Tamil Heritage

Vishal Agarwal vishalagarwal at HOTMAIL.COM
Fri Sep 17 00:05:41 UTC 1999


Respected Dr. Thompson,

I have indeed referred the list archives for posts pertaining to meating
eating in Vedic texts. So please be more specific. And why not refer to the
book that I mentioned before criticizing me?

As for being politically correct, suffice it to say that Sayana and others
never denied the slaughter of animals in Yajnas. Yes, several Acharyas (like
Sri Madhvacharya) strongly advocated the use of replicas etc.) Others, like
Sri Ramanujacharya, too acknowledged the slaughter of animals in Yajnas but
preferred to substitute it with Prapatti. Even to this day, orthodox Pundits
do declare that slaughter of animals is an integral part of Srauta ritual
(although they take shelter of texts like the Parashar Smriti to say that
this falls in the 'Kalivarjya' category). Refer, for instance the massive
'Vedartha Parijata' of Swami Karapatri.

It is you who is reading wide meanings in my post. I never denied or
affirmed anything on the prevelance or non prevalance of meat eating per se
in the Vedic period. My post merely concerned that particular passage of
Shatapath Brahman. Else I also know what is written in the Katyayana Srauta
Sutras or the Taittiriya Brahman etc.

I dont know what you mean by 'these days' because I posted my messages after
a long time. If you can see adulation of Godse in some article, and threats
in my message where they do not exist, it is clear who is prejudiced and
close minded and who is not. If you are referring to the private discussions
that Dr. Witzel forced on me by bombarding my mailbox with unsolicited
posts, then reference to these is better made in that private discussion,
not in this public forum.

May we expect some better academic stuff from you rather than personal
remarks?

----Original Message Follows----
From: George Thompson <GthomGt at CS.COM>
Subject: Re: Tamil Heritage
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 19:34:05 EDT


Bold unsubstantiated remarks like this come pouring forth so frequently from
Vishal Agarwal these days that I seldom stop to comment.  But, purely by
chance,
  this one caught my eye.

I see no reason to reject the interpretation of Macdonell and Keith in this
matter.  The native tradition has been trying to re-interpret Yajnavalkya's
remark ever since he made it. By all means, please, look at the context
again. ZB 3.2.1.21 becomes *pointless* if we interpret *aMsala'* as a
reference to milk products.  Yajnavalya's iconoclasm is, so to say,
*emasculated* by such an obviously 'politically correct' re-interpretation
of
Yajnavalkya's remark. Yajnayalkya was a free-thinker and a meat-eater and a
man with a refreshing sense of humor.

Vishal Agarwal in the past has urged us to search the list's archives for
previous discussions. I recommend the same procedure to him.

Anyone who denies that the eating of meat was common practice in the Vedic
period is, well, impenetrable.

Best wishes,

George Thompson

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list