Ramdev Deean Yabhlleeahn. Nonsense Of Ramdev PUNJABI

[aristotle]

They are condemened for this, as Vedas are clear. NO Moksha for those that conduct these animal sacrifices.

You may be wrong on that count, atleast the sacrifised animals are said to have attained Moksha. Animal sacrifise is verified time and again in the Sanatan scriptures, including the Vedas which mention the Gaumedh and Asvamedh Yagnas (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashvamedha & http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01162.htm), for attaining Moksha and authority, as I mentioned earlier.

The puissant Lord of all creatures caused the deities to perform sacrifices with their aid. Altogether seven (domestic) and seven (wild) animals are indicated as fit for sacrifice. Instead of all being equally fit, each succeeding one is inferior to each preceding one. The Vedas again declare that the whole universe is appointed for sacrifice. Him also that is called Purusha the Vedas have appointed for the same purpose. 4 This again hath been sanctioned by men of remote and remoter times. What man of learning is there that does not select, according to his own ability, individuals from among living creatures for sacrifice? 5 The inferior animals, human beings, trees, and herbs, all wish for the attainment of heaven. There is no means, however, except sacrifice, by which they can obtain the fruition.
(The Mahabharata, SECTION CCLXVIII)
Link: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12b095.htm

Now, I don't know whether you consider the Mahabharata an authentic scripture or not.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

They are condemened for this, as Vedas are clear. NO Moksha for those that conduct these animal sacrifices.

who condemns them ? Please provide the right hymn form the Vedas Jios..

 

[sanj007]

Here's the link: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv10086.htm

That verse has been incorrectly translated by Griffith. Point is to translate Vedas relies on in depthg knowledge as metaphors are used, a person who is immersed in this line of thought can uderstand.
here is RV 10.86-13 from translation by Dr Tulsi Ram

O Vrshakapayi, mother Pakritri, provider of living beings, opulent and abundant power of noble children and giver of joy and bliss, mother fertility, Indra would ultimately take over and consume whatever deae, creative and inspiring havi you would offer here in the creative world

RV 10.86.14:
Natural powers of creative mother Prakritri ruipen, mature and give up 15 evolutionaryy forms of matter, energy and mind with 20 parts of the biological systems which i swallow at the completion of the existential cycle and i feel staisfied with the involutionary consumption of the Rtam and Satyam modes of existence. Indra is supreme over all

RV 10.86.15:
Indra, just as a sharp horned bull bellows and lords over the herds of cattle with pride, so may the joyous process of the creative cycle which the dedicated celebrant and loving Prakrtri enacts for you give you satisfaction and yoy at heart as lord and master of the world


So as u can see it does say to eat bulls, such basic level thinking cannot come to truth of Vedas, and also why do other veerses, as shown and again will show say complete opposite, what is ahimsa-, why is there no reconciliation to this, God resides in hearts of all beings bg 10.20, why no reconciliation to this

 

[sanj007]

You may be wrong on that count, atleast the sacrifised animals are said to have attained Moksha. Animal sacrifise is verified time and again in the Sanatan scriptures, including the Vedas which mention the Gaumedh and Asvamedh Yagnas (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashvamedha & http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01162.htm), for attaining Moksha and authority, as I mentioned earlier.



Now, I don't know whether you consider the Mahabharata an authentic scripture or not.

Well i have shown you verses, that disagree with you, and previous post shows truth as well, you have a big problem in trying to prove animal sacrifices, as:
1) does not reconcile to ahimsa
2) BG 10.20 God resides in hearts of all beings.
3. RV 1.162, above which verses, as it refers to : Ashva, the horse, here is a metaphore of the nation.
So u see, metaohors need further disection, wiphkedia nor griffith have done this.

Now let me produce m,ore verses which competely go against your mis translated verses, which do not reconcile to fundamental pioints, and why is that:
http://agniveer.com/no-beef-in-vedas/

Yasmintsarvaani bhutaanyaatmaivaabhuudvijaanatah
Tatra ko mohah kah shokah ekatvamanupasyatah
Yajurveda 40.7
“Those who see all beings as souls do not feel infatuation or anguish at their sight, for they experience oneness with them”.
How could people who believed in the doctrines of indestructibility, transmigration dare to kill living animals in yajnas? They might be seeing the souls of their own near and dear ones of bygone days residing in those living beings

Breehimattam yavamattamatho maashamatho tilam
Esha vaam bhaago nihito ratnadheyaaya dantau maa hinsishtam pitaram maataram cha
Atharvaveda 6.140.2
O teeth! You eat rice, you eat barley, you gram and you eat sesame. These cereals are specifically meant for you. Do not kill those who are capable of being fathers and mothers.
——————————————–

Care to comment on the above. At times we have to unlearn what we think is the truth, and this applies to you here, though not your fault, as translations by griffith have failed to deliver

 

[sanj007]

Mahabharata is not a holy text.

As reagrds condemning those number of hinud groups in Nepal for animal sacrifice that is my own and other Hindu faith peoples condemenation.
God will judge his/her way

 

[sanj007]

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

It is definitely a great sin to kill innocents. Do not kill our cows, horses and people.
How could there be justification of cow and other animals being killed when killing is so clearly prohibited in the Vedas?
———————————————
Aghnyaa yajamaanasya pashoonpahi
Yajurveda 1.1
“O human! animals are Aghnya – not to be killed. Protect the animals”

More verses, can you comment

 

[sanj007]

For more info, you tube video here:
https://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DecCPLt5rE58&sa=U&ei=Zp0pU5T8AdCThQfCw4CAAw&ved=0CC0QtwIwAw&usg=AFQjCNGf6UKdbbc86Yj2I5hPG6Yz-38xFw

 

[aristotle]

What about Ramchandra performing the Ashvamedha Yagya after returning to Ayodhya? A similar Yagya was performed by the Pandavas too.

 

[sanj007]

What about Ramchandra performing the Ashvamedha Yagya after returning to Ayodhya? A similar Yagya was performed by the Pandavas too.

Here is a rebuttal
http://www.krishna.com/forums/what-exactly-ashwamedha-yagna-horse-sacrifice
,

If we take the meaning of the root 'medhri' as
sangamanarth it will come to be interpreted as to organize the people
for virtuous deeds or to enhance the love and equanimity among them
i.e. it would be 'nriyajna' or 'purushmedh'. It may be pertinent to
mention here that 'nrimedha' is a risi of some vedic hymns of
Samveda. It can never mean the one who kills or sacrifices the human
beings. Consequently, the terms followed by medha always do not
signify killing/sacrifice and therefore the interpretations made by
the Western scholars are utterly wrong and unacceptable.

 

[sanj007]

Now can you comment on this you tube video which goes into detaill of question of supposed animal sacrifice in Vedas,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecCPLt5rE58


Question is can you reconcile to ahimsa, BG 10.20, and other verses clearly shown in this thread, these claims of animal sacrifice, why did these supposed scholars misinterpret Vedas, what was their hidden agenda to misinterpret or were they not simply up to the job of translating Vedas, which requires al lot of education and understanding: