Holy Cow --- Hinduism

[rational]

Manusmiriti Verse 3.119

राजर्त्विग्स्नातकगुरून् प्रियश्वशुरमातुलान् ।
अर्हयेन् मधुपर्केण परिसंवत्सरात् पुनः ॥ ११९ ॥

rājartvigsnātakagurūn priyaśvaśuramātulān |
arhayen madhuparkeṇa parisaṃvatsarāt punaḥ || 119 ||

He should receive, with the “honey-mixture,” the king, the priest, the accomplished Student, the Teacher, the Son-in-law, the Father-in-law and the Maternal uncle,—coming again after a year.—(119)

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

In course of the entertaining of guests, the Text proceeds to lay down the special form of honouring of a few other respected persons also.

‘King’—stands here for the annointed king of men, and not for the mere Kṣatriya in general. The honour here prescribed is a very great one, and every Kṣatriya does not deserve it. Nor would it be right to speak of an ordinary Kṣatriya along with the ‘accomplished student’ and the ‘teacher;’ for there can be no similarity between the honour accorded to the Teacher and to an ordinary Kṣatriya. There are Vedic texts also indicative of the same conclusion. For instance, in the Ātithyeṣṭi-Brāhmaṇa we read—‘the guest is like a king of men arrived;’ and in connection with the rule of killing a cow for the offering of ‘Honey-mixture,’ we find the guest spoken of as ‘the killer of cows;’ all which goes to show that the said offering is meant for the king of men. Hence the honour here mentioned is to be paid to a king of men, irrespective of his being a Kṣatriya or not. But so far as the Śūdra king of men is concerned, no honours are to be paid to him which are accompanied by the recitation of Vedic Mantras.

https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc199898.html

Praśna II, Paṭala 3, Khaṇḍa 7

4. Food (offered to guests) which is mixed with milk procures the reward of an Agniṣṭoma-sacrifice. Food mixed with clarified butter procures the reward of an Ukthya, food mixed with honey the reward of an Atirātra, food accompanied by meat the reward of a Dvādaśāha, (food and) water numerous offspring and long life.

https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/apastamba-dharma-sutra/d/doc116271.html

 

[rational]

Goghna, Go-ghna: 13 definitions

In Hinduism

Purana and Itihasa (epic history)

[«previous (G) next»] — Goghna in Purana glossary

Source: Wisdom Library: Varāha-purāṇa

The Varāhapurāṇa is categorised as a Mahāpurāṇa, and was originally composed of 24,000 metrical verses, possibly originating from before the 10th century. It is composed of two parts and Sūta is the main narrator.

Source: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries: The Purana Index

Goghna (गोघ्न).—The slayer of cows; the other three heinous crimes are ingratitude, wine drinking and defiling of teacher's bed.*

Purana book covercontext information

The Purana (पुराण, purāṇas) refers to Sanskrit literature preserving ancient India’s vast cultural history, including historical legends, religious ceremonies, various arts and sciences. The eighteen mahapuranas total over 400,000 shlokas (metrical couplets) and date to at least several centuries BCE.

Discover the meaning of goghna in the context of Purana from the community on Patreon

Ayurveda (science of life)

[«previous (G) next»] — Goghna in Ayurveda glossary

Dietetics and Culinary Art (such as household cooking)

Source: Shodhganga: Dietetics and culinary art in ancient and medieval India

Goghna (गोघ्न) refers to a “guest for whom a cow can be killed is known”, according to Pāṇini, and is commonly found in literature dealing with the topics of dietetics and culinary art, also known as Pākaśāstra or Pākakalā.—Meat eating in India is as old as Ṛgvedic period. [...] Pāṇini also refers to meat eating. According to Pāṇini a guest for whom a cow can be killed is known as goghna.

Ayurveda book covercontext information

Āyurveda (आयुर्वेद, ayurveda) is a branch of Indian science dealing with medicine, herbalism, taxology, anatomy, surgery, alchemy and related topics. Traditional practice of Āyurveda in ancient India dates back to at least the first millenium BC. Literature is commonly written in Sanskrit using various poetic metres.

Discover the meaning of goghna in the context of Ayurveda from the community on Patreon

Shaktism (Shakta philosophy)

[«previous (G) next»] — Goghna in Shaktism glossary

Source: Google Books: Manthanabhairavatantram

Goghna (गोघ्न) refers to “one who has killed a cow”, according to the Ṣaṭsāhasrasaṃhitā, an expansion of the Kubjikāmatatantra: the earliest popular and most authoritative Tantra of the Kubjikā cult.—Accordingly, “[...] Abandoning the enveloping cover (kañcuka) of sin, O dear one, by praising the sacred seats he sees no misfortune even if he is yoked to terrible sins (or) has killed his mother, father or a cow [i.e., goghna] or steals the sacrificial offerings of the Heroes or has fallen from the Rule due to (his) carelessness or even if he has stopped uttering the Mantras”.

Shaktism book covercontext information

Shakta (शाक्त, śākta) or Shaktism (śāktism) represents a tradition of Hinduism where the Goddess (Devi) is revered and worshipped. Shakta literature includes a range of scriptures, including various Agamas and Tantras, although its roots may be traced back to the Vedas.

Discover the meaning of goghna in the context of Shaktism from the community on Patreon

Languages of India and abroad

Sanskrit dictionary

[«previous (G) next»] — Goghna in Sanskrit glossary

Source: DDSA: The practical Sanskrit-English dictionary

Goghna (गोघ्न).—a.

1) destructive to cows.

2) one who has killed a cow.

3) one for whom a cow is killed, a guest.

Goghna is a Sanskrit compound consisting of the terms go and ghna (घ्न).

Source: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries: Shabda-Sagara Sanskrit-English Dictionary

Goghna (गोघ्न).—mfn.

(-ghnaḥ-ghnī-ghnaṃ) Who or what kills kine. m.

(-ghnaḥ) A guest. E. go a cow, and ghna what kills, from han with ka affix; a cow being killed on the arrival of the latter, or being presented to him.

Source: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries: Benfey Sanskrit-English Dictionary

Goghna (गोघ्न).—[go-ghna], m. One who has killed a cow, [Mānavadharmaśāstra] 11, 108.

Source: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries: Cappeller Sanskrit-English Dictionary

Goghna (गोघ्न).—[adjective] noxious to kine, kine-killing; [masculine] a cow-slayer.

Source: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries: Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary

1) Goghna (गोघ्न):—[=go-ghna] [from go] mfn. noxious to kine, [Ṛg-veda i, 114, 10]

2) [v.s. ...] m. = -ghāta, [Manu-smṛti xi, 109 and 116; Yājñavalkya; Rāmāyaṇa; Bhāgavata-purāṇa vi; Hitopadeśa]

3) [v.s. ...] one for whom a cow is killed, guest, [Pāṇini 3-4, 73.]

Source: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries: Yates Sanskrit-English Dictionary

Goghna (गोघ्न):—[go-ghna] (ghnaḥ) 1. m. A cow or cattle killer; a guest.

[rational]

Brihadaranyak Upanishad 6/4/18

Section IV - Conception and Birth as Religious Rites

Verse 6.4.18:

अथ य इच्छेत्पुत्रो मे पण्डितो विगीतः समितिंगमः शुश्रूषितां वाचं भाषिता जायेत, सर्वान्वेदाननुब्रुवीत, सर्वमायुरियादिति, मांसौदनं पाचयित्वा सर्पिष्मन्तमश्नीयाताम्; ईश्वरौ जनयितवै—अउक्शेण वार्षभेण वा ॥ १८ ॥

atha ya icchetputro me paṇḍito vigītaḥ samitiṃgamaḥ śuśrūṣitāṃ vācaṃ bhāṣitā jāyeta, sarvānvedānanubruvīta, sarvamāyuriyāditi, māṃsaudanaṃ pācayitvā sarpiṣmantamaśnīyātām; īśvarau janayitavai—aukśeṇa vārṣabheṇa vā || 18 ||

18. He who wishes that a son should be born to him who would be a reputed scholar, frequenting the assemblies and speaking delightful words, would study all the Vedas and attain a full term of life, should have rice cooked with the meat of a vigorous bull or one more advanced in years, and he and his wife should eat it with clarified butter. Then they would be able to produce such a son.

18. And if a man wishes that a learned son should be born to him, famous, a public man, a popular speaker, that he should know all the Vedas, and that he should live to his full age, then, after having prepared boiled rice with meat and butter, they should both eat, being fit to have offspring. The meat should be of a young or of an old bull.

(maga pilladu puttali anukune vallaki idhi easy gaa workout avthundhi choodandi)

https://www.infoplease.com/primary-sources/philosophy-religion/the-upanishads/fourth-brahmana-3

https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122237.html

[rational]

Swami Vivekananda

When Buddhism went down that way, there came they inevitable reaction. There is but one entity in the wholes world. It is a unit world. The diversity is only eye-service. It is all one. The idea of unity and what we call monism — without duality — is the idea in India. This doctrine has: been always in India; [it was] brought forward whenever materialism and scepticism broke down everything. When Buddhism broke down everything by introducing all sorts of foreign barbarians into India — their manners and customs and things — there was a reaction, and that reaction was led by a young monk [Shankarâchârya]. And [instead] of preaching new doctrines and always thinking new thoughts and making sects, he brought back the Vedas to life: and modern Hinduism has thus an admixture of ancient Hinduism, over which the Vedantists predominate. But, you see, what once dies never comes back to life, and those ceremonials of [Hinduism] never came back to life. You will be astonished if I tell you that, according to the old ceremonials, he is not a good Hindu who does not eat beef. On certain occasions he must sacrifice a bull and eat it. That is disgusting now. However they may differ from each other in India, in that they are all one — they never eat beef. The ancient sacrifices and the ancient gods, they are all gone; modern India belongs to the spiritual part of the Vedas.

 

Morality is a relative term. Is there anything like absolute morality in this world? The idea is a superstition. We have no right to judge every man in every age by the same standard.

Every man, in every age, in every country is under peculiar circumstances. If the circumstances change, ideas also must change. Beef-eating was once moral. The climate was cold, and the cereals were not much known. Meat was the chief food available. So in that age and clime, beef was in a manner indispensable. But beef-eating is held to be immoral now.

 

“It is obvious and overwhelming. You see India never loses anything; only she takes time to turn everything into bone and muscle. Buddha dealt a blow at animal sacrifice from which India has never recovered; and Buddha said, ‘Kill no cows’, and cow-killing is an impossibility with us.”

 

Madhuparka was a Vedic ceremony, usually in honour of guest, in which a respectful offering was to be made consisting, among other dainties, of beef. The text which Swamiji partially quotes forbids such food. The full text means that in the Kali-Yuga the following five customs are to be forsaken: The horse sacrifice, cow-killing ceremonies, meat-offerings in Shraddha, Sannyasa, and maintaining the line of progeny through the husband’s younger brother in case of failure through the husband.

https://vivekavani.com/swami-vivekananda-quotes-beef-eating-cow-slaughter/

https://www.swamivivekananda.guru/2017/03/27/did-the-hindus-eat-beef-in-the-past/

https://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info/vivekananda/volume_3/buddhistic_india.htm

[rational]

SPECIAL MENTION     

Dog meat

Rig Veda 4.18.13

Sanskrit text [Accents, Plain, Transliterated]:

अव॑र्त्या॒ शुन॑ आ॒न्त्राणि॑ पेचे॒ न दे॒वेषु॑ विविदे मर्डि॒तार॑म् । अप॑श्यं जा॒यामम॑हीयमाना॒मधा॑ मे श्ये॒नो मध्वा ज॑भार ॥
अवर्त्या शुन आन्त्राणि पेचे न देवेषु विविदे मर्डितारम् । अपश्यं जायाममहीयमानामधा मे श्येनो मध्वा जभार ॥
avartyā śuna āntrāṇi pece na deveṣu vivide marḍitāram | apaśyaṃ jāyām amahīyamānām adhā me śyeno madhv ā jabhāra ||

English translation:

“In extreme destitution I have cooked the entrails of a dog; I have not found a comforter among the gods; I have beheld my wife disrsepected; then the falcon, (Indra), has brought to me sweet water.”

Commentary by Sāyaṇa: Ṛgveda-bhāṣya

In extreme destitutuin: So Manu has, Vāmadeva, who well knew right and wrong, was by no means rendered impure, though desirous when oppressed with hunger, of eating the flesh of dogs for the preservation of his life; icchan attum, wishing ot eat; the text has śuno āntrāṇi pece, I cooked the entrails of a dog; the falcon: i.e., as swift as a hawk, śyena vat śīghragāmīndraḥ; Sūkta 18: Ṛṣi vāmadeva, while yet in the womb, was reluctant to be born and chose to come into the world through his mother's side; aware of his purpose, the mother prayed to Aditi, who thereupon came, with her son Indra, to expostulate with the Ṛṣi; this is the subject of the Sūkta

Details:

Ṛṣi (sage/seer): vāmadevo gautamaḥ [vāmadeva gautama];
Devatā (deity/subject-matter): indrāditī ;
Chandas (meter): svarāṭpaṅkti;
Svara (tone/note): Swar;

Padapatha [Accents, Plain, Transliterated]:

अव॑र्त्या । शुनः॑ । आ॒न्त्राणि॑ । पे॒चे॒ । न । दे॒वेषु॑ । वि॒वि॒दे॒ । म॒र्डि॒तार॑म् । अप॑श्यम् । जा॒याम् । अम॑हीयमानाम् । अध॑ । मे॒ । श्ये॒नः । मधु॑ । आ । ज॒भा॒र॒ ॥
अवर्त्या । शुनः । आन्त्राणि । पेचे । न । देवेषु । विविदे । मर्डितारम् । अपश्यम् । जायाम् । अमहीयमानाम् । अध । मे । श्येनः । मधु । आ । जभार ॥
avartyā | śunaḥ | āntrāṇi | pece | na | deveṣu | vivide | marḍitāram | apaśyam | jāyām | amahīyamānām | adha | me | śyenaḥ | madhu | ā | jabhāra

Multi-layer Annotation of the Ṛgveda

[Rigveda 4.18.13 English analysis of grammar]

avartyā < avarti

[noun], instrumental, singular, feminine

śuna < śunaḥ < śvan

[noun], genitive, singular, masculine

“dog; śvan [word].”

āntrāṇi < āntra

[noun], accusative, plural, neuter

“intestine; abdomen.”

pece < pac

[verb], singular, Perfect indicative

“heat; cook; digest; boil; ripen; fester; burn; boil; cauterize; fry; cook; suppurate; inflame.”

Source

https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/rig-veda-english-translation/d/doc832452.html

Mahabharatam

Sage vishwamitra stealing and eating Dog meat

Santi parva SECTION CXLI

The great Rishi Viswamitra, urged by pangs of hunger and engaged in search after food, entered that hamlet and endeavoured his best to find something to eat. Though the son of Kusika begged repeatedly, yet he failed to obtain any meat or rice or fruit or root or any other kind of food. He then, exclaiming, 'Alas, great is the distress that has overtaken me!' fell down from weakness in that hamlet of the Chandalas. The sage began to reflect, saying to himself, 'What is best for me to do now?' Indeed, O best of kings, the thought that occupied him was of the means by which he could avoid immediate death. He beheld, O king, a large piece of flesh, of a dog that had recently been slain with a weapon, spread on the floor of a Chandala's hut. The sage reflected and arrived at the conclusion that he should steal that meat. And he said unto himself, 'I have no means now of sustaining life. Theft is allowable in a season of distress for even an eminent person. It will not detract from his glory. Even a Brahmana for saving his life may do it. This is certain. In the first place one should steal from a low person. Failing such a person one may steal from one's equal. Failing an equal, one may steal from even an eminent and righteous man. I shall then, at this time when my life itself is ebbing away, steal this meat. I do not see demerit in such theft. I shall, therefore, rob this haunch of dog's meat.'

“… he addressed Kusika's son, saying, 'What do you seek here in the night, O Brahmana?' Conciliating the Chandala, Viswamitra said, 'I am exceedingly hungry and about to die of starvation. I desire to take away that haunch of dog's meat. Being hungry, I have become sinful. One solicitous of food has no shame. It is hunger that is urging me to this misdeed. It is for this that I desire to take away that haunch of dog's meat. My life-breaths are languishing. Hunger has destroyed my Vedic lore. I am weak and have lost my senses. I have no scruple about clean or unclean food. Although I know that it is sinful, still I wish to take away that haunch of dog's meat. “

 

“…"The Chandala said, 'By eating this food one (like thee) cannot obtain long life. Nor can one (like thee) obtain strength (from such food), nor that gratification which ambrosia offers. Do thou seek for some other kind of alms. Let not thy heart incline towards eating dog's meat. The dog is certainly an unclean food to members of the regenerate classes.'

"Viswamitra said, 'Any other kind of meat is not to be easily had during a famine like this. Besides, O Chandala, I have no wealth (wherewith to buy food). I am exceedingly hungry. I cannot move any longer. I am utterly hopeless. I think that all the six kinds of taste are to be found in that piece of dog's meat.”

"Viswamitra said, 'They that are called good are authorities in matters of duty. I am following their example. I now regard this dog's haunch to be better food than anything that is highly pure.'

Viswamitra said, 'As regards myself, I am observant of rigid vows and my heart is set on peace. For preserving the root of all religious merit, I shall eat food that is unclean. It is evident that such an act would be regarded as righteous in a person of cleansed soul. To a person, however, of uncleansed soul, the eating of dog's flesh would appear sinful. Even if the conclusion to which I have arrived be wrong, (and if I eat this dog's meat) I shall not, for that act, become one like thee.'

"Viswamitra said, 'If thou be a friend desirous of my happiness, do thou then raise me up from this distress. In that case, relinquishing this dog's haunch, I may consider myself saved by the aid of righteousness (and not by that of sinfulness).'

"Bhishma continued, 'The Chandala, having said these words unto Kusika's son, became silent. Viswamitra then, of cultivated understanding, took away that haunch of dog's meat. The great ascetic having possessed himself of that piece of dog's meat for saving his life, took it away into the woods and wished with his wife to eat it. He resolved that having first gratified the deities according to due rites, he should then eat that haunch of dog's meat at his pleasure. Igniting a fire according to the Brahma rites, the ascetic, agreeably

to those rites that go by the name of Aindragneya, began himself to cook that meat into sacrificial Charu. He then, O Bharata, began the ceremonies in honour of the gods and the Pitris, by dividing that Charu into as many portions as were necessary, according to the injunctions of the scriptures, and by invoking the gods with Indra at their head (for accepting their shares). Meanwhile, the chief of the celestials began to pour copiously. Reviving all creatures by those showers, he caused plants and herbs to grow once more. Viswamitra, however, having completed the rites in honour of the gods and the Pitris and having gratified them duly, himself ate that meat. Burning all his sins afterwards by his penances, the sage, after a long time, acquired the most wonderful (ascetic) success. Even thus, when the end in view is the preservation of life itself, should a high-souled person possessed of learning and acquainted with means rescue his own cheerless self, when fallen into distress, by all means in his power. By having recourse to such understanding one should always preserve one's life. A person, if alive, can win religious merit and enjoy happiness and prosperity. For this reason, O son of Kunti, a person of cleansed soul and possessed of learning should live and act in this world, relying upon his own intelligence in discriminating between righteousness and its reverse.'"

This is the list of the holy texts that mention about beef eating, cow sacrifice, bull/ox etc that I have found.

1)     Rig veda

2)     Yajur veda

3)     Aitreya Brahmana

4)     Satapatha Brahmana

5)     Mahabarata

6)     Matsya purana

7)     Brihandara nayak Upanishad

8)     Vishnu Smriti

9)     Manusmrti.

There is not much I could find about cow/bull/ox sacrifice and consumption in the later vedas like Atharva veda and Soma Veda, which shows that Hinduism went through a transition face. Once I find any I will post here. (STC)

I request who ever reading these books please find oldest books, the new books are manipulated and doesn’t give the actual meaning of the sloka or the slokas will be missing.

[telugu_voter]

gothram vacchinde akkada nunchi

 

[telugu_voter]

23 minutes ago, 11MohanRedddy said:

 

are you symbolically calling bapans who begs rice in every pooja

[Konebhar6]

Big award to anyone who reads all the stuff posted in this thread

[Konebhar6]

Rational bhayya - Why have irrational expectations that someone will read this?

[11MohanRedddy]

8 minutes ago, Konebhar6 said:

Rational bhayya - Why have irrational expectations that someone will read this?

 

1 hour ago, 11MohanRedddy said:

 

 

[rational]

54 minutes ago, telugu_voter said:

gothram vacchinde akkada nunchi

 

I dont know that interesting can you throw some light.

[Android_Halwa]

Hindu practices were never based on any books…they have evolved. If you are looking for the origin of such practices then its not going to end any where…Hindutvam is a democratic religion, where you are free to practice anything that you want and no one is going to stone you to death..

[rational]

11 minutes ago, Konebhar6 said:

Rational bhayya - Why have irrational expectations that someone will read this?

 

27 minutes ago, Konebhar6 said:

Big award to anyone who reads all the stuff posted in this thread

I thought just 2 or three references wouldnt cut it, more over its a little bit detail so posted as many as i can, i have another 7,8 hindu texts that cover the same topic felt its too much so holding them back for now.

[11MohanRedddy]

51 minutes ago, Android_Halwa said:

Hindu practices were never based on any books…they have evolved. If you are looking for the origin of such practices then its not going to end any where…Hindutvam is a democratic religion, where you are free to practice anything that you want and no one is going to stone you to death..

In a way the reason Hinduism hasn't perished like most other religions have perished due to invaders is because there is no one God, or one person to follow or one practice that could be targeted to invade it. 

[Android_Halwa]

10 minutes ago, 11MohanRedddy said:

In a way the reason Hinduism hasn't perished like most other religions have perished due to invaders is because there is no one God, or one person to follow or one practice that could be targeted to invade it. 

+1

Its a practice that evolved, not preached by a god or written in a book. 

Invaders destroyed temples and influenced culture, still they could’t change our practices. These are invincible…and this is the reason why we are still surviving and thriving…we have seen the highs and lows of other civilizations and we are still here and will be here for ever..

Bhumi putinapudu modalaindi vayya…ippatla edaki podu..