Vastu07
Ākāśa Bhārgava [ The LTN बौद्ध]
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2026
- Messages
- 75
- Online time
- 16h 43m
- Reputation
- 64
- Location
- India
- Guild
- Fraud and Gray
Why waste your time with telling you why meat is important right? But still for the sake of formatting I should write about it anyways. Your traditional Indian vegetarian diet is nutritionally cheap. Your daal and raita are not filling your macros and just forget the micros jfl. Going on full vegetarian/vegan mode where good nutrient sources is harder to source and still being cheaper in quality would be a bad decision. You people have calcium deficiency, iron deficiency (especially women), vitamin d deficiency, zinc deficiency etc etc and your usual diet doesn't have enough protein. Your nation's height is stunted because you guys are underfed, you have so many deficiencies on top of that. You are barely passing the health threshold jfl. If you want to hit the gym and gain some shi, improve your health, and Looksmaxx your way out of inceldom etc. meat is your good friend. Nevertheless I assume that you are literate and grounded enough to understand what I am talking about but apart from the issues like being short on money, sourcing your meat etc which are fixable and easy to make your way out. The part where many of you hesitate about religious restrictions on meat, especially beef. That is why I'm writing this post, as an attempt to convince you currys to include meat in you diet. GTFIH nigas, you don't know shit.
-x-
Convincing Buddhists.
Let's start this section with a simple question, why is meat consumption usually unethical in nature unlike plants based foods? The answer would be that almost all earthy beings that are sentient have the ability to feel pain. When you kill an animal for consumption, it's not just a selfish act involving you but rather you strip a fellow being's right to live and become the direct cause of its suffering. How about we kill the animal painlessly? Even that would be selfish as you are striping it it's right to live and every possible experience it could have if you hadn't killed it. Humans are beings capable of reasoning and understanding the pain of others thus, for any smart human veganism comes out as an ideal moral and ethical path. But we must keep in mind that we are also mortal and need proper nutrition to sustain ourselves.
Every mortal from the Brahma to a blade of grass are just different arrangements of worldly materials and quantities and thus do not possess any special essence that is pure and "full" in nature. That is why we should understand that "meat" is not inheritly "impure" or "pure" in nature, as it's just as material as we are. The restriction on meat is connected to the source it is coming from. I would like to talk about MN 55 where lord discussed the properties of pure meat aka meat that is not prohibited for consumption of monks. MN 55's threefold pure meat is a code for monks, for they have to eat whatever is donated to them whereas layperson earns, and cooks his own meals, lives with his family etc. I should give a few applications of threefold pure meats: buying meat from already in stock meat, ordering a meal in a hotel or restaurant, eating the meat provided by someone else etc. and according to what I have understood, for a lay person, following these rules is "morally ideal" and not "necessary" and I think this distinction is very important, more than people realise. Hence, it could be argued that even following the pure meat conduct is not a code for layperson. In MN 88 lord explicitly gives us the criteria for lay persons like us but even though it contains a code about "abstaining from killing" it does not imply "abstaining from meat altogether" as that would be too universal.
Pātimokkha-pācittiya 39 states that If a monk who is not sick asks for special delicacies for himself and then eats them, he commits a pācittiya offense. Quoting lord's words, “I allow you, monks, when a monk is ill, having asked for sumptuous foods for himself, to eat them. And thus, monks, this rule of training should be set forth: Whatever are sumptuous foods, that is to say, ghee, fresh butter, oil, honey, molasses, fish, meat, milk, curds—whatever monk who is not ill, having asked for sumptuous foods such as these for himself, should eat them, there is an offence of expiation.” Also the infamous devadutta's case from cullavagga where he proposed that monks should be prohibited to consume fish and meat along with other harsher proposals. But lord did not impose such absolute rules on the entire sangha but Devadutta still followed it himself implying that even though it's not necessary one can always follow stricter vows for themselves. I would also like to mention a vinaya, in mahāvagga as 6/23 the story of a sick monk suppiya where he consumed animal flesh as medicine to save the monk's life. This even broke the pure meat criteria but lord still approved it. The vinaya also distinguishes allowable meat from prohibited meat. According to the vinaya ten animals including humans, tiger, lion, dog, horse, etc are prohibited.
But everything I just said was referencing the pali canon preserved by the theravadins and concerns with the arhata path. Many mahāyānis may also argue that the sections that are allowing any kind of meat consumption are edited by greedy monks as according to Lankāvatāra and other sutras meat consumption is strictly scrutinized by the lord. Those texts develop a substantially different argument: compassion toward sentient beings should lead the bodhisattva to abandon meat altogether, rather than merely avoid meat obtained through one's own direct involvement in killing. I would like to argue siding with Bhāviveka's defence of the original three fold pure meat doctrine. He distinguishes between desiring meat and merely receiving meat as food. The causal chain leading to slaughter is associated particularly with the desire for meat, rather than with the bare act of eating meat. What Bhāviveka principally defends is the monk who receives meat accidentally in his alms and eats it under Vinaya's threefold purity rule: he has not seen, heard, or suspected that the animal was killed specifically for him. I personally believe that those passages from mahāyana should be understood as morally ideal behaviour by a mahāyāna practitioner and not a universal ban.
Still we all know that as lay people we would not be as strict as a monk in sangha. We are only playing with rules and doing mental gymnastics to justify our wrongdoings but still, if we want to live a healthier life, quitting meat would be extremely difficult and if you want to improve your looks, physique, and start gym for example, it would be not a good choice especially if you're still growing. Believe in the buddhavachana and not hurt sentient beings unnecessarily.
-x-
Convincing Hindus.
As sage manu explains in Manu 5.30 “The eater who daily even devours those destined to be his food, commits no sin; for the creator himself created both the eaters and those who are to be eaten.” (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/...the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc200407.html) The nature is very cruel, lion preys on deers, bears preys on salmons, but the case of humans is different. Unlike lions and bears we possess the ability to reflect on our actions, overcome our primitive instincts, that's why I think that in your religion humans are the core of the whole karmic circle.
Nevertheless let's not waste any time with introductions and immediately start the information dump. Meat is usually prohibited for twice-born and they are only allowed to eat meat from the sacrificial yajñas and other special cases. Manu 5.33 (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/...the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc200410.html now I would advise you to read this section of Padma purāṇa carefully.(https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-padma-purana/d/doc365275.html) Notice the last sections. Specifically "O best brāhmaṇas, so also (the flesh of) a peacock, a patridge, a pigeon, a cātaka, rhinoceros, a crane, a swan. Thus said Prajāpati (Manu). These fish, viz. (the glittering fish) śapharī, siṃhatuṇḍa, paṭhīna and rohita are directed as fit to be eaten. With a desire (to retain the status) as a twice-born he should eat the flesh of these after it is sprinkled over; even if he is about to lose his life he should duly use it. He should not at all eat flesh. He who eats what remains, is not smeared (with sin)." And the most importantly "If he is weak, he should eat flesh as medicine, or by order or for sacrificial purposes." Similar sections can be found in Brahma Purāṇa 113.111 “The following can be eaten: hare, tortoise, alligator, porcupine and the fish with darts (?) The village boar and the cock should be avoided. In the following circumstances, even if one eats meat, one is not defiled: if it is the remnant of offerings unto the Pitrs, Devas etc. or if it is cooked in Sraddha at the request of the brahmins and is sprinkled with the holy water or if it is taken as a medicine.” (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-purana-english/d/doc216270.html) Also here Yājñavalkya explains when consumption of meat does not not incur guilt (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/...itakshara-and-viramitrodaya/d/doc1898294.html)
Meat prepared during rites is a special case. Now I should go on and explain to you how bali (animal sacrifice) is an essential part of your religion but it's a waste of time but anyways here we go. One thing before we begin, both Vedika and Agama Paths of Hinduism and its rituals have Animal sacrifice but I'll only discuss veda related faxx because it settles the entire discussion without stretching it too much.
Mantrabhāga Ṛgveda Maṇdala 1 Sukta 162 is describing a horse sacrifice. “There is one immolator of the radiant horse, which is Time; there are two that hold him fast; such of your limbs as I cut up in due season, I offer them, made into balls (of meat) upon the fire.” in mantra 19. Followed by “Let not your precious body grieve you, who are going verily (to the gods); let not the axe linger in your body; let not the greedy and unskilful (immolator) missing the members, mangle your limbs needlessly with his knife.” in mantra 20. And finally "Verily at this moment you do not die; nor are you harmed; for you go by auspicious paths to the gods." In mantra 21. (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/rig-veda-english-translation/d/doc830706.html) Now, according to Manu 5.39 "Animals have been created by the Self-born God himself for the purpose of sacrifice: sacrifice is conducive to the well-being of all this would; hence killing at a sacrifice is no ‘killing’ at all." (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/...the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc200416.html) And finally the Great Sage Vyasa in his Brahmasutra 3.1.25 defends the position that killing in the name of dharma and vedas is not a sin and this includes animal sacrifice. The great philosopher śankarāchārya rigorously defends this position in his commentary on Brahmasutra check it out...(https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras-thibaut/d/doc63997.html) also other ācharyas like Rāmānuja, Madhva etc accept this position and I'm not going to paste evey single commentary here Dah.
Now many Hindus especially the devotional sects, and revolutionary like Arya Samaj try to destroy this position and prove that meat and animal sacrifice is entirely prohibited but they can fuck off as they're primarily playing grammar games and coping so hard jfl. For example “The Veda and other Shaastras do not at all sanction animal sacrifice; the practice of offering oblations to the manes of departed ancestors is an invention of priests, because it is opposed to the Vedic and Shaastric teachings and finds sanction only in the Puraana like the Bhagvat. We have, therefore, nothing to say against the refutation of this doctrine.” says Svāmī Dayānanda Sarasvatī of Ārya samāj in his Satyārtha prakāśa. But animal sacrifices are not merely part of the so-called priest's made up scriptures. It is clearly found in veda mantrabhāga too, and check Āchārya's commentaries on them too if you want.
This section from Atharvaveda Mantrabhāga explains the procedure of a goat sacrifice (https://sacred-texts.com/book/the-h...mn-14-accompanying-the-sacrifice-of-a-he-goat) and Kṛṣṇa Yajurveda Taittirīya Saṃhitā also deals with animal sacrifices. Just read the first few prapātḥakas of kaṇda 1 and 2 and you'll get the shi I'm talking about (. https://sacred-texts.com/hin/yv/index.htm) Check Āchārya's commentary on it too and I think Rāmānujā also quotes something similar or this exact section in his Gitābhāṣya. Now Ṛgveda Mantrabhāga 5.29.7&8 with Āchārya's commentary: “To aid (the undertaking of) his friend, Agni, the friend (of Indra) has quickly consumed three hundred buffaloes; and Indra, for the destruction of Vṛtra, has at once quaffed vessels of Soma, offered by Manu.” and “When you had eaten the flesh of the three hundred buffaloes, when you who are Maghavan had drunk the three vessels of Soma, when he had slain Ahi, then all the gods summoned Indra, full of food, as if he had been a servant, to the battle.” (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/rig-veda-english-translation/d/doc833090.html) and it's not simply a "translation error by a foreigner" it's just a translation of 16th century goated traditional scholar Sāyaṇāchārya. It cannot be more accurate and traditional than this LOL. Even Arya Samaj's translations and commentaries sometimes contains animal sacrifices but let's not get into that rabbithole as I think you got my point.
"Bhargava meat is prohibited in my relegion if it's not from a yajña animal sacrifice." No it's not jfl you are not a Vedapatḥī Brahmaṇa, Kśatriya or Vaiṣya are you so it does NOT apply for you. People often cite Mahābhārata Anuśāsana Parva's discourse between Bhīṣma and Yudhiṣṭhira Section CXV (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-mahabharata-mohan/d/doc826440.html) and somehow try to prove that meat is entirely prohibited in Hinduism. What they don't understand that Bhīṣma is NOT the decider of Dharma, your scriptures are. He presents many moral reasons why consumption of meat is unethical and how it would cause bad karma etc. He could be right, but he's only giving his opinion. One may quote a random verse from some random Purāṇa but my dearest, Veda> Dharmaśāstra> Purāṇa etc. Padmapurāṇa also talks about animal sacrifice in vedas. Check (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-padma-purana/d/doc364244.html) verses 32 to 42 where the scripture copes about how "The Vedas are not Vedas where compassion is not (prescribed)" jfl. But as I told you earlier Vedas are the supreme authority of dharma and even if they describe something that seems immoral like animal sacrifice, you must do it because it's dharma. Btw the same purāṇas larping such bullshit also describe animal sacrifices for dieties too btw, and in Rāmāyaṇa there are like multiple reference of meat eating, hunting practices of kśatrīya kings and princes, and don't get it started in Mahābhārata, but let's not get into that too lol.
From Veda Mantrabhāga Krishna Yajurved 2/2/10/2 and Tandya Brahman 23/16/7 you can clearly see that according to vedas, Sage Manu's words are medicine, and it is dharma, and hence your law. So I would like to quote Manu 5.32 ("https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/...the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc200409.html" in which sage manu explains when does a person aquires no sin from consuming meat, and that's enough evidence already jfl. Also, when purāṇas describe how meat eaters are reborn in hell because of their adharma. It is more like "do not eat meat it's unethical you'll rot in hell" and not "meat is strictly prohibited". If you eat meat you're still a Hindu and still an Aryan, remember that. I would recommend reading the whole section VI (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/...the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc200402.html)
"But Bhārgava what about beef?" Yes friend, Cow meat is very much prohibited but let's examine it in depth. Many fucktards quotes Ṛgveda 8.101.15 "She the mother of the Rudras, the daughter of the Vasus, the sister of the Ādityas, the homeof ambrosia. I have spoken to men of understqanding, kill not her, the sinless inviolate cow.” (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/rig-veda-english-translation/d/doc837245.html) and say say shit like "Bhārgava see a cow must never be killed" but you can fuck off. The same vedas who is saying to never kill a cow also says that Sage Yajñavalka eats Cow and ox meat when it's tender in Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 3.1.2.21 (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/satapatha-brahmana-sanskrit/d/doc1052421.html.) "Oh my god Bhārgava is sage yajñavalka doing adharma by eating cow meat?" Not necessarily. Remember Manu 5.33? Yes it applies to cattles too, including Cows. Śatapatha Kāṇḍa 4, Adhyāya 5, Brāhmaṇa 1 in the verses 5 to 8 mentions that three cows are offered in sequence: one to Mitra and Varuṇa, one to the Viśve Devas, and one to Bṛhaspati in a seasonal sacrifice. I don't know what it's talking about here though. It further says that, if a barren cow cannot be obtained, a bullock may be used instead. (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/satapatha-brahmana-sanskrit/d/doc1053724.html)
Now even though Dharmasūtras are not Veda but they are also an authority for Dharma. According to Vāsiṣṭha DS "It is declared in the Vājasaneyaka, that (the flesh of) milch-cows and oxen is fit for offerings." (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/vasistha-dharmasutra/d/doc116376.html) whereas according to Āpastamba DS "The meat of milch-cows and oxen may be eaten. The Vājasaneyaka declares 'bull's flesh is fit for offerings." (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/apastamba-dharma-sutra/d/doc116249.html) And in Hiraṇyakeśī DS sages discuss how a cow should be free, drinking water and eating grass, but if one is sacrificed, it would take away your sin. And if the cow is set free and not sacrificed, any other animal is sacrificed in her place. (https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/hiranyakesi-grihya-sutra/d/doc116749.html)
One correction though, this doesn't necessarily mean that our ancestors were eating cows like crazy, they were not. Many Muslim, Bhimtas, and IQlets try to use these scriptures and conclude weird fantacy out of them. Dhruv Rathee has created a video on this topic earlier too but he's utterly wrong on many places and his understanding is all over the place jfl and Arya samaji and their bootlickers like Hyperquest along with other so-called hindu activists are responding to it lol. Bunch of idiots fighting among themselves. Just read your scriptures dah lol. Also according to many later scriptures cow sacrifices are prohibited in this kaliyuga specifically but many scholars agree and disagree according to their tradition and beliefs.
Now, when vedas say गौः, अघ्न्या, धेनुः, etc it doesn't directly translates into your usual cow. Let me explain. For a cattle to posses"gau" (गौः) status it must possess the "Gautva" (गौत्व) described by the scriptures. That would include the colours, horns, humps on their back, slightly curved back, flap of skin beneath the neck etc etc. "Wtf Bhārgava what do you mean by that?" JSDR n***a, according to many orthodox/traditionalist Hindus, Jersey Cows and other foreign breeds do not posses the Gautva and hence are not holy according to Dharma. Gir, Sindhi etc are the "holy cow" of your religion so don't eat them.
Summary: your religion is pretty dumb. Anyways;
1. Meat is prohibited for twice-borns if it's not prepared for religious ritual.
2.Flesh of most animals is not prohibited for normies with exception for cow and horse meat which are strictly prohibited. But you will acquire bad karma for it unless it's sacrificial.
3. Both twice-born and normies can eat meat, including cow beef and horse meat
prepared during yajñas without any bad karma. But according to many scholars horse and cow sacrifices are prohibited in this age.
4. Jersey and other foreign cows do not fit the traditional characteristics of "Gou" and hence their meat is not prohibited according to many traditionalist Hindus. And matter of buffalo is more consistent, it is allowed.
-x-
How to source Beef in India
Before beginning, let's discuss the legal status of beef first. So the thing is beef is not nationally banned in our country. Follow this map as a reference:
Though this map only covers the legality of Buffalo and Cow beef, other cattle including calf, bull and bullock etc. are very province dependent and not worth including in this map. Now, when I say legal it's mostly talking about laws and prohibition under the laws but, each province has its own slaughter laws. For example, in Karnataka Buffaloes ≤13 years cannot be slaughtered so, if you are sourcing your meat from Karnataka the vendor should be following the state laws, if you want to export it, you would need to know whether export is prohibited or allowed, and so on.
If you are from green provinces: Source and include beef of your choice asap.
If you are not from green provinces but areas near them: First source and include beef asap.
If you are from yellow provinces: Source and include buffalo in your diet. As something is still better than nothing lol.
Red provinces: I'm sorry dude.
Now for example, I'm from WB. And according to our laws cow, bull, bullock and buffalo slaughter requires a certificate. Generally available only where the animal is over 14 and unfit for work/breeding or permanently incapacitated.
Weather the vendor follows these laws is none of your concern but you should keep your own profile clean in case a legal problems arises. To be safe from hindu nationalists, alternative your vendors every few days, do not reveal your name or address, and make sure to keep a weapon/self protection near you when you are going to buy it. Also I would recommend going and buying the meat yourself rather that ordering it in your home for obvious hygiene and privacy reasons. Buying in bulk and storing in your help helps alot sometimes, and just pretend it's mutton or lamb if your family or relatives ask you.
Finally do not argue with the nationalist. They do not care about vedas or scriptures, they have complete belief in their made up perception, so your evidences or logic is worth nothing for them. And finally, maintain your calm and focus on your looksmaxx.
-x-
I wrote this thread assuming we are allowed to talk about religious and political topics here, if it's not please inform me. Writing this thread was quite an effort so I hope that it was worth the effort and I hope that you enjoyed. Goodnight 
Last edited:
