ---

31

With this ye nourish the shining Ones and may the Shining
Ones nourish you; thus nourishing one another ye shall
reap the supremest good-------.
From food creatures become: from rain is production of
food: rain proceedeth from sacrifice; sacrifice ariseth out of
action.
Most esteemed Dr. Annie Besant, in her version explains
the Giver of desires in to as the Kmadhuk cow from which
each one could have as much milk as he wished. This milk gave
butter which was clarified and formed the principal ingredient in
the sacrifice.
The Jains
The Jains too accept the doctrine of Ahims as an essential
doctrine in religion. Everyone knows that the Jains are so careful
not to hurt any alive thing, that they will keep their mouth shut
lest creature may go in and die. They boil their water, and then
drink it for the same reason. And we are told, that the scriptures
of Jains, like Ratnasr, lays down a penalty even for the man
who harm plants and trees, for he kills so many insects.
In the Sydvdamajariof Jains, aja in a yaja is to be
interpreted as seeds:
(Interpretation of verse no 23, published by Bombay Sanskrit
Prakrit Series 1933, first edn. page 140, lines 40-54)

32

It means In Vedic injunctions like yaja should be performed

with aja, the ignorant interpret aja as an animal (goat). Those
who are not to be reborn in the world, such wise persons
interpret it as three-year old barley and rice, five year old
Sesamum indicum(til) and masura lentil, seven-year old panic
seed (kangu) and mustard, etc.,
In the third chapter (tantra) Kkolukya of the Pacatantra by
Viuarma, it is providedMeaning thereby - Those who kill animals in yajas are fools,
because they do not know the correct interpretations of ruti.
ruti provides for aja to be used for yaja. Aja means seven-year
old rice and not an animal. There the following verse of
Mahabhartha is quoted in support -- If, by cutting of green
trees, by killinganimals and playing with their blood, one can
attain heaven, then by which action is one likely to go to hell ?
Lord Buddha
Buddhism too is one with Jainism and Hinduism on this
point. One of the vows which every Buddhist has to take is
I vow neither to hurt nor to kill any living thing("The Way
of Buddha", page 50, Wisdom of East Series) One of the ten
fetters to be cast off in Buddhism is The superstition that
external religious rites, prayers, sacrifices, hearing sermons,
relic worship, pilgrimages and other ceremonies can lead to
salvation". ("The Way of Buddha" - Page 52) . Thus Buddhism
strikes at the very rite by discountenancing all religious rites and
ceremonies and sacrifices which Brahmanical Hinduism adopted
as acts of merit. ---- Yet, it will always be valuable to know the

33

injunctions of Buddhist scriptures, on general questions treating

of flesh-food. We find that Lord Buddha in his sermon indicated
a Noble Eightfold path to his followers and among those eight
things necessary to gain salvation i.e. Nirvna, A harmless
livelihood is also one. ("The Way of Buddha" - Page 30) . The
Sutra of 42, sections of Buddhists says in the 5th section, The
whole world dreads violence. All men (human beings) tremble
in the presence of death. Do to others that which ye would have
them do to you. Kill not, cause no death. (Buddha and Early
Buddhism - Page 146, by Lillie).
Ashoka
In Asokas reign, this Buddhism religion became the
stare religion of Bhrat, and we know that no animal sacrifice
was ever committed during this period. The following are
exerpts from the inscriptions on the Rock-Pillars which Asoka
got constructed to commemorate his reign. Formerly in the
great refectory and temple of heaven beloved King Prujadsi,
many hundred thousand animals were daily scarified for the
sake of food-meat, but nowhere joyful chorus resounds again
and again, that henceforward not a single animal shall be put to
death. (First Rock Edict No 1 Prinsep quoted by Lillie, page
63). And again we read: -- Religion will increase from the
absolute prohibition to put to death living beings or to sacrifice
aught that draweth breath. (Delhi Pillar Edict VIII, Prinsep
quoted by Lillie Page 63) .

34

Degenerate Waama-Maargis
Thus it has been demonstrated that every religion which
has taken its root from the sacred land of Bhratavarsha has
accepted Ahims, as the cardinal doctrine and totally
prohibited aught in the shape of animal sacrifices for religious
rites. The only exceptions to this are the sects like that of WaamMargis, who are not actual followers of the holy Vds, Smritis
and other scriptures. Their customs, therefore, unhallowed and
forbidden as they are by Hindu scriptures are to be classed as
Barbarous.
ZOROASTER
The religion of Zoroaster, which bears in many ways a
remarkable affinity to the Hindu religion, too, forbids animal
sacrifices. The Parsi scriptures forbid any cruelty to the animals
and birds. In the Teaching of Zoroaster (Wisdom of East
Series) the writer quotes as a specimen the following prayer of
repentance given in the Patent Erani (Khorhah Avesta) :-- of
all kinds of sins with reference to Heaven against the
Ameshaspend Bahman i.e. the protection of cattle, with
reference to the world against the cattle and the various kinds of
cattles, if I have beaten it, tortured it, slain it wrongfully, if I
have not given it fodder and water at the right time, if I have
castrated it, not protected it from the robber, the wolf, and the
way-layer, if I have not protected it from extreme heat and cold,
if I have killed cattle of useful strength, working-cattle, warhorses, rams, goats, cocks and hens, so that alike these good
things and their protector Bahman have been injured by me and
not contented with me, I repent. No instance of animal

35

sacrifice, or any similar custom has been reported among the

Parsis, and they at least are free from the taint of ever having
had perverted people in their fold, who have thought it
meritorious to sacrifice, animals of religious rites. - Blessed
are the merciful.