09-07-2007, 09:09 AM
Bodhiji,
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->also pls clarify - did swamiji eat meat during his sadhana phase, siddha phase, or as Narendra before entering the hertitage of guru, or throughout?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sure of his status when he ate meat and will accept your word.
As for the teachings of Swami versus habits/actions of Swami, you'll note that from Swamji's teaching that he was pretty practical about those who ate meat or not. And he didn't hold any strong reservations about those who ate meat. In fact, it was quite contrary to the widely held belief.
This is from '<b>Teachings of Swami Vivekananda</b>' published by Advaita Ashrama in Kolkotta (my personal copy - will mail you the same if you need it). It's from chapter 13 titled 'Food' (page 68 onwards): (added later: Book available online
(I can't scan the pages due to the size of book - am typing here from the hard copy)
Swami Vivekananda says:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So long as man shall live a Rajasika (active) life under circumstances like the present, there is no other way except through meat-eating. It is true that the Emperor Asoka saved the lives of millions of animals by the threat sword, but, is not the slavery of the thousand years more dreadful than that? Taking the life of a few goats against the inability to protect the honour of oneâs wife and daughter, and to save the morsels fro oneâs children from robbing hands â which of these is more sinful?
Rather let those belonging to the upper ten, who do not earn their livelihood by manual labour, not take meat; but the forcing of vegetarianism upon those who have to earn their bread by labouring day and night, is one of the causes of the loss of our national freedom. (IV. 486-87)
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->More than 90% of those whom you now take to be men of Sattva quality are only steeped in the deepest Tamas. Enough if you find 1/16th of them to be realy Sattvika? What we want now is an immense awakening of Rajasika energy, for the whole country is wrapped in the shroud of Tamas. The people of this land must be fed and clothed â must be awakened â must be made fully active. Otherwise they will become inert, as inert as trees and stones. So, I say, eat large quantities of fish and meat, my boy! (V. 402-03.)
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->To eat meat is surely barbarous and vegetable food is certainly purer â who can deny that? For him surely is a strict vegetarian diet, whose one end is to lead solely a spiritual life. But he who has to steer the boat of his life with strenuous labour through the constant life-and-death stuggles and competition of this world, must of necessity take meat. So long as there will be in human society such a thing as the triumph of the strong over the weak, animal food is required, or some other suitable substitute for it has to bed discovered; otherwise, the weak will naturally be crushed under the feet of the strong.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Please note that my earlier post was in response to some calling another a non-Hindu because he ate meat. Now these are kind of bogus metrics we could do without. It's not a matter of who likes to eat what or what's good for health or what's advocated by which guru. Our society is plagued with enough divisions we don't need one more. Calling a someone a non-Hindu solely based on the persons dietary preferences is akin to some of secular friends who try to establish their credentials based on their beef-eating choice.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->also pls clarify - did swamiji eat meat during his sadhana phase, siddha phase, or as Narendra before entering the hertitage of guru, or throughout?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sure of his status when he ate meat and will accept your word.
As for the teachings of Swami versus habits/actions of Swami, you'll note that from Swamji's teaching that he was pretty practical about those who ate meat or not. And he didn't hold any strong reservations about those who ate meat. In fact, it was quite contrary to the widely held belief.
This is from '<b>Teachings of Swami Vivekananda</b>' published by Advaita Ashrama in Kolkotta (my personal copy - will mail you the same if you need it). It's from chapter 13 titled 'Food' (page 68 onwards): (added later: Book available online
(I can't scan the pages due to the size of book - am typing here from the hard copy)
Swami Vivekananda says:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So long as man shall live a Rajasika (active) life under circumstances like the present, there is no other way except through meat-eating. It is true that the Emperor Asoka saved the lives of millions of animals by the threat sword, but, is not the slavery of the thousand years more dreadful than that? Taking the life of a few goats against the inability to protect the honour of oneâs wife and daughter, and to save the morsels fro oneâs children from robbing hands â which of these is more sinful?
Rather let those belonging to the upper ten, who do not earn their livelihood by manual labour, not take meat; but the forcing of vegetarianism upon those who have to earn their bread by labouring day and night, is one of the causes of the loss of our national freedom. (IV. 486-87)
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->More than 90% of those whom you now take to be men of Sattva quality are only steeped in the deepest Tamas. Enough if you find 1/16th of them to be realy Sattvika? What we want now is an immense awakening of Rajasika energy, for the whole country is wrapped in the shroud of Tamas. The people of this land must be fed and clothed â must be awakened â must be made fully active. Otherwise they will become inert, as inert as trees and stones. So, I say, eat large quantities of fish and meat, my boy! (V. 402-03.)
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->To eat meat is surely barbarous and vegetable food is certainly purer â who can deny that? For him surely is a strict vegetarian diet, whose one end is to lead solely a spiritual life. But he who has to steer the boat of his life with strenuous labour through the constant life-and-death stuggles and competition of this world, must of necessity take meat. So long as there will be in human society such a thing as the triumph of the strong over the weak, animal food is required, or some other suitable substitute for it has to bed discovered; otherwise, the weak will naturally be crushed under the feet of the strong.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Please note that my earlier post was in response to some calling another a non-Hindu because he ate meat. Now these are kind of bogus metrics we could do without. It's not a matter of who likes to eat what or what's good for health or what's advocated by which guru. Our society is plagued with enough divisions we don't need one more. Calling a someone a non-Hindu solely based on the persons dietary preferences is akin to some of secular friends who try to establish their credentials based on their beef-eating choice.