Published On: Mon, May 4th, 2015

Butchers teach the values of Satya and Ahimsa

Sometimes, the best of the lessons are learned and taught, not in classrooms but in times and places where the distinction between life and death is murkiest. Consider the example of the Bhagavad Gita. Who would have thought that the sublime song would be sung on the battlefield which saw the death of forty lakh soldiers? Yet it did.

This essay recounts the tale of two such unlikely teachers who taught the characters in the story— and us—the quintessential lesson of Dharma and Duty.

Tale One – Dharma Vyadha (धर्मव्याध), Mahabharata (Book three, chapters 206-216)

As a typical Indian story begins, once upon a time there was a poor Brahmin named Kaushika. He learnt all the Vedas and decided to do Tapas to further sharpen his Yogic prowess and gain knowledge and Siddhis. His vigorous Tapas continued uninterrupted for years. The glow of the penance started showing on his face and his very aura started becoming radiant.

One day, while he was meditating under a tree, his concentration was disturbed when a sparrow started making noise while trying to build a nest on the tree. Kaushika glanced at the sparrow angrily and the poor sparrow burned to ashes that very instant.

Pleased by his progress, he went to a town nearby to ask for Bhiksha. At a particular house, the lady of the house took a long time to answer his call and finally gave him alms. This angered Kaushika who threatened to curse the lady and burn her down with his Yogic Powers. But to his surprise, the lady replied that she was neither a crow nor a sparrow, to be burnt.

Kaushika was amazed to see that an average housewife had such sophisticated Yogic powers without having undergone stringent austerities. The lady replied that by doing one’s duty, one can achieve all that is to be achieved. She redirected Kaushika to a butcher named Dharma Vyadha living in the city of Mithila who, according to lady, would impart knowledge to this learned Brahmin.

So Kaushika decided to check out this butcher.He reached Mithila, tracked down the meat-shop of the said butcher and was horrified at the sight of blood and meat and death around. He gives up the expectation of gaining any knowledge, but now that he had come this far, he decides to at leasttalk with this butcher. The butcher, however, knows the intent of this Brahmin and requests him to wait until his shop is closed, so that he can instruct the Brahmin about the intricacies of Dharma as told by the housewife in another city. Kaushika gets the second surprise of his life and his arrogance is thoroughly grounded and replaced by genuine curiosity, befitting an ideal student.

Dharma Vyaadha starts his instruction, ‘Oh tapasvi, I will instruct you on the nature of Dharma and Ahimsa by my own example. I am in this business because my family has been in this business for generations. It is my Kula Vritti. Upon careful thinking, I found out that this business suits me well. I devote all my time to ensure that my customers are satisfied with my service. Furthermore, it allows me to take care of my aged parents as well as my family.It also ensures that I have the ability to live a decent life in this good city. Do not judge an act as good or bad. No act is of higher or lower stature. It is higher or lower based on the driving force behind that act. Right action is achieved by the means of coordinated efforts in two directions: controlling the six enemies (Kaama/Krodha/Lobha/Moha/Mada/Matsara) and strengthening the Dharmic intent of the mind. Any action under influence of these six enemies is bad action.

[contextly_sidebar id=”47OHI7kC2skFl1jvBCeRCgvX7ElWwMN2″]

Ahimsaa (nonviolence) and Satya (truth) are the two main pillars of Dharma. A decision on what is truth, under difficult circumstances, should be made by choosing that course of action which would lead to highest good of all that is (Bhuta). And Ahimsa is when a person wishes and acts for the benefit of all keeping the true understanding of Justice (Nyaya) and virtues (GuNa).’

Knowledge and bliss dawns upon Kaushika who thanks the butcher and bids him farewell. Dharma Vyaadha gives him final lesson, ‘Oh learned Brahmana! In your quest for mastering Vedas and acquiring Yogic Siddhis, you have neglected your duties towards your parents, your family and have become an ascetic. You learned from me, but you also have to learn from the housewife who sent you here. Dharma and knowledge can be achieved perfectly by staying in the society and fulfilling all the duties and earning all the Purusharthas. You have to pay back the dues to parents, to society before you attain liberation (Mukti). Quit Sannyasa, go back home, take care of your parents, start a family. You have my blessing, knowledge will shine upon you.’

It is both interesting and humbling to note that one of the finest lessons on non-violence given to a Brahmin by a butcher whose occupation is to kill animals. There is an elaborate story where the butcher tells Kaushika about his past life and how Shudras and Brahmins are defined. They arrive at the conclusion that good conduct alone determines who is Brahmin and who is not. And good or bad are themselves determined by the driving force behind every action in a given situation. Possession of qualities like purity, discipline and adherence to truth alone makes one a Brahmin, irrespective of the caste a person is born into.

Tale Two – The story of Gopalchandra Mukhopadhyay or Gopal Patha

Gopal `Patha’ Mukherjee, Gopal the Goat was among the most feared of Calcutta’s musclemen, with 800 boys under his command. He was an emperor and they were his army. Gopal Patha got his name because his family ran a meat shop on College Street which was, at the time of partition, a protector of his community.

gopalWhen the Direct Action Day unleashed communal rioting in Calcutta, Gopal Patha assembled his force. In his words, ‘It was a very critical time for the country. We thought if the whole area became Pakistan, there would be more torture and repression. So I called all my boys together and said it was time to retaliate. If you come to know that one murder has taken place, you commit 10 murders. That was the order to my boys.’

While the words were uttered softly, it took a while for their import to sink in. Calcutta was up in flames and Gopal Patha, in effect, took the opportunity to douse the city in kerosene. ‘It was basically duty,’ he said, ‘I had to help those in distress.’ Patha says that his boys were always selective. ‘We only fought and killed our attackers. But why should we kill an ordinary rickshaw-wallah or hawker who happens to be a Muslim?’

‘A year later when Mahatma Gandhi came to Calcutta appealing for peace, people came with their weapons and placed them at the feet of Gandhiji. Shabbily-dressed people came with swords, daggers and country-made guns. However I didn’t go. Gandhi called me twice, but I didn’t go. The third time, some local Congress leaders told me that I should at least deposit some of my arms. I went there. I saw people coming and depositing weapons which were of no use to anyone—out-of-order pistols, that sort of thing.

Then Gandhi’s secretary said to me: ‘Gopal, why don’t you surrender your arms to Gandhiji?’ I replied, ‘With these arms I saved the women of my area, I saved the people. I will not surrender them. Where was Gandhiji during the Great Calcutta Killing? Where was he then? Even if I’ve used a nail to kill someone, I won’t surrender even that nail.’

I find a strange connection in these two stories. I think Gopal Patha understood the crux of Satya and Ahimsa in far better and nuanced way than Gandhiji during those difficult times. The more I think about it, the more I realize that the words of Dharma-Vyaadha resonated in essence from the words and actions of butchers like Gopalchandra Mukherjee.

As Dharmavyadha said, it is the driving force behind the action which determines its moral position. Satya is choosing a course of action which would lead to higher good in the long term, in a given frame of reference. And Ahimsa is acting for the benefit of all with true a sense of justice and virtue.

In these times where values, virtues, ethics, and morality depend on which side of the fence you are on, the story of Gopal Patha may sound crude, harsh, violent, and ‘communal.’ Yet, as the story of Dharma Vyaadha illustrates, the inaction on the part of Gopal Patha would have led to far more brutalities against the hapless Hindus of Calcutta at the hands of a determined mob intent on massacring them.

Which leads us to this question: what eventually happened to Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh? And what has happened to Muslims in India? This is the frame of reference to judge the higher and long-term good of humans. And this should be frame of reference while using terms like Satya and Ahimsa in the context of socio-politico-economic events happening in the Indian subcontinent for the last six decades.

About the Author

- The author is a biologist who pursues Indic philosophy, music, history and international politics. He describes himself as a Hindu Nirishwara-vaadi and a Saamkhya-Yogi.


Displaying 74 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. […] conviction rate in cases of riots is the lowest of all crimes. Even in India, beginning with the Direct Action Day of 16 August 1946, partition riots of 1947, and all subsequent riots, conviction rates have not […]

  2. […] conviction rate in cases of riots is the lowest of all crimes. Even in India, beginning with the Direct Action Day of 16 August 1946, partition riots of 1947, and all subsequent riots, conviction rates have not […]

  3. Jithendra says:

    Totally false story, first one. No GOD will offer Siddhis to anyone who kills other animals.

    • Jishnu says:

      Who taught you so? What is the relevance of “GOD” that “GOD” will give siddhis in the first place, leave alone how they come and whether through killing or any other act?

      • Jithendra says:

        All Saints who have achieved deathless life and Siddhis have thought this to me.

      • Jithendra says:

        Who ever didn’t teach you, thought me 🙂

      • Jithendra says:

        You need to experience truth to know this answer.

      • Jithendra says:

        If you start your spiritual journey, these things will be answered, otherwise it is better kept as ‘Mission Impossible’.

        • Jishnu says:

          I do not need answers. I am questioning your assertion which you pompously preach like gospel but are unable to substantiate. So as an escape you appeal to my experience as though you know the nature of siddhi and its relation to “GOD” and killing. So go try your smartness elsewhere, ain’t gonna fly with me.

          • Jithendra says:

            Enjoy your own opinions, after all those are your ass holes!

          • Jishnu says:

            I have not expressed any of my opinions, if you know basic comprehension. It is YOU who made claims and I questioned them. Funny that people who lack honesty in seeing this much talk big about siddhi himsa God et al. Anyways you are incapable of anything beyond a low slangmatch, so I am off this thread.

          • Jithendra says:

            Good for you blabbering tongue! 😛

          • Jithendra says:

            You are no GOD to stop arguing. You are one nut head whose ego eats over the logical discussions and stops from accepting the genuine facts of nature whose nature cannot be comprehended by your little dwarf brain that thinks that it is the greatest in the world. Living in an oxymoron!

  4. VP says:

    First of all Satya, Ahimnsa, and all other things are applicable to the individuals who wants to attain Moksha. These things should be practiced individually. Society should practice the rules which are applicable for society. Gandhiji tried to enforce his whims on the entire society. Killing some one to protect yourself and your family’s defense is not crime.
    This is a brilliant article exactly explaining this fact.

    • Radha Rajan says:

      Killing a living being to eat pander to the fad of eating the flesh and blood of another being when there are alternatives and choices available of other things to eat and other professions to follow is not dharma. It is a specious argument by humans to maintain the status quo instead of choosing to change one’s eating habits and one’s profession if it meant that there would be no killing by us because of what we do and what we eat. In the end every individual has to choose how he lives and by what standards. These choiuces have their own Karma. I will emphasise again: A butcher cannot give me lectures in ahimsa and if despite choices available to do otherwise he chooses to kill, he also cannot give me lectures on dharma.

  5. Sarcasticatheist says:

    Beautifully nuanced. This message is what the world needs today.
    Motive. That’s the only Dharma.
    But one needs clarity to understand doing the difficult act for a greater good. Unlike ISIS, who’s motive is skewed by their selfishness and greed, pin their intentions on the quran. Atleast reasonable people should understand that this is just a facade and condemn these acts out rightly.

  6. Dr. MS says:

    I have an anecdote to share. I had an interesting experience with an Anglo woman who stood in front of me as I tried to get through a narrow space in a fruit market few hours ago. She moved only when I got close to her, and because she is the Anglo ruler, at least that is what the attitude showed, she actually threw a gaalee at me while all the dark skinned Dravidians stood cowering in front of her. I looked past her as if she matters little to me while she mumbled galee because she is only used to Indian women, Tamilians, Dravidians and South Indians stretching their smile and anus at the sight of her, and moving away in fear, deference and total obedience and devotion. I refused to do that.

    So I looked at her with contempt…conveying, “Oh no you don’t. You do not occupy every space in the world, including North America where you killed the Natives and enslaved Blacks, and every nook and corner of the world, and use these sites to read the comments and find new ways to ‘divide and rule’. I might have differences with my brothers and sisters. I might even argue with my own sister. I might have differences with DMK politics….but you will never use it against us or my people. Do you understand madam Anglo and sir Anglo? Do you understand? Now take your cheap fruits, pay what is due and leave my country with grace. Do you understand you fool.”

    That is how you deal with colonialists and colonial idiots who try to divide and rule…by using this Dravida politics. Next time I see content of these sites, where honest democracy is at work, being used by editors, editorial board, spies and other unenlightened fools playing “Gotcha” games, “Or divide and rule”. game…I will come after you with every thing one can master and muster. Never underestimate the Tamilian Kaali. I am happy to be one sometimes.

    Ahimsa works only when others are in the same plane. Otherwise few Anglo butchers will eliminate

  7. madhav says:

    Did’nt know about this Butcher Mukherji! I believe what he did was right and even at the end he was right. But one thing i did not like about the article. Its discussing the nuances of dharma, the scriptures and dharma have different meanings based on different times the scriptures even have opposite things written in them . So decoding waht one needs to do requires the aid of a ‘Guru’ or atleast ‘devotion’ to god or atleast pure and impartial mind! Without this how can we say what is right and what is wrong?

    Sri Krishna in the Mahabharat War had given different advice to different ppl;
    To Arjun Sri Krishna said to FIght is his dharma;
    To Duryodhana he said to Not Fight is his dharma
    To Vidurji he said to go on a pilgrimage!

    So for a common man its very perplexing as to what to do in hour of crisis! Although the Scriptures say to pray fervently and from the heart with firm faith for a solution and one will get the solution.

    My crux is this article although has given us a good idea about what dahrma may mean it has unnecessarily said that one need not be an ascetic one can very well attain siddhi by being at home! Although this statement is true its contextual as to what one will achieve by doing similarly!

    See the thing about doing our duty is that we ‘do not do waht our mind tells us but do that what the scriptures tell us!’ Who amongst us will be able to not do what the mind tells us to do?

  8. Gautam Sharma says:

    very enlightening article,great intriguing examples !

  9. Seel says:

    Excellent article, Hindus were denied the true knowledge of Dharma, due to over emphasize of ahimsa and Gandhi, one who can’t protect his family, is not worthy of anything.

  10. Dr. MS says:

    I sent this article to a group of people whose first response was, “Indians are the butchers who have learnt Ahmisa after butchering.” Kindly stop these kinds of titles…I have said it a hundred times….Many people do not look beyond titles. Who are the people who edit these articles? I am becoming suspicious, worried and afraid.

    • Seel says:

      You are a disgusting piece of crap, no respect to someone who correctly addresses Dharma, no idea about Calcutta massacre. USA is broke with 20 trillion in debt due to the failed policies of the liberal social handout system. Feminism is rotten and hateful, it is not a country’s job to design mega systems and accumulate debt, it is the individuals job to take care of family with hard work and not with handouts from the state. There is no mention from the author about preaching to women. You are lunatic and mad, go away troll!

      • Dr. MS says:

        This is the way you insult your women? Can you not open your mouth without hate, and spewing out foul language. I sent your letter to someone and his first response. was, “How do these awful men find women? Unless the women are beaten these men will never get anyone.”. Some countries will say to you, “We may butcher some people…but that teaches us Ahimsa better than you”. You dumb moron…do you even know how people around the world perceive these articles you clueless fool? No wonder you live in your frog in the well mentality and then get invaded, Get invaded…what do I care. Fools like you should be enslaved. Improve your language…or get out.

        • Seel says:

          Your enslavement by the feminist system is already complete, you are barking at an article without any sense of gravity. We were talking about Dharma and the failure of it, you are pushing your feminist agenda sponsored by Ford Foundation, We have no time for you!

          • Dr. MS says:

            I am not enslaved by the feminist system I am liberated by it. Whereas dumb asses like you oppose it because without enslaving women how are you going to find obedient wives for third rates like you? Many Indian men are afraid of strong smart women because they desire her confidence and her internal beauty but they also hate her because she can reject them. Hence they need patriarchy to make sure beautiful smart women come to them, third rates like you, and touch their feet, like in old Tamil movies where women are shown as enslaved but homely and family bound and male pleasing.. It makes me vomit to think there is a woman who may actually sit next to you…or sleep with you. Only by battering her can you get her to stay with you. No wonder men like you are anti-feminist. I know the likes of you…who just wilt when a fair woman or a North indian actress or a white female comes near you…but you are too scared to open your mouth in front of them. But Indian women you’ll beat outside the net and inside the net. You are a perpetrator of domestic violence and pure hatred of Indian women,. .Men like you convince me every day how far this country is behind from where it should be, and what it can achieve. You third rates keep it behind. Thank goodness i understood the best of Hinduism outside India. In India, since my return, I only see failures and losers like you…and they give Hinduism a bad name, and keep India behind. Stop being a third rate. .

          • Seel says:

            You are unemployed and probably on disability payment from social security, go away, disappear!

          • Jishnu says:

            That is the irony of history. Every victim of enslavement thinks of his master to be a liberator. And ignoramuses like you can’t even see it, while shouting from rooftops about analysis and intelligence. For your mannerless, senseless, obscene talk you attribute all that to others, shows how brainwashed you are with white western false superiority complex. For such barbaric, invasive, hegemonic, dishonest, fraudulent mind you even have the audacity to comment topics that require some knowledge and civilization to understand and talk about. But then as I said, that is the irony of history.

          • Sree Charan R says:

            “That is the irony of history. Every victim of enslavement thinks of his master to be a liberator.”
            While I am ineligible to speak about the responses in comment section that are happening these days, I can safely say that you have summed up a thousand year history in a single sentence.

        • Jishnu says:

          Insult to YOU is NOT insult to WOMEN but to one person. So stop the nonsense. Even if you are a woman first and human next, the comment of Seel nor the article has anything specific to women: it just is YOUR “sexism”.

        • Rama says:

          The troll is back hijacking the discussion unrelated to the article. Don’t feed the troll!

    • Sree Charan R says:

      One note:
      If all those countries that you mention have social security system, India has Societal Security system; which,according to my understanding, is a more reliable and ethical way of cultural economy than any artificially constructed system/management.And this economic model is proved, where the responsibility is more on Families than on the government administrative systems is proved to be a better option today.
      Thank You

      • Dr. MS says:

        Societal Security system? What does that mean? Are you aware of the growing mental health problems in India? Tamil Nadu has the highest number of alcoholism among men across class, and high number of domestic violence among its poor and working class. Kerala has growing suicide and divorce rates. Maharashtra has suicide-committing farmers and indebted middle class and poor people. Punjab has growing violence among youth and highest number of kidnappings. In Bihar, UP and few other places dowry harassment, dowry murder and girls marrying before 18 is the norm. Stop living in your clueless bubble. We need our communities back…not 14th century feudalism that keeps subservient women obedient to stupid weak lazy arrogant men. That is why our men do not grow…and the country does not grow. I am a social scientist and you should India’s statistics.

        • Jishnu says:

          Now are you aware why mental problems in India are increasing NOW for the past century and why it did not exist earlier while lunatic asylums always existed in the west?

          • Dr. MS says:

            Lunatic asylums did not exist always in the West. In fact asylums were started because of the growing number of mentally ill people who were homeless, and there was no one to care for them. But asylums became warehouse of the mentally ill with prison like conditions with brutality and violence. The mental health revolution of the 60s made scientific study of mental illness…so better treatment is possible.

            But mental health is more than absence of mental illness. Lot of Indian psychology is like that of a subject under a 15th century king. That is not a healthy psychology though much of what they do would never be considered professionally mentally ill. It is like the men who gang up against me with vitriolic statements, sexist comments, attacks that are rude and personal…without knowing me personally. These are thugs who;d never get admitted to an asylum…but they are not mentally healthy people. There is a big difference between mental illness and mental health.

          • Jishnu says:

            Whether lunatic asylum did not always exist is irrelevant. Whenever they came about, they did for a reason. And there is also a reason that was not the way mental “illness” is seen and addressed in India. So instead of trying to judge “Indian psychology” first get to know its basics.

            “vitriolic statements, sexist comments, attacks that are rude and personal” are all what YOU get for what YOU say. Instead of trying to crib about the consequences of your ignorant nonsensical mannerless rants, you arrogantly try attributing the fault with those who respond to you. How do you know you qualify to be called mentally healthy and not others? Why do other women on the comments section receive great respect? What gets a human respect, be it man or woman? Who taught you what is sexist or vitriolic, and why did they fail to teach you how sexist your rants are?

        • Sree Charan R says:

          Let truth prevail.Good Bye.

          • madhav says:

            Good one @shree Charan R .
            As for Dr MS try to understand that after the islamic invasion the culture of the country and hindus has been systematically and violently crushed. This is more so under the British and Congress raj.

    • Yogini says:

      Dr.MS

      Does the article say women should sit at home ? You are driving your conclusions based on your imagination as you read the article. I don’t see any conclusion that says men should not do house work. A story set in a certain period seems to set off emotions in your mind prevalent to that era with economic situations of today.

      In the conservative system of economics duty and responsibility is followed by rights. In which country do you have a government which announces monetary compensation for a rape in a private bus? Or compensation for loss of property and life in floods? In US when a tornado strikes like say Katrina of 2005 it was the private industry & NGOs that rallied for the people not the Govt. The US Federal Govt only helped in re-building public utilities.

      • Dr. MS says:

        I am so glad you got more out of this than I did. It is a terrible article and a diatribe. But glad it worked for you. Hopefully the author is not your friend or a relative, and you are being objective.
        Best wishes,
        Dr.MS

      • madhav says:

        I concur with you , don’t know @Dr. MS has understood from the term ‘duty’?

    • Globalaryan says:

      >>>>>>When are Indian men going to grow up and start doing house work…in
      stead of this duty, duty…preaching to women.. Other countries’ women
      are climbing mountains, flying planes, becoming astronauts and brain
      surgeons…our men can only say, “The great housewife has wisdom”. >>>>

      Not sure which planet are you living on but Indian women are also doing most of the above. Men are also helping in the household chores. believe there is room for more equality but don’t just paint a glass is half-empty view. Also, whoever you are, advice you should re-consider your friends or educate them properly about rejecting stereotypes created by the media bias. i.e if you are even an Indian.

  11. Radha Rajan says:

    And because every author has his/her description at the bottom of the article request author to explain please the label “nirishwara-vaadi”.

  12. Radha Rajan says:

    “And Ahimsa is when a person wishes and acts for the benefit of all keeping the true understanding of Justice (Nyaya) and virtues (GuNa).”. Does this “benefit of all” include the bird or the animal which this butcher is butchering in the interest of his family and those that eat the blood and flesh of this creature? Let us not elevate anything to high status without first raising all questions. If the atma in the animal that is butchered is the same atma that is within me, then how can denying a living being the right to live be considered dharma? And where is the essence of ahimsa ” a-himsa, not offer injury to any being” in this creative definition of ahimsa? A butcher by definition cannot give me lectures on ahimsa.

    • Jishnu says:

      The notion of preaching and giving lectures doesn’t apply in dharma as in the west, because we do not have a single formula dharma for everyone. So a guru does teach his students what he does not practice, and a butcher who has the profound knowledge of dharma does teach kaSyapa about ahimsa. dharmavyAdha happens to be a performer of is own dharma through which he has the knowledge of the very nature of dharma.

    • VeVePe says:

      When are you going to stop butchering plants 🙂

      But seriously, there is a difference between eating a human being and eating a fish. The two acts are not equal under Dharma.

      • Radha Rajan says:

        You do not cut a live tree and offer it to the gods; we take leaves and flowers which fall off or which will fall off the tree or plant. Cutting the carotid is different from cutting hair and nails. And while some may think eating a fish or a cow or a dog or a pig cannot be equated with eating a human, my question is why not? In Hindu understanding humans are not privileged over non-humans. That is Abrahamic. Pl permit me to explain my discomfort over the idea of a butcher preaching ahimsa. The author describes himself as being a nirishwaravaadi. I sincerely hope this is not disguise for ‘atheist’. Atheism in any religion is the same; in Hindu society some atheists call themselves agnosts while some call themselves yogis. Perfectly legitimate except it falls short of the fullness which comes with bhakthi and karuna and not all yogis are atheists. Had they been Adi sankara would not have composed the breathtaking Saundarya Lahari. Sankatra gave a face, a form and beauty to the fromless, the abstract. The problem with rationalists whether of the Periyar or Samkhya yoga variety is that they rely on the intellect to find answers for every question; rationalism frowns upon intuition and insight. And bhakti and karuna? You have the answer when someone can say a butcher embodies ahimsa. You cannot embody ahimsa (you may embody other characteristics) when you kill. A kshatriya on a battle field is upholding his svadharma but he is not upholding all dharma and he is certainly not upholding or exemplifying ahimsa. Satya dharma and ahiumsa are stand-alones. You cannot by tortuous arguments make them congruent or synonymous. But all three like bhakti gnana and karma can come together in one perfect moment in one purushottama.

        • Jishnu says:

          “And while some may think eating a fish or a cow or a dog or a pig cannot be equated with eating a human, my question is why not”

          Because they are not equal. Dead matter is not used for ritual offering anyway – for instance pUja/yajana is not done with mud/sand. Offering has to be live and consecrated. And offering of plant, animals like goat, then cow, horse, man are all different and consuming/eating them is different too. This is not abrahamic, this is very much a dhArmic view. That all beings are divine does not mean all beings are at the same level of consciousness/evolution or that their consumption is same.

          One needs to qualify to teach, with his knowledge of dharma and through exemplary practice of his own dharma. He can very much teach others whose dharma in terms of code of conduct might be entirely different. Expertise in a specific subject is relevant for those who have not known the “one by knowing which everything else is known”. In case of dharmavyAdha etc it is not relevant.

          • Radha Rajan says:

            To equate dead with sand or mud is inappropriate. We use mud or clay, wood or metal, flour or turmeric to make murtis dont we? The dead and by nature non-sentient should not be compared. And it is man’s supreme arrogance which thinks that his consciousness is higher than that of other beings and so should not be sacrificed to the gods or eaten. It is wisdom to accept, “We do not know” and atma has no levels of consciousness. The human mind does. My atma is the same as the atma of a pig, goat, cow and crow. So I cannot claim immunity from being sacrificed and eaten on that ground. Let us simply say man has found arguments to justify his cruelty towards non-human nature and creation.

          • Jishnu says:

            Its very name is mRt or dead-death 🙂 Why then, is it inappropriate to equate? From the mRt when life is added, it becomes a living being: the way clay becomes a mUrti or mud becomes a human and human body’s raw element after death goes back to mRt. In west yes its man’s special stature because of arrogance. Its not the same as MBH saying human life is the most evolved of all. I am making the difference and sticking to what SAstra says in this matter: yes animal is more evolved than rock and human is more evolved animal. There is no immunity claimed here for human because even human animal is sacrificed in antyeshTi and several other yajna-s.

          • Radha Rajan says:

            Semantically Jishnu, dead is that which once had life – like a dead tree, dead human, dead animal. The five elements which make up the body cannot be called mrt or dead. Ditto with materials which go into the making of objects – soil, clay, wood, metal or rock. In English we have two different words for those we think, we presume have no consciousness – the dead being and the non-sentient being which are so by their very nature in Creation. That’s why they cannot be both named dead.

          • Jishnu says:

            “dead is that which once had life”

            Not necessary – semantically one that simply doesn’t have life is mRt 🙂 Soil IS called mRt, that is the word for it and I didn’t coin it. There is also a reason jala and other mahAbhUta-s are not called mRt. The living ones after their short life, go back into that mRt (in post-death the elaborate “going back to elements” and the way life is made out of these five along with the addition of life-breath). In panchIkaraNa, the conscious principles enter the dead matter and in the reverse cycle all conscious principles leave the being leaving alone dead matter or soil into which the dead go – hence it is called mRt.

            Problem with English is death as a process is known to come after life, but the coming about of life from dead matter is not in its worldview. Because for them creation is not cyclic. Sanskrit words do reflect the natural cyclic view of jaDa prakRti -> janma -> jIva -> mRtyu -> jada prakRti.

          • Jishnu says:

            The word in other languages as derived from Sanskrit – miTTi, mATI, mud etc are all derived from the word mRt only 🙂

          • Radha Rajan says:

            Jishnu first pl accept my gratitude for engaging in what is for me very informative and educative dialogue. Thank you. Now pl bear with me if I respond to several issues. From what you say, I have to infer that mrt refers to soil but not to other elements. And I wld be grateful if you can tell me if mrt then is not death but non-sentient and if we can say from the non-sentient comes into being the sentient. For the rest – humans, in this case the butcher in the story, cannot seek refuge in the argument he was doing what his fathjer and his ancestors were doing considering what they were doing was depriving living beings of their sacred life. For me all beings, sentient and non-sentient are sacred and the life of every being is as important and a part of creation as humans. This is my abiding conviction. It is only when humans have no other choice, no other alternative or does not know of other alternatives can they seek refuge for butchering as family profession. The butcher’s specious argument tells me he has thought it through and is justifying his unethical profession dressing it up as dharma. An intelligent thinking person can find alternatives. Butchering is killing a defenceless being and it is paapa. So a butcher cannot give lectures on ahimsa even if he has a fancy name. And our shastras are about questioning, examining, testing and being convinced. Point is Jishnu, I am not convinced and let’s not forget, at least two of Srirama’s actions are still passionately argued and debated even now.

          • Jishnu says:

            Am humbled Radha ji 🙂

            “if mrt then is not death but non-sentient and if we can say from the non-sentient comes into being the sentient”

            non-sentient
            becomes sentient when the sentient enters it: namely consciousness or
            the jIva entering the jaDa prakRti and transforming it into life. With the exit of the conscious being
            the matter falls back to state of death/insentience. mRt is death, and
            the element soil is called mRt because that is the last phase of exit of
            consciousness from a being that makes it dead. Or in the descent of
            consciousness from subtlest it is the grossest, the most jaDa. It is
            called the element of death for the reason that bereft of conscious/life
            principle it is indeed dead matter 🙂

            Regarding dharmavyAdha:

            1.
            I do not know that dharma is uniform for all beings – each being has
            its own dharma and each being can be adjudged by its own dharma only.
            Every action has multiple sides and dharma-adharma or puNya-pApa cannot
            be determined by any one side. For instance, butcher is killing animals.
            Now he is with his butchering, feeding scores of people and catering to
            their most basic need. It is service. After all there is no debate of
            his own eating, the debate is about his killing. When he does that
            service with conviction, where is pApa touching him? Consider the fact that
            dharmavyAdha narrates his life routine in terms of seva – what he does
            towards his parents, profession and so on.

            2. That
            any vegetarian does not appreciate
            butchering to be a virtuous act goes without saying. But that is the nature of
            one set of people that is all. There are beings whose primary nature is
            predation and human animal since creation has been carnivorous in
            majority. As I understand such a basic prAkRta aspect cannot be seen judgmentally. Corollary of this is that his profession is
            one of the most commonly involved and permanent ones in the history of
            mankind, how much ever seen with contempt both by herbivores and fellow carnivores.

            3. Food cycle of the world, in which life feeds on life to produce a higher form of life, is the grand cosmic rite and a constituent rite of the sacrifice of universe. So neither consumption of life nor killing in itself can be treated unethical. Yes killing out of cruelty is unethical, but a butcher kills to feed and hence cannot be called unethical. He is simply an agent in the food cycle.

            4. pApa-puNya is a different cross-section to understand human virtue than dharma-adharma. For instance looking straight into the eyes of a para strI or praising a para strI are “pApa hetu” but here is nothing inherently adhArmic about these. So virtue and morality cannot be mixed up.

            5. The real question is about the knowledge of the person that qualifies him to teach, not his vRtti.

            6.
            Credibility to teach one virtue does not require specialization in that
            virtue. One who knows “the one by which everything else is known”, can
            know it through ANY of the life styles and vocations and that is among
            the most fundamental ethos of sanatana dharma.

          • Jishnu says:

            Sri Rama’s actions are debated or judged, because we forgot the basic epistemology and logic 🙂 Namely, is dharma codified based on how Rama and Krishna lived or did they merely happen to be historic personalities whose actions are liable to be judged per some standard already established? If there were to be such standard, why do their lives become golden standards for us? If the primary source is to be adjudged per the derived secondary source of knowledge be it morality or otherwise, is it not paradoxical?

          • Radha Rajan says:

            No Jishnu, that’s samsara. Humans will judge gods too as humans and that is correct. because Srirama and Srikrishna took birth as humans only to set examples for how humans should conduct themselves under trying circumstances. The flip side is that they will be judged too. That is the strength if Hindu dharma. Questioning and testing does not take away from the intrinsic sanctity and nobility of their lives.

          • Jishnu says:

            The problem is not authoritarian but epistemic. To be able to judge Rama, there should be an independent source of knowledge based on which such a judgment can be made. In the absence of such source, it is the behavior of SishTa jana that becomes example: which was precisely why, in spite of morally being very visibly apparent, in the absence of a source to validate, Bhishma etc could not directly hold yudhishThira wrong for gambling his brothers wife and himself. When we say we “can” judge, can is not about permission one has but about the logical possibility to do so.

            I am not at all saying Rama cannot be judged because he is an avatara. I am saying there is no other independent axiomatic source to validate Rama’s actions because he is the originator of such code 🙂

          • Radha Rajan says:

            Jishnu we are conveniently making Srirama’s Rajadharma alone of importance and choosing to bypass motherhood. Sita was the daughter of Bhumi Devi and in a sense Prakriti herself, the eternal mother. This motherhood cannot be weighed on the scales of dharmic conduct with motherhood. Srirama cannot be made to choose between right conduct as King and his duty as King to a pregnant woman in his kingdom. I resolved this deeply troubling question like this: Both Ramayana and Mahabharata are itihasas dealing primarily with Kings, kingship and the right conduct of Kings in different circumstances. Srirama as human, as historical king was confronted by the most terrible crisis in his life when he had to choose between fulfilling his duty to his praja and fulfillingn his duty as husband towards his pregnant wife.And Srirama chose to fulfill his duty towards his praja knowing well that his action to abandon Sita will have its own karmic trajectory. Srirama made the choice of serving one aspect of his dharma which entailed failing his duty to his wife. Life ultimatelyy Jishnu is about the choices we make and why we make them. And if as I believe there are forces which are beyond the ken of human intelligence we can only hope and pray that we always have the anugraha of our devas and devis and the blessings of our parents, Guru and elders.

          • Radha Rajan says:

            Correction: “This motherhood cannot be weighed on the scales of dharmic conduct with motherhood” Motherhood the basis of all Creation cannot be weighed on the scales of dharmic conduct with Rajadharma.

          • Jishnu says:

            Because Radha ji, dharma is layered and it is very clear what overrides what in what circumstance. We cannot forget that rajadharma overrules individual rights of Rama and Sita because they were the rAjA and rAjnI. Rama’s fatherhood and Sita’s motherhood are vyakti dharma which happens to be transgressed with banishing her.

            As you said Rama put praja above his own family (after all it was not Devi who alone suffered) and that is exactly what makes him the ideal rAja. That is not a debatable aspect but a golden standard.

            Of course vyakti dharma is universal. It is also called sAmAnya dharma. Special portfolios like ruling do require special qualification/visesha adhikAra where there are several compromises one has to make on the sAmAnya dharma. Rama-Sita demonstrate that they do make such compromise however big it is, for that visesha dharma.

          • Jishnu says:

            Just for completeness on yudhishThira gambling: we now know human cannot be commoditized or gambled, because we have a pramANa from his life. At his time there was none, so none could judge his action. For subsequent times, his experiences stand as example to say his commitment to dharma is to be followed, gambling should not be followed and so on. Thus he becomes a primary source on certain aspects to learn from. For those aspects where there was already an established tradition such as speaking the truth, people did judge him.

          • Radha Rajan says:

            Jishnu by what standards did dharmic Hindus prior to the birth of Srirama and Srikrishna live? And Jishnu how do we deal with the question of why did Srirama evict his pregnant wife from her home and instead io escorting her with honour and dignity to her father’s house or some place safe abandao a pregnant Sita alone in the forest? I cannot take refuge in escapism like Gandhi who said his Rama was not a man but God because if he were man he did not have answers to several troubling questions. That’s escapism. Srirama was human because his life was meant to guide humans down the ages. And Jishnu we either grapple with these questions and find answers or attain a state of wisdom when questions no longer rise. True wisdom is not when we have all answers but when the questions do not rise. This is a lonely journey which all thinking Hindus must travel. And the troubling questions are what makes Hinduism vibrant and dynamic unlike Abrahamic cults where questioning is forbidden.

          • Jishnu says:

            “Jishnu by what standards did dharmic Hindus prior to the birth of Srirama and Srikrishna live”

            Judging is possible when a standard is available: sources are prevalent SRti, dharma SAstra, SishTAcAra in the same order. By Rama’s time whatever could be known from these was known and adjudged. What was not known from SRti & dharma SAstra, was simply left to how exemplary personalities well versed in dharma dealt with such situations. Rama was one milestone personality who cleared some such dhArmic conflicts through his own life. Yudhisthira was one. This hardly means there was no continuing/evolving tradition before them. But human society’s complexity as grows, man is faced with more dilemma and daivAMSa comes down to set examples from time to time which then becomes a golden standard. Questioning is essential for understanding the various complexities of
            dharma, but searching for answers also has to be epistemic and based on
            proper pramANa.

            I agree on the human nature of avatAra lives. We don’t have to count a dwarf like Gandhi on dharma – he was himself no living example of dharma 🙂 Rama-Krishna were humans and their vyakti and samAja dharma does impact their lives.

          • Anshul Singhal says:

            Radha ji argument with people like them with agenda and award for its completion or persuance must be avoided bcoz it will lead no where, we can not lose or we will have to win to save the Dharama and they can not afford to loss either as it will lead to stop all perk they have been enjoying for a long time best way is to keep comment on in public so more and more people can aware of conflicted contradict article,distortion, things on our civilization Dharama Culture and more and avoide them , it will just waste energy ,,save it and apply to make new insightful comment

          • Anshul Singhal says:

            YAjna and sacrifice is two different thing do not equate both

        • Sree Charan R says:

          QUOTE The problem with rationalists whether of the Periyar or Samkhya yoga variety is that they rely on the intellect to find answers for every question UNQUOTE.
          But Samkhya-Yoga system is embodied and experienced(and not rational),right?An explanation of this,precisely?
          {When the two “colorful” revolutions(White and Green) hit the nation both unscientifically and unethically; and almost (fortunately,not all)destroyed the centuries-old systems,seeds,cows, there were no “rationalists”.But when there is an opposition for ‘unfathomable’ killing of animals for purely selfish purposes, the mighty rationalism comes in–with the more convoluted arguments! }
          Thank You

    • Rama says:

      I agree Radha Ji . Ahimsa to me is not to do others what you will not like them do it to you.

    • Globalaryan says:

      The butcher is performing his duty under the principles of karma and dharma. This is is profession and he very well knows the karmic burden of butchering the animals but he accepts it for the larger good of the society especially for fulfilling the responsibilities towards his family including caring for the elderly parents. The duty towards the family and society triumphs the duty towards animals as it should be. Besides he’s not going around killing animals just for fun.

      As a bread winner for the family, if he gives up his profession and let his family suffer and leading to possible death of the elderly parents, then that would be classified as form of himsa on his parents initiated by his lack of responsibility and negligence towards his duties.

      • Radha Rajan says:

        I have answered this point in my response to Jishnu.

        • Globalaryan says:

          I beg to differ but you haven’t. Butcher is performing his occupational duty that helps him fulfil obligations towards his family. As I mentioned, he is not doing it for fun. We have no proof if he actually enjoys the killing but more indication that he is performing his duty for the larger good of the family without attaching emotion to what he is doing. To him it’s just work.

          The point that the author makes is that practicing ahimsa for the larger good of society/family and to fulfil one’s dharma is not the same as selfish ahimsa perpetuated just to persecute and oppress life and promote inhumane practices. The key determining factor is “motive” behind the actions.

          Butcher’s dharma towards his family and society is important than towards animals. Don’t also forget the karmic cycle of the universe as well. The animals being killed also are part of that cycle..perhaps they are paying the consequence of their accumulated karma. In fact even in this seemingly cruel profession, he has managed to attain the knowledge of dharma and that is commendable and he has full right to talk about ahimsa and dharma. A person becomes a true brahman not by birth but by actions and deeds.

  13. Sree Charan R says:

    A week back,as part of my small student project to clean up the premises,I went to an area in Bengaluru(Bengaluru suffers form serious garbage disposal problem).And while cleaning, an old person standing beside me said (obviously, translating from Kannada)”what you are doing is wrong,stop it” with his eyes above his eyebrows !! I asked him the reason,with the regular pathetic student`s arrogance;he said
    “This ‘garbage’ that you are cleaning is just vegetable-fruit-liquid wastes.Every day sparrows,crows,cows and rabbits come here for their food.By ‘cleaning’ it, what you are essentially doing is taking away food from them.Clearly, the notion of ‘cleanliness’ that you have is selfish,and does not care about other creatures.Hence you need to clean the garbage in you, firstly.The people here are not economically good enough to provide them with ‘high quality’ food; but ethical enough to consider them as another beautiful creation of the God.” and then he disappeared, I stopped doing it.I was embarrassed, but learnt a lesson from a great soul.
    Truth is,this country is being run, not by “intellectuals” sitting in towers,while it is a different story altogether that those “towers are falling”;but by Dharma, that peculiar quality that all the Indians(at least, until recently!) possessed.However, a great article.
    Thank You.

    • Rama says:

      All the same, the veggie garbage can be collected by the concerned persons in clean bins to be distribute to the animals. Most of the time, they rot and smell.

      • Sree Charan R says:

        My point is, we modern human beings have a very “unnatural” ides of cleanliness/decency/fragrance and then try to apply it on other animals; who more often than not,are more decent than human beings themselves !! And our current aesthetic values are so rotten and misguided that if any animal would really have that ability to talk to us,she would first curse us saying “go to hell” !! And that reply of the old man suffices the entire impotent arguments of modernists, who seem to do anything to satisfy personal agendas.
        There is no difference in distributing in bins(refer:”The people here are not …….. to give them what they can.”) because a)the cost b)the absence of an organised system, fortunately! c)high ethical values of the folks, to spare some time for animals, instead of biased judgments or selfish emotions.
        However, your point is important too; but the message is quite different !!
        Thank You

        • Rama says:

          Sree Charan

          “a)the cost b)the absence of an organised system, fortunately! c)high ethical values of the folks, to spare some time for animals, instead of biased judgments or selfish emotions.”

          I agree with you 100%

Leave a comment