Did Medieval Buddhists, Brahmins, Jains eat or Ban Meat? The Real History

Every year, the sale of meat is banned in different parts of India for reasons related to religious beliefs. But has this always been the case? Not really. Anirudh Kanisetti explores texts from medieval Tamil Nadu and Karnataka to see how the people of the past engaged with this controversial question.
SOURCES:
Achaya, Konganda Thammu. The Story of Our food. Universities Press, 2003.
Dehejia, Vidya. Slaves of the Lord: the Path of the Tamil Saints. Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1988.
Mahendravikramavarman and L. D. Barnett (trans). "Matta-vilāsa: A Farce." Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, London Institution (1930): 697-717.
Sen, Colleen Taylor. Feasts and fasts: A History of Food in India. Reaktion Books, 2014.
Ulrich, Katherine E. "Food Fights." History of Religions 46, no. 3 (2007): 228-261.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join our channel to get access to perks. Click 'JOIN' or follow the link below:
/ @theprintindia
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connect with ThePrint
» Subscribe to ThePrint: theprint.in/su...
» Subscribe to our KZbin Channel: bit.ly/3nCMpht
» Like us on Facebook: / theprintindia
» Tweet us on Twitter: / theprintindia
» Follow us on Instagram: / theprintindia
» Find us on LinkedIn : / theprint
» Subscribe to ThePrint on Telegram: t.me/ThePrintI...
» Find us on Spotify: spoti.fi/2NMVlnB
» Find us on Apple Podcasts: apple.co/3pEOta8

[@anuradham8435]

Its widely known that meat was eaten by Hindus in ancient India..nice that you are citing from texts to prove it, but why the sniggering tone. also, why do you have to say yum yum and all to meat, to show your preferences? Many of your audience would be vegetarian (not me). Need to improve.

[@dummybava5971]

Why do you feel disgust when he's expressing his preference??how's that offensive. Look, look at that soy mf eating veggies is offensive Wow I really like eating meat,yum is not.

[@albertjose8879]

Exactly this what I even though a non veg hate no veg ppl. Always a rude condescending tone. Acting like they are superior 😒

[@sivaniam]

Please read the Vedic Mimamsa, and there you will see how "meat from the cow" is distributed by the Brahmins and they always obtained two parts. This is the extension of the Rig Veda and is extended into the Ramayana where Rama also consumes meat.

[@Logicalmind911]

Kindly read the RigVeda. Book 10, chapter 87, verses 16-18(Griffiths Translation. Available in Sacred Texts Website.) ‘16 The fiend who smears himself with flesh of cattle, with flesh of horses and of human bodies, Who steals the milch-cow's milk away, O Agni,-tear off the heads of such with fiery fury. 17 The cow gives milk each year, O Man-regarder: let not the Yātudhāna ever taste it. If one would glut him with the biesting, Agni, pierce with thy flame his vitals as he meets thee.’ Exactly where it is written that Cow can be killed? Don’t make your own assumptions or some whatsapp university publications. Mimansa is an atheistic interpretation that ignores the nonviolent nature of the ceremonies and the symbolic sacrifical nature of the yagnas. Animalistic traits of humans are told be sacrificed not actual animals.

[@sivaniam]

@@Logicalmind911 (using Griffiths translation also) Book 1:162:3:- Dear to all Gods, this goat, the share of Pushan, is first led forward with the vigorous Courser Book 1:162:12:- They who observe that the Horse is ready, call out and say “the smell is good - remove it”. And carving meat, await their distribution - may their approving help promote our labour. Book 10:91:14:- He in whom horses, bulls, oxen, and barred cows and rams, when duly set apart, are offered up, To Agni, Soma sprinkled, drinker of sweet juice, Disposer with my heart I bring a fair hymn forth ... and many more

[@sivaniam]

@@Logicalmind911 The Rig Veda and the Mimamsa were compiled by the same group of people and at the same instance and time.

[@Logicalmind911]

@@sivaniam Kindly show where beef was advocated to be eaten in RigVeda. The same group did not write RigVeda and Mimansa. It is wrong on two accounts. One, the first 3 Vedas Rig, Sham, Yajur were written between 1500-1200 bce. And RigVeda is the core book on which the other 3 are made. Mimansa is written in 100 bce. Source- Encyclopaedia Britannica. Two, Mimansa is based on Vedas but it is an atheistic principle. So it may allow eating any animal based on tamasik principles. But it is again and again restressed that satwik eating or non violence is the principle of the knowledgeable. Source- Oxford Bibliography The general confusion is between the ancient practices of the atheistic and the theistic groups of so called Hinduism. But to equate atheistic groups of Hinduism in some way represent the theistic group of Hinduism is quite bizarre.

[@sivaniam]

@@Logicalmind911 There is a lot of difference between "composed"; "compiled" and "written". archaeological References were provided. Badarayana & Jaimini are credited to have compiled both the Rig and Mimamsa and the Mimamsa directly refers to Badarayana and the Rig as a reference source.

[@projectmanager6423]

Don't understand from when these vegeterians have considered superior to meat eating countrymen?

[@kirchunetwork1986]

Not Superior. Morally upright maybe. Remember we vegetarians don't kill animals to consume their meat so we don't cause pain to them nor we contribute to Global warming (There is a scientific evidence that if everyone on this planet stop eating red meat it will have a major positive effect in combating Global warming)

[@shubhashishdwivedi9873]

Ever since concept of non-violence became vogue. That is, with advent of Advaita and Sramana such as Buddhism and Jainism. To understand you need to understand the socio-economic and political context of ancient times. In a turbulent political climate, concept of non-violence and peace is the go-to concept and a dream and desire to achieve. So, when concept of abhorrence towards meat which require violence is introduced. It is immediately taken note of and thus become popular amongst elites. It becomes a matter of elitism and class thing as vegetarian food was a thing not everyone could jn those times. Gradually vegetarianism became a matter of status not just amongst people but also amongst religious groups. So every group was trying to portray their religion more non-violent and vegetarian and pious. This competition led to superiority game and more dietary restrictions were introduce to portray themselves as claas apart, elite and superior to others. So that nobles and elites allude towards such group and provide them political and economic aid which established their position and clout in society. And No. There is no such thing as Native or Aborgines of India. Every group came from outside. Even the First Indians who came from Africa. Harappans, proto-Dravidians came from Iran and were Indo-European Aryans too. There is no such thing called Moolnivasi in India.

[@ic9771]

So instead of some hard core analysis backed up with credible references , Kani here comes up with easy references to a couple of famous plays , a recipe book also quite famous & a polemic by a Shaivite saint . That example from Harappa is bogus for residue lipids were found in utensils used for cooking which was interpreted as beef but was later proved that it could also be milk . The evidence wasn't conclusive. This by no means , proves that ancient Harappans didn't consume beef but we still lack conclusive evidence as opposed to the open & shut case Kani makes it to be. Seems being a historian especially one working for The Print is a cakewalk . Anybody with more than a passing interest in history qualifies especially if they happen to have authored a less than mediocre work of "history " more historical fiction actually . Kani , of course , meets all the criteria here .

[@Raja-ct9xq]

One word - Khangress agenda can be fulfilled that way. You don't need to do lot of research for that, just go against majority, you'll attract the remaining anyway 😂😂😂

[@mailtorajrao]

Don't you mean ' Kani , of course , _meats_ all the criteria here .' ?😉

[@divyanshtiwari3547]

@@mailtorajrao 🤣

[@sheilakijawani2526]

If you provide the source that will better your argument and will not be considered a plain rhetoric. Kani here provided sources thus his argument remains conclusive and accepted.

[@ic9771]

@@zenzui9304 we brahmins of Kerala "consumes" non veg so our counterparts in Kerala ? I read this sentence thrice including doing a head stand reading it but couldn't understand. Try using your mother tongue while putting forth ideas you can't articulate in grammatically correct English . Google translate does provide a coherent translation .

[@beluga9596]

Hindi heartland people not able to understand that their understanding of Dharma which is localised and natively variable >Fish is Sattvic for Saraswat Brahmins & Konkani culture >Mutton (sheep) and onion are Swastik in Kashmir Pandit and Hindu culture they eat meat after Shivratri ( 3 mutton recipes along with Lotus stem ) > Mutton and Fish are also considered swastik in Bengali Shakta traditions Similar in Marathwada region of Maharashtra where the bhog served to Khandoba or local shaivite form is mutton and similar to devis . This vegetarianism no no is only in Vaishnavas pan nation , may they be from Tamil Nadu or Manipuri . Other sects ( samarta - no clue ) are open to meat . Beef is , was and will be a big no no though , irrespective of the sect or traditions . Traditions of the given sexy also defines caste dynamics btw Northie homogeneity of Dharma is sad

[@Perceptron0]

Smartas,saiva śrautins,madhvas,sri vaishnavas are pure vegitarians saraswat belt ,shakta belt+ konkan-madhvas are nonveg rest all brahmins i.e Majority are vegetarians srauta does prescribe to bali but doesn't allow non veg to eat satvikally.

[@Perceptron0]

Naarthies are not much homogeneous id say they're not sectarian like savuthies. Savuthies are sectarian but sampradayas are homogeneous in ap ts TN ka talking only about brahmana traditions.

[@debishasharma7997]

Cow meat is banned. But buffalo meat is allowed. For example, in Kamakhya Temple buffalo is sacrificed regularly and therefore, it is ok to eat buffalo but not cows.

[@alphaff9939]

Because vaishnavism is copy of Buddhism mahayan

[@stillwater13]

What a serious let down, these 6 minutes were. The entire dietary preferences of the sub-continent was reduced to supposed manipulation of the masses to appropriate more patronage. Seems improbable and logic is lacking for the theory to hold.

[@keerthi321]

Ya I get it. This guy just wants to hate on Hinduism and poor vegetarians..

[@dummybava5971]

Just like you mfs shame and feel utter disgust of people eating meat. You just want to oppress and practice untouchability. What's wrong in that amirite?

[@keerthi321]

@@dummybava5971 Well dummy. I'm not a vegetarian.. So STFU dummy offended sensitive MF

[@shubhamjain9470]

Wow.... If a poet thought that jains "Secretary desired fish cooked with meat" so you start to believe that jains ate meat... Waaaa bhai.. matlab ksisi ko bhee defame karna ho to kutch bhee utha k bol doge... 1st of all he is just a poet with his views 2nd he "thought" that Jains secretary "desired" meat... Even lets assume that his thinking is true he said jains "desired" not that they "ate meat". Please use some common sense.

[@shubhamjain9470]

@@tamilagam05 okay bro. 🙂

[@maheshkarthick8447]

So in " Manimegalai" the main female protagonist has "Akshaya Patra" to feed poor people, so we can take that medieval people had Akshaya Patra!

[@codenamevisage]

Your English teacher : 😢

[@maheshkarthick8447]

@@codenamevisage ok son of English memsaab!

[@ogi4ever1]

Imagine this: I became very interested in Buddhism and stumbled upon a store that sells Buddhist books, items, and clothing. I started buying from that store, and after a few months or years, a friend tells me: "Don't buy from that store, the sellers there catch Buddhist monks, beat them up or kill them, and steal their things to sell them." I replied: "First of all, I respect and love Buddhists and I don't do that. I'm not the one who beats anyone, and I'm used to buying there. So many people actually buy from that store; if I stop, it won't have any impact anyway..." In today's world, there is something called the law of supply and demand - if you buy something that undoubtedly creates suffering (like meat that must have been created through immense suffering and killing), you indirectly contribute to increasing the demand for that product. By giving up meat and other animal products, you directly reduce the suffering of animals. The notion of purity and impurity is completely absurd. We should talk about what creates suffering and what reduces it. That is why Buddha allows eating meat only when it is given to you, for example, by a monk who is begging, because that meat did not arise from your demand, but rather it is the food that people had left after their meal and gave to the monk. However, when you directly create demand by buying meat, you are indirectly responsible for the enormous suffering that the animal has gone through, as well as for future animals that will be artificially inseminated and created to be tortured and killed (because you contributed to the demand for meat). According to veganism, for example, if you are walking on the beach and come across a dead fish or another animal, you can eat it because you are not the one who caused its death, neither directly nor indirectly. PS: I'm not talking about Karma here, but rather the law of supply and demand in today's world. Not everywhere in the world, but in the West and other markets with a completely or partially free markets.

[@chetanpurohit9267]

Selective Pseudo historians who go on half baked scribes and overlook the existing traditions totally. Sad to see Print giving platforms to these voices.

[@sandyqbg]

KZbin is sadly giving a platform to ingorant sanghis like you. It's a free world buddy.

[@sauravsuresh6388]

So how do you justify your claim?

[@saifanrahman7052]

😂😂😂 watch science journey channel and world of antiquity channel Brahmin ko dukh ho Raha hai

[@goodsong_views]

@@saifanrahman7052 But brahmins even today eat meat. Say in Kolkata or even the Kashmiri Brahmins etc

[@ShrekCunther]

🤦🏿Hindus jains Buddhist might be eating meat You should always associate thier practice by following Desha (place) Kaala (era) Samaya(time) Bhuddist, jains and Hindus did this based what was right for that time at that juncture it cannot be true always in all time , At this time reverence is assigned to those who ensure the food is vegitarian and those who are more detached of thier tastes, and moreover India is complex you can't simplify it, some maybe vegitarian for a day(Somwar) some for a month(ayappa) some thier whole lifetime Why do you want to critique present day vegitarian because it's Indian and hence regressive ?🤦🏿

[@kizhakke]

Yes.. also Buddhist monks will never slaughter animals themselves, but will eat meat if someone cooks it for them... not very logical in current times

[@hema_raghu]

Putting the shoe on the other foot, why do Indian vegetarians look down on meat eaters or non-vegetarians? Why do vegans (the world over) look down on meat eaters as well as lacto, ovo vegetarians? It's funny if it weren't a serious issue that actually determines social choices of who eats with whom, who married whom!

[@HRC294]

@@hema_raghu Noice

[@hawkingdawking4572]

It's the reaction to Hendoos imposing the newly cooked up 'vegetarianism' like their bulldozer persecution.

[@thomasthomas9533]

In short what you are saying is people got choices and why looking down on vegetarianism. All your complex words made me a scholar😎

[@biswaroopmaiti2943]

Very interesting topic. But I was expecting more. The only primary relevant text cited appears to be Manasollasa a Sanskrit text from the Chalukya dynasty, of the region around Karanataka and Maharashtra, of today. The polemics cited for setting the context are all in Tamil. The paintings in the video appear to have Thai calligraphy? Also, it appears you're using a video editor software in trial version beyond its expiry date. As indicated, there was clearly some significant background to those polemics. However, it seems merely punctuative rather than substantive to quote one text from one kingdom as the only positive evidence a la anecdote. If this were math, one counterexample was sufficient to disprove the vegetarianist hypothesis. However, this is not even science, this is history, with a much more relaxed standard of evidence. If anecdotes be the beads of this train, there must be more anecdotes across centuries, languages, subcultures and time-places. A more thorough historiography and more primary sources, perhaps beyond two very specific time-places would be greatly appreciated. It is true that our culture of food and diet can be strange and complicated. E.g. it is well known in West Bengal that a few centuries back, say in the 19th and even early 20th century, vegetarianism was much more prevalent than today, while for some eating chicken and eggs was considered extremely heinous and was ridiculed, while goat, mutton, fish were normal for them. Today, non vegetarians are 99.95% and chicken and eggs have lost their taboo. This is very different from other regions of India at the time.

[@orkkojit]

Not only texts but this hypothesis is backed by carbon dating of ancient vessels found in historically Buddhist and Jain areas which have traces of animal protein in them. It's also attested to in the travelogues of Fa Hsien and Hsuen Tsang that Buddhists of Nalanda often partook in eating chicken meat. The comments about the video editing software is irrelevant. "West Bengal in the 19th and 20th centuries used to be more vegetarian" Any credible source for this dubious piece of information ?

[@sandyqbg]

You've trashed the argument in the video citing lack of evidence with barely looking at the evidence presented and then shooting off theories of your own without any evidence yourself? How intellectual! Too much conservative originality! Much wow

[@rutvikrs]

​@@orkkojit 1. I don't think people today realise how rare meat was, in the post agrarian to pre industrial phases. Most people have universalised the history of North Western Europe which had negligible agriculture. Everyone ate meat but not at the rate we do today. A good rule of thumb is if your hyper local festival has a harvest/communal festival with sacrifice, meat was historically rare.(Eid, Chhat, Ugadi). If your festival has dietary restriction, meat was the norm(Lent). 2. Several misconceptions on chicken, it's likely that Hiuen Tsang was referring to local fowl, not chicken. The cheap and ubiquitous chicken and eggs we eat today are a product of the broiler revolution in the 30's and reached India in the 70's(silver revolution). We did not have organised and centralised poultry only domestication and hunting. Chickens used to weigh less than a kilogram, were bottom feeders eating bamboo shoots and worms. They were worse than pork. There was significant historical stigma attached to the bird because it was used for cock fights. 2. From the traditional history, the Bengali diet was much like its historical origin in the Shakta belt of the subcontinent(MP, MH to Southern Karnataka, Bengal was settled very late in history), vegetarian and for the most part(tribal pescatarianism seeped in as with any riverian/coastal practice), red meat was strictly ritualistic. During the harvest festival, human sacrifice was the initial practice, substituted by buff/venison, later by goats and fowl. Chicken entered very recently during the secularisation of the Pujo.

[@J-IFWBR]

editor argument is ad hominem and needs to be dismised. As it goes for source selection, i found it pretty good, especially if one considers that this is a short yt video.

[@urrasscal8380]

what interesting about this??? everybody knows during vedic times the vedic people used to eat meat it is mentioned in vedas. It is not written in vedas that one should eat meat or not eat meat. so eating meat is not prohibited in any ancient text moreover hhindus have complete free will as no book is binding for hhindus... so as i have complete free will i decided not to eat ccow meat whereas rest i don't care...

[@nitinsingh4522]

I know u were not able to sell one copy of ur book.

[@ic9771]

@Football-Pundit fiction usually sells well especially historical fiction if you know how to spice up what you consider facts .

[@ic9771]

@Football-Pundit do you have anything to refute my claims ? If yes , post them here otherwise you're the jackass from whatsapp or whichever University you accuse me of being a part of . As far as being published goes , you can write a book & get it published too if nobody does it for you . Hire a good PR firm & they'd do the publicity for you else if you've a good publisher they'd do it for you . Everything else follows.

[@ic9771]

@Football-Pundit do you go thru the entire thread or only in the section you commented in ? Help yourself.

[@miked999]

Nitin from cow belt is so uneducated that he won't understand

[@nitinsingh4522]

So many dogees barking ,🤣🤣🤣.just having fun

[@Intelcrpto]

I can eventually see where George soros funding is going 😂

[@infinitejourney...]

You are right

[@divyanshtiwari3547]

🤣🤣🤣

[@prashanthb6521]

silly

[@priteshamburle3034]

Guys chill our ancestral homo sapiens did hunting and fishing and agriculture arrived very later so we all are descendants of no vegetarian sapiens

[@rajdeepatha4416]

Butt hurt hindu vegetarians in the comments are hilarious 😂

[@rajdeepatha4416]

@tamilagam05 Hindus are the only people in the world who deny selling/renting houses based on food preferences. Many gated societies exist in India where non vegetarian people aren't allowed to enter! Even if you order something via zomato or swiggy, the boxes are opened at the gate and checked only to make sure that non veg food doesn't enter the society gates! These are all personal experiences!

[@debishasharma7997]

@Bhontaji It's about 75% people are non-veg Hindus as per the NFHS survey.

[@amandeep9930]

These plays were often written to ridicule and spread misinformation about other communities. You should not take them as reference.

[@miked999]

How do you know that? Did you do any cited research. Show us your citations please. By that logic even Ramayana was written to ridicule the Srilankans and the Advasis and Mahabharat shows the utter corruption of ancient Indian society where brother kills brother for power!

[@heathenfire]

That's exactly what I thought too

[@ic9771]

@@miked999 are the Ramayana or the MB plays ? Or are you a joker ? Which of these statements are correct ?

[@miked999]

@I C Both are fictional unless proven otherwise. Prove me wrong that people in ancient India didn't eat meat. I already proved you're a joker. Prove me wrong

[@ic9771]

@@miked999 the issue wasn't whether they were factual or otherwise . The issue was you comparing plays to the Ramayana & the MB. Nowhere in Indian tradition have they been considered "plays ." They've been recognised & recorded continuously over millenia not centuries , without any deviation in thought whatsoever as Itihasas meaning history. Scholars & academics ( much more credible than Kani or a joker like you here ) are of the view that the core events are likely true though over the years a lot of embellishments have crept into the narrative over time. Regarding meat eating did you see me make a comment against ancient Indians not being meat eaters & if so pls point it out to me , joker . And as far as plays go , counter religions like Hindus Buddhists & Jains wrote derogatory stuff about each other in their scriptures apart from their preachings which incidentally was recorded dutifully in such scriptures to be studied by future monks & other faithful . Eg Jains record Sri Ram & Sita Devi to have been siblings. The Buddha himself is recorded as askingJains practising severe austerities as to why did they do so only to receive the answer that in their previous lives they had committed grave sins for which the only penitence was severe austerities to which the Buddha who advocated madhyamarg or the middle path , tauntingly remarked that it seemed bas though all Jainism were filled with grievous sinners. Now if this is the kind of impression the progenitors of religions carried about each other , is it any wonder that these thoughts or feelings of superiority wouldn't have been reflected in plays or other art forms ? You should have been the one providing this bit of information . Instead like the troll you are you demand references without providing any or even coming up with logical answers yourself .

[@sadhnabhatnagar6816]

Absolutely fascinating discussion as usual! I have two questions only one of which is related to this particular video. 1. How, why and when did vegetarianism become popular in India? 2. What are the origins of Sati pratha and how old is it?

[@AK-db2ph]

Answer to your second question- Sati pratha is a part of hindusim and we see it's reference in various hindu text including ramayan and mahabharat ( valmiki ramayan ayodhya kand 66/12, valmiki ramayan yudh kand 32/32, vishnu puran 5/38/2)

[@debishasharma7997]

@sadhnabhatnagar6816 Sati pratha is very ancient, probably even vedic. But it was never widely practiced until medieval times in the face of invasions.

[@kashr7439]

Excellent commentary brother

[@debishasharma7997]

well in Kamakhya Temple Buffallo is sacrificed. chicken sacrificed for ekvira mai, Durga Puja gets goat and pigeons as sacrifice. These are continuing to this day and will continue. Explore other beliefs in India within Hinduism and even today meat is part of the worship. Its not unbelievable that Harappans may have had beef.

[@XyzAbc-sm7eh]

Medeival Brahmin= today's Musalman

[@RkR2001]

The Hindu Temple priests associated with Diety has always been Vegetarian since Vedic times. Now whether this Harappan civilization was Vedic is controversial

[@siddhantk4985]

If this was precedent. Then Peshwas and Marathas wouldn't have to put ban on cow slaughter as peace treaty everytime nizam and hyder Ali lost battles.. which are documented even today....

[@Shaileshartsms]

By their time Vegetarian diet was well established in the society. I remember one European account of food habits in Shivajis Darbar mentioned about difficulty in finding meat. Shivaji then had to make special arrangements for them.

[@dynamitebsb4520]

​​@@Shaileshartsms by this time? There is mention of ancient travellers from greek to Chinese that indians are vegetarians

[@debishasharma7997]

@Shaileshartsms Harappans were before 2500 BC. That's when beef eating is said to be. Vedic times are 1500 to 600 BC. Again, there are mentions of beef eating. We didn't have greek and chinese travelers coming to India during this time. It was at least 300 years later during Alexandar's times i.e. around 327 BC. By that time both Jainism and Buddhism were well established and in many places where they were strong, Hindus also started turning towards vegetarianism. So the time he is talking about and you are talking about are different by 300 years at least.

[@anakinskywalkerii4350]

Essentially “marketing differentiation” drove each religion to compete on not eating meat and demonstrate purity. Makes total sense. Even religious leaders rejecting family and sex was used to demonstrate purity. Bramhachari. Essentially competing on rejecting matters of “flesh”. Awesome post. I don’t have social media but would love to buy your book.

[@kirchunetwork1986]

The only way to prove is to jump on a time machine and travel to ancient time. There are 2 things. Science and Faith. Science demands evidence and faith is what you believe in that is passed on by your parents. I believe in live and let live. We have a saying in Kannada which roughly translates to "Your Dress to impress others and eat for your own satisfaction". I tend to follow this. I am strict vegetarian but have no issues if some one wants to consume meat of any kind so long as he/she does not force me to consume or brings it to my home.

[@shailendratiwari7542]

Great series on busting myths of our culture, food, beliefs, faiths...Keep it up buddy and keep enlightening us...

[@Harry-bd6pb]

​@siddharthsriram2685they weren't 😂

[@theternalaw]

​@siddharthsriram2685 lol they weren't 😂

[@AbhiN_1289]

Most Hindus are meat. However, vegetarianism was the ideal. You cannot count sacrificial meat in this because you are allowed to offer an animal in a sacrifice, and this is an exception to the prohibition against killing animals. Again, this is an exception and not a rule.

[@kalebj7001]

“The cow should be slaughtered on the arrival of a guest, on the occasion of ‘Shraddha’ of ancestors and on the occasion of a marriage.” ~Apastamb Grihsutram (1/3/10) Taittireeya Upanishad praises the sacrifice of a hundred bulls by the sage Agasthya. Hymn 162 in the Rigveda describes elaborately in detail about the horse sacrifice 'Ashvamedha.' Different Vedic gods are said to have different preferences for animal meat thus Agni likes bulls and barren cows, Rudra likes red cows, while Indra likes a bull with droopy horns with a mark on its head, and Pushan a black cow. The 5th century BCE sanskrit grammarian Panini even coined a new adjective, Goghna (killing of a cow), for the guests to be thus honoured. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad has reference to meat cooked with rice, The Mahabharata has references to rice cooked with minced meat ('pistaudana') "You will be astonished if I tell you that according to the old ceremonials he is not a good Hindu who does not eat beef on certain occations" 'The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda' (Vol 3 Pg 445) Manusmriti (Chapter 5 / Verse 30) says, “It is not sinful to eat the meat of eatable animals, for Brahma has created both the eaters and the eatables.” “It is permitted to eat the meat of milch cows and oxen.” - Dharmasutras : The Law Codes of Apastamba, Gautama, Baudhayana, and Vasistha. [Chapter 17, Verses 29-30] In old days 2000 cattle used be killed in the court of Rantideva (King in Mahabharata). Everyday he distributed the meat as food and earned fame. For the performance of the ritual of Four months (चत्वारमासत्रय) everyday animals are killed. In the next verses Dharma Vyadha [righteous Hunter] (धर्मव्याध) expressed the view that no sin attaches to the King and Brahmins when the animals are killed in a sacrifice (यजथ). Vyaasa Mahabharata, Book 3 [Books of Forests - Aranya Parva also called Vana Parva], Chapter 199 (in some books Sec. 207. This number may vary from version to version). Verse No. 6,7,8.] Ashwamedha (अश्वमेध पर्व): Krishna and Vyasa advise King Yudhishthira to perform the great Horse Sacrifice, which is described at great length. ~The Mahabharata of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa [Vol 14] Maharishi Yagyavalkya says “I eat beef because it is very soft and delicious" ~Shatpath Brahmin (3/1/2/21) “If a Brahmin refuses to eat the meat offered to him on the occasion of ‘Shraddha’ or worship, he goes to hell.” ~ Vashistha Dharmasutra (11/34)

[@ic9771]

Untouchability also had religious sanction although there was no mention of it in the Vedas . Death was prescribed to mlecchas which in today's India would mean Non Hindus like Momins & Christians . So , what do we do ? Bring back those edicts ?

[@kalebj7001]

@@ic9771 the sources are here for those people keep saying Sanatan Dharm was never about eating meat let alone a beef delicacy, so they can now read and understand whats the origins. Untouchability definitely had its sanctions from a religious backing no denying that, hence we still see ostracization of certain communities in the society even so as much as blocking them temple entry

[@ic9771]

@@kalebj7001 The cow was considered to be aghnya or not to be killed in the Rg Veda. Besides beef wasn't a meat people consumed in daily life but was taken only as part of sacrificial rites. This was true of all meat . It had to be consecrated before it was taken at meals . On the other hand you're making it sound as if the ancients in India gorged on beef almost everyday . That it was as simple as it is today where you can just walk into a restaurant or visit the nearest butcher's shop.

[@kalebj7001]

@@ic9771 i never said they gorged, read my quotations on Apastamba it's meant for particular event say a marriage, even Vivekananda mentioned it's on "certain ceremonial events" I'm merely pointing to the fact it was eaten, not that it was gorged

[@ic9771]

@@kalebj7001 equally there are gnostic gospels which declare the crucifixion of Jesus didn't result in the resurection 3 days later . They're also silent about the so called Immaculate conception . Traditionally the Vatican has & had declared these gospels heresies. Out here the concept of heretical is either absent or given a long rope . I think we both know where you're coming from & what your intention is ?

[@heathenfire]

I am a big fan of AK's work. I loved his echoes of India and yuddha podcasts and am currently reading lords of the Deccan. I am very happy that we have good Indian historians writing about Indian history, but my one criticism of him is something that was demonstrated here. I believe everyone is free to have their own political opinions and biases, but there are times where AK makes his biases very conspicuous and even takes digs at people with different political opinions. This is the only time I find him irritating. Otherwise I think his work is great.

[@surajbiradar9827]

This is good...!!! Even if you admire someone doesn't mean you ignore their flaws... Bravo

[@urrasscal8380]

u seems like a typical murkh iindian why don't u become his official chamcha..

[@tamobiswas6083]

Anybody finding his slurping which mentioning non vegetarian food irritating? If you find non veg food tasty, keep it to yourself. Lots of people 'dont like' non veg and doing such things is insulting the beliefs of people who don't necessarily ride your band wagon.

[@helcurt2509]

Then why ban beef to prevent ur vegetarian chicken heart being offended

[@dummybava5971]

How was it offensive to vegetarians?? If you say "wow paneer paalak hmmm...* Slurp *, id just say aight mate!! Just tell me you utterly disgust people who eat non veg. You guys are real snow flakes . Expressing one's taste is "offensive" gtfo here

[@yerajoker3524]

@@helcurt2509 Then why ban dog meat to prevent ur doglover pomeranian heart being offended

[@millennialmind9507]

​@@helcurt2509 and why not promote bat meat as well

[@tamobiswas6083]

@@helcurt2509 the same reason pork is banned in a lot of countries. and we really support that ban.

[@Perceptron0]

Śrauta does prescribe bali but not beef.

[@satishkodachwad]

This video was a no history show. Look at the way he was saying yumm in between. It shows the desperation and attempt of few people to quote only few chosen lines from the history books and prove what they think is right. God bless. May the real truth prevail.

[@lindyswing4368]

This guy is a pycho....nothing else .. He is trying to be edgy to impress his leftist cohorts.

[@hotfun07]

Anirudh, Just include Medieval Muslims in the mix as well and you'll see your entire narrative fall like 9 pins 😜😅 I KNOW you know what I mean. You kept going in loop after loop without explaining why ALL HINDU BUDDHIST AND JAIN Sects considered avoidance of Meat as 'virtuous' and 'purer' ? From quoting Sangam Poetry, belonging to at least 2 centuries before the Christian Era, depicting Brahmins as sacrificing and probably feasting on Cow Meat to taking a leap of over 1000 years and quoting an 8th century AD Drama depicting a Pashupata Sect follower as fond of Meat and Alcohol has been, in my opinion, unnecessary. You could have simply quoted from Al Biruni's Tehqiq e Hind where he quotes Brahmins claiming that certain Practises in Hindu sects had been given up and new practises had been taken up over the centuries like considering Beef as a taboo which wasnt the case earlier. Even in 21st century different sects and communities include Meat dishes as offering to Gods. Kashmiri Pandits celebrating Mahasivratri anyone? We dont need a menu from an Early Medieval Royal Court to understand what is obvious. It'll suit you better to not considerr your viewers as a homogeneous group like the Sanghis. Else, what is the difference between You and Them. Both are pedding their narrative. Anyhow, we would love you to include what Muslim Theolgians, Travelers, Nobles, Courteirs and Rulers had to say on Hindus, rather Brahmins practicing Vegetarianism. That will be LOVELY to hear from you. It'll be interesting to see how you pick and choose from History to further your narrative.

[@abhay_cs]

This guy is a deracinated moron, so I wouldn't expect good standards of history reading from him. Not a single mention of that ancient principle of Ahimsa which has been so central to our civilization. He is your typical JNU leftist idiot, nothing more. You can see the awful smugness writ large on his face, thinly masking his insecurity as a stupid person and an uncritical historian.

[@baskaranjv8925]

This topic has no relavance today Simply wasting time

[@AP-do6sv]

For thise interested in this topic, there is a book called Indian food written by Achaya KT. It covers the history of indian cuisine and produce from ancient times till today. A must read.

[@akhileshsingh2216]

KT Achaya has given evidence from the Ancient Literature or Archeology in his book or not please reply

[@chinnucutie]

Messy history wooow that's words wisely used..... What a great left guyyy who wrote a book and thinks... I just have a simple question where will you go with this

[@kash60ishvlog67]

Your topics & sources are good but your narration is very very bad. It's very difficult to retain anything you narrate as your words are very tedious & statements not much cohesive. Take some guidance from SG. And plz do share the script or the article of your content so that people may read it. Thanks & regards!

[@mamdhata1614]

It is NOT maTha. Matta. Ta as tambura. Not Tiger. 2nd. It was Ashoka who ensured wide spread vegetarianism. 3rd. Your pulao is mentioned un caraka samhita. (No itnis not a Mughal invention) 4: Yes beef was eaten in ancient times, including kebabs. Read Baudhayana Sutra by IGNCA. 5 Baudhayana dharma sutra is oretty clear that any one (including Sannyasis) who refused to eat meat offered durinf a sraddha incurs sin) 6: No garlic in Manosllasa? Interesting as Kashyapa samhita recimmends medicine made out of garlic. It also recommends it people of China, Bahlika & Central Asia. It also says the girija garlic is better than kshetraja garlics. 7. Meat only became kali nisshidha. Finally lose that yum yum. You are self proclaimed historian. Not a troll.

[@dhanjeepandey4252]

Good one...

[@virtualatall]

Nice article but misses a lot of points and lacks proper research... Few article and play cannot be representative of whole population... For eg there was a movie kadakh where it is shown family people celebrating diwali with chicken curry and beer, but definately not followed in most Hindu household in India.

[@mailtorajrao]

Hmm... isn't it true that early _"Hindu"_ (quotes used advisedly) were largely in the variety of pagan traditions. Should we be really surprised?

[@goodsong_views]

Was it Pagan tradition or just the local tradition?

[@mailtorajrao]

@@goodsong_views Local is a better term than pagan.

[@vishal_sharma]

After this episode I won't regret for not being a member of The Print. Thank God I am no more paying for this BS. Was not expecting this from Print

[@dynamitebsb4520]

I thought print changed...but they didn't .

[@hnema94]

This is the first video in this series which I didn't like. All of AK's videos take on a hypothesis (usually indicated in the title) and provide ample evidences to prove it or at least sow a seed of curiosity in the viewers to look things from new POV. This video didn't do any of these things. While AK frequently mentioned that vegetarianism as a practice cemented during the mediaeval times, supporting evidences or anecdotes were not mentioned. Also some more citations could have been from modern scholarly articles rather than just relying on ancient and mediaeval religious and cult centric pieces. Another two topics I would've liked in this video would be the transition of brahmins from cow sacrificing priests to current practice of abhorring beef, and upper castes adopting vegetarianism. P.S - the "yum-yums" were annoying and forced.

[@pradeepkumarkoot5622]

I do not know what type of historian you are, You are quoting SHAIVA text which says some Jain's used to crave for meat and to satisfy it they used to have nuts, 1) shaiva and Jain's were not in good terms during mediaeval period, as a historian how come you take comments from adversaries of Jain's 2) you do not have basic sense that to postulate Jain's supported meat eating, you should get reference from jain literature not some others comments,

[@kalyanimookherji8834]

diet is far more complex than simplistic moral precepts. Glad your videos are illustrating this.

[@user-bc3ok2sg3z]

The consumption of meat is very high in southern states..its more than 97%...and its more than 85% overall india ... During Ramayana and Mahabharata period almost the whole world was eating meat ...Vegetarian was a stupid concept.Thus India was always a meat eating nation..untill few jains started eating plants due to lack of cattle.Kerala is heavy consumer of beef and buffaloes.Every one eats beef there except very few uncivilized people.

[@sunilpillai5053]

Yajnavalkyas discourse on The Holy cow in the Satapatha Brahmana will surely shed some more light on this

[@debishasharma7997]

I am an Assamese Brahmin- traditionally eaters of select meat and fishes, follower of Shakta tradition. I have heard that Yagnavalkya banned cow eating. That may have been when he started Svetayajurveda, a split from Krishnayajurveda.

[@ShivamRaina-dm9df]

There are many more references why these Tamilian's think.The whole world is just them

[@martianbigbang8580]

Tamilans (Dravidians) aspire for Knowledge based society since time immemorial, its in their DNA. The facts may be hard to digest but casting aspersions is in the DNA of brahmins(aryans) that questions their false history.

[@ShivamRaina-dm9df]

@@martianbigbang8580 nah you are false .There are many civilization and languages which are much ancient just we don't know .And Brahmins has a huge contributions .Tamil is nowhere close to it .They are just connecting it to pan India however it is not . Sanskrit is pan world language .And Brahmins have done much more contributions .Tamilian's just do claims nothing else none of them has any facts

[@satanshameer690]

@@ShivamRaina-dm9df Aryans are barbaric fools. All their knowledge is stolen from BMAC, Indus valley, Dravidians and Harappans.

[@Ashwekar]

2:18 wouldn't it be more accurate to say ..."Buddhist priests didn't eat meat"? Any reason to believe even lay followers didn't eat meat?

[@aniket385]

Monks had to eat whatever was given to them as alms

[@rockongrx20]

Don't dwell into past, don't blame current generation for mistakes of past. Also, waste time proving ancestors ate beef and hence justify insulting current cultural trends(which is not that current). P.S. I am a meat eater but don't spend my time "belittling" vegetarians.

[@vb4168]

I have watched his 2 episodes. Frankly his sole objective of history telling to mock. But he makes sure his mocking is based on selective facts. This is perfect example Ravish Kumar school of narrative building.

[@debishasharma7997]

Why exactly are you hurt? May be the way he presented is not the best, but think about it. In Kamakhya Temple, buffallo is sacrificed. chicken sacrificed for ekvira mai Temple in maharashtra, Durga Puja gets goat and pigeons as sacrifice, most tribal and local gods do get animal sacrifices. These are continuing to this day and will continue. Our present day beliefs are of vedic times is 1500 BC To 600 BC. Harappans was even 1000 years before that i.e. before 2500 BC. Why does it matter is harrappans had beef when we are not even following their traditions even as per religion? They are just part of our history. Why is it necessary that our ancestors thousands of years back must necessarily have the same belief as us?

[@vb4168]

@@debishasharma7997ok I agree but as you said beliefs evolved and he is now using those old facts to mock beliefs of large section Hindus todays.

[@debishasharma7997]

I went through the video twice. I understand the discomfort the vegetarian Hindus may feel and even non-beef eating Hindus may feel awkward. It could have been done better. However, what he is saying need not necessarily be wrong as I shared that even today, non-vegetarian practices continue. Hinduism is not Islam, Christianity or Judaism that only certain written dictates written in one book written centuries before have to be strictly followed. Hinduism every corner of the country evolved based on local needs because north-Indian caste Hindus especially the Brahmins were initially tasked with ensuring that the local beliefs in different places were integrated within the Vedic or Puranic traditions. I am saying this both from a reading of books such as Historical Outline of ancient India and the fact that I, an Assamese Brahmin, have heard traditions of my ancestors migrated from Kannauj and Navadweep centuries back- may be even more than a thousand years back. The point I want to state is that while how he has presented may not be the best, but what he is saying has a strong element of possibly what happened. How I understand it as a traditionally non-vegetarian Brahmin, similar to non-vegetarian Brahmins of Bengal, Konkan, Odisha, Kashmir and Mithilanchal, is that food practices have changed and we don't need to believe that faith is set in stone. We are Hindus. We evolve as per need unlike dogmatic religions that don't evolve like Islam Christianity and Judaism. But I get it that he could have said things better. I would criticise how he said it, but what he said has some truth. Although somethings he said are oversimplified. Social changes happen due to multiple things together. Jainism and Buddhism are naastik philosophies I.e. they don't believe that vedas are true. Hence, they always criticise Brahmins and Brahmins criticised them. But irrespective whether Brahmins or Indians had cow meat at any point, today it's not the case. The problem is there are people who hate beef eaters. That is detrimental for peaceful coexistence. But the video kind of missed this crucial point. Eating beef doesn't make you less Indian as many people claim, because at some point that was the case and today Hindus just draw from the past. But if you are clear that we are following Hinduism based on Puranas and local traditions, then it's easy to understand why we don't eat beef. The issue is most Hindus want to believe that what they are doing has always been the case. Unfortunately, the video missed these crucial points and as you said, was not presented in good taste.

[@vb4168]

@@debishasharma7997 My problem is trying to "rub it in" and mock certain set people by showing picking and choosing random set of knowledge from past

[@moullikjain7535]

😂😂😂 because he likes meat , thats why they justify all that with unknown & baseless arguments

[@nagraj2k1]

From the actual paper (must read for armchair experts) Out of the domestic animals, cattle/buffalo are the most abundant, averaging between 50 and 60% of the animal bones found, with sheep/goat accounting for 10% of animal remains (Thomas, 2002; Miller, 2004; Joglekar et al., 2013; Chase, 2014). The high proportions of cattle bones may suggest a cultural preference for beef consumption across Indus populations, supplemented by the consumption of mutton/lamb. Pigs make up about 2-3% of total faunal assemblages across Indus sites but the domestic status of the pig is not yet determined (Thomas, 2002; Chase, 2014). Wild animal species like deer, antelope, gazelle, hares, birds, and riverine/marine resources are also found in small proportions in the faunal assemblages of both rural and urban Indus sites (Belcher, 2003; Deshpande Mukherjee, 1998), suggesting that these diverse resources had a place in the Indus diet. The pattern is similar at the sites in northwest India, where domestic and wild mammals, and smaller proportions of birds, reptiles, riverine fish, and molluscs were consumed (Joglekar et al., 2013).

[@ViswaMitrann]

Why? for the very same reasons - partially for moral reasons and partially to enhance their clout. Just like physics, the way classical physics and quantum physics explains same thing from different levels, in culture and tradition to there are differences when observed at philosophical level and at practical level. It is psycholog which makes it difficult for us to hold two different viewpoints, so we try to favour one over the other and look for justifications.

[@Raja-ct9xq]

Veg - seen as not so cruel method of food, how many of you know, what happens to those trees when they stop producing veg/fruits ?? They will chop it and burn them afterwords. I'm a non veg lover but not cruel to see the animals being culled to feed my taste buds. Eat to live, don't live to eat. You no need to quit meat, just Reduce the consumption of meat - you'll see the difference.

[@dwarasamudra8889]

What a stupid argument. Plants are not intelligent sentient beings, meanwhile animals are. Cows, Pigs, Dogs, Monkeys are all highly intelligent creatures with memories and the ability to express pain and grief. There is no comparison between them

[@Raja-ct9xq]

@@dwarasamudra8889 in the process of producing your veggies, animals are hurted too. Killed specifically just to save your veggies/fruits - if you attribute pain to how cute the animal looks and your awareness about that animal - then it's your heights of stupidity that needs attention. #Cheerio.

[@DipanjanPaul]

What are you trying to infer? Your channel always tries to spread propaganda. Indus Valley people ate beef so what? We have to eat beef then? Why don’t you highlight about Arabs worshiping Lat, Baal and Uzza in ancient times and advise them to worship them again leaving their monotheism ??

[@luciddoggo5094]

Stop being so fuckign insecure. Not eating meat is why hindu are fucking pussies, I'm a hindu and I eat meat

[@luciddoggo5094]

@@tamilagam05 im tired of thse hindus cucks who are scared of eating a chicken

[@groundzero5708]

@@luciddoggo5094 bro im from srilanka , buddhists peopl over here eat beef,pork, mutton and chicken . it crazy .

[@20shourya]

well the point is that if our 'evolved ancestors' ate all sort of stuff and had a hell of a great time, why should we be beaten up for having something most of the world enjoys with a glass of wine? There is always enough grass for 'pure' vegetarians.

[@debishasharma7997]

That's not the point. The issue is so many people just try to justify their current actions as traditions and eternal history and start hating and attacking others because of that. The point is to give another perspective that if our ancestors in distant past ate something, and we out of choice gave it up, do we then necessarily need to hate others who are practicing what our ancestors also used to do just because they are doing so?

[@sunny5610]

we are happy to export BEEF (india is 3rd largest exporter) but won't eat it ... let me tell you its very delicious and one must try it.

[@ashyjager]

Tamizh king Manu needhi Chozhan ordered killing his own son for killing a calf. So if you want to source dramas and plays against facts go ahead and make a fool of yourself. This is just a Dravidian party propaganda non sense video.

[@dummybava5971]

"Killing" not slaughtering. Also this time period is close to brahminism as ideological uprising amoung masses. Kshatriyas consumed meat including beef and pork. Go see people in dharmapuri-villupuram areas.

[@ashyjager]

@@dummybava5971 ok dummy

[@thestorytellercr9293]

Thank you dear young historian for giving valuable information about India's ancient history. I have subscribed to your channel. C R Dash

[@niteshsrivastava8931]

In medieval India non vegetarianism was surely prevalent, but your views suggest that why are religious leaders against it. Point is not about religion here. There was no Democracy that time, we have grown and have a more civil society now, we don't fight and live in societies as good people, In medieval India the societies themselves were surely more non-vegetarian, but were not very civil as well, as we live in a cleaner world where people respect each other why not respect the kind animals, and being civil and having democracy now not grant the poor animals the right to live. How can a poor animal who cannot fight for himself be consumed just for some taste, our eating habits could also become more civil as our lives and societies have become :)

[@pradeei.g7478]

There is, of course, food taboo regarding non- vegetarians, and there also is reverse food taboo for vegetarians. I ve seen ppl ridiculing vegetarians as "ghas pus eating ppl". I was born a vegetarian and then started eating non-veg. So I know of both worlds. For a nonveg eating person it is difficult to understand the vegetarian concept and sentiment and for a vegetarian it is vice-versa. Both need to respect each other and move on rather than ridiculing one another. Although it is hard to believe the explanation given by Anirudh regarding the origin of vegetarianism. I think as a historian Anirudh must know that whatever is written in medieval period should not be taken verbantin. For example a king may be glorified as having power of 100 elephant. Most of the time scriptures were used to glorify kings or the elites and it was a mode of expressing creativity. Anirudh has to do more research into the origins of vegetarianism. It cannot be explained merely by egalitarianism and ritualistic.

[@hemikovsky]

Nice series. Modern day self-styled religious gurus and the myth making gang busted!

[@hsuyaarchives2526]

selective reseacrch with anecdotes presented as facts flavoured with YUM YUM doesn't qualify it to be a part of history there are books contrary to that also incl. travelogues of fahien and other travellers to india.

[@assambinturong9612]

This is great insightful research

[@Cray-wilder]

I don't know i tried chicken mutton fish i don't like any of these. Maybe because i have been eating vegetarian diet all my life. My palate have grown to like flavourful veg food. Also it's like meat on plate stares at me as once a thing that walked and talked but now into pieces.

[@goodsong_views]

The yum-yum and mouth watering thing in middle and the sly (whomsoever it is meant to be at) is very cringy and non-academic. I would like it, if he presents the study as an impartial academic person, rather than someone stitching a narrative. The sources and literature is much appreciated but the lack of professionalism is not

[@ranjitpal9937]

Meat 🍖 Restriction On Holy Day

[@yerajoker3524]

slurp slurp Soros Putra yummm

[@sivaniam]

​ @Logicalmind The claim of "Surthi"; by itself is a folly without logic. To say that a lost language " specifically words as mentioned in the Mimamsa" was memorised unaltered is another folly. To say that the Vedic Language is the same / similar to the Classical Sanskrit is an even greater folly. You only claim all these as truth but no evidence. Only puranas say that Bada Narayana "compiled the Rig Veda"; but there is NO HISTORY. When was the Rig Vedas actually compiled - NO HISTORY only Purana. When was the Rig Veda first written down - again NO HISTORY only Purana. Which is the oldest Rig Veda script book available - only that written in 1464 AD. Where is the oldest Vedic language script found - NONE because the Vedic language never evolved to take a script. Everything you claim is only Purana (mythology); NOTHING HISTORICAL. The Vedic language does not does not even have a pottery scratch to lay claim of its ancestry. It only has other "older languages outside India" that is linked to denote its ancestry, which is fairly accepted. That is NOT THE SAME for other Indian languages like Pali and Tamil, which have a language, a script , many pottery evidences, cave writings, rock edits and many books. That is what we call as "solid proof", not some fancy mythological fairy tales thrusted by force to be taken as truth.

[@indiandude993]

Keep it going! 🔥

[@phillipii4709]

3:30 I can assure you that you didnt read that text otherwise you would have noticed the sarcasm behind it. It's shocking to see The print hiring a fool who is creating content on a book without reading the book. Shit !

[@raskolnikov7034]

Is this even relevant today

[@akhilrajt]

beef or cow ?

[@latasingh7013]

Aise program Hindi mei hone chahiye

[@apostatejulian-qh6ud]

3:05 keep ur yum yum 2 urself.

[@TRA]

No animal is safe near this guy 😂

[@phoebusapollo4677]

This person speaks to the dead!

[@magma9000]

LOVE FROM PAKISTAN

[@Real_Gigachaddi]

Always takes info from this channel with a grain of a salt.. they spew liberal Hindutva.. especially shekhar Gupta.

[@spidy9883]

@@Real_Gigachaddi and who are you .....a liberal jihadi?!......jai bhim people will be angry on your profile picture!!

[@ic9771]

@@Real_Gigachaddi What're you doing here then? Zaid Hamid & Orya Maqbool Jan channels are awaiting you .

[@yorisingrango9837]

Nikal yaha se bhosdike apne desh k channel pe ja k gand mara maradchod

[@Real_Gigachaddi]

@@ic9771 iam not a Pakistani..and i don't need your advice

[@sohambiswas7507]

Nothing much changed today. I believe so called godmen, priests and bramhins still eat meat (including beef) secretly while presenting themselves as vegetarian and pure.😂😂😂😂😂

[@ic9771]

Must be in Bongo where most of the so called tantriks are Momins who mostly have clientele who're Bongo Hindus especially women who can't conceive. You seem to be the result of one such "tantrik" upasana. 😭😭😭

[@ic9771]

@@Real_Gigachaddi know few Momins who relish pork too .Jinnah was a good example of it

[@ic9771]

@@Real_Gigachaddi who cares if you do or don't . Those are just facts

[@miked999]

Bangali....enough said 😆😆😆😆😆

[@sohambiswas7507]

Be it beef or pork or fish or egg or any kind of meat, guys its just food with a rich source of protein . If u like it eat it, if u dont like it dont eat it. Just focus on your own diet. Nobody should be forcing others in any way to eat and what not.

[@backbencher479]

Khate sabhi hai magar batata koi nahi.

[@shobhitdagur1086]

George Soros money is giving lecture.

[@supernerd8527]

This boy thinks by citing translations from some recent southern dynasties irrespective of the genre gives him the right to eat any kind of meat? Lol!

[@roshanrajakrishnan4435]

Manimegalai is from the 2nd century.

[@supernerd8527]

@@roshanrajakrishnan4435 that is recent compared to the Vedic civilization.

[@vaibhavdixit275]

Brahminsssssss ever forever ....vediccc🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩 humanity fisrt🙏🙏

[@hindurashtra63]

Of course Ancient Hindus ate Meat & Fish. Meat was restricted to only Brahmins. Nowhere in Hindu Texts does it say Meat is impure or restricted. It only forbids Beef (Cow meat), Ban on Meat does not come from Hindu belief, It originates from Buddhism. Over time, Buddhist belief was enforced on Whole of India by Tyrant king - Ashoka. There is a famous story of how a Kuruba (Forest Tribal) offered Shiva Deer meat and Shiva accepts it, Even though offering Animal flesh to Gods is forbidden. But the Tribal was ignorant so Shiva forgives him and accepted his offering. The Heroes of Mahabharat - The Entire Pandava and Kaurava lienage is descended from Satyavati (Fisherman's daughter).

[@groundzero5708]

ashoka didnt banned anyhing dude im a hindu from srilanka , here the buddhist people eat meat daily more than the muslims sometimes

[@AjitJoshi686]

Any paper in Opensource domain about these kababs in TN ?