One life is meant to be eaten by another. That is nature's law. But we should use discrimination in what kind of foodstuff we shall eat

Expressions researched:
"discrimination" |"discriminative" |"eat" |"eating"

Notes from the compiler: VedaBase research query: "discriminat* kill* eat*"@40

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

You must follow his instruction, "Thou shall not kill." You must have discrimination. You are human beings; you are not cats and dogs. You must have discrimination, what to eat, what to not eat. Because we have to eat some other living entity, it does not mean that I shall eat my sons and daughters.

Lecture on BG 4.10 Festival at Maison de Faubourg -- Geneva, May 31, 1974:

Translator: (translating questions from French) Jesus Christ..., it is said that he made the miracle of the fish and ate. So why is it that one should not eat meat?

Prabhupāda: Jesus Christ said, "You shall not kill." Why you are killing?

Translator: But then why did he eat fish?

Prabhupāda: He can eat the whole world, but you cannot do that. You must follow his instruction, "Thou shall not kill." You must have discrimination. You are human beings; you are not cats and dogs. You must have discrimination, what to eat, what to not eat. Because we have to eat some other living entity, it does not mean that I shall eat my sons and daughters. "Discrimination is the best part of valor." So far we are concerned, we are eating certainly vegetable, but not directly. We eat kṛṣṇa-prasādam. Kṛṣṇa says, patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati: (BG 9.26) "Anyone who offers Me with love and affection vegetables, grains, milk, I eat." So if there is any sin for eating vegetables, that is Kṛṣṇa's sin, not our sin. We take the prasādam. We are teaching people to eat kṛṣṇa-prasādam. We are not teaching people to become vegetarian or nonvegetarian. That is not our business. After all, we have to eat, so if we eat kṛṣṇa-prasādam... That is stated, yajña-śiṣṭāśinaḥ santo mucyante sarva-kilbiṣaiḥ: "If you accept prasādam which is offered to God, then you are free from all sinful resultant action."

Although the nature's law is like that, one animal or one living entity is the foodstuff for another, but that should be, there should be discrimination. But so far we are concerned, we are not killing anybody for eating purposes. We are eating kṛṣṇa-prasāda, foodstuff which is offered to Kṛṣṇa and then we eat.

Lecture on BG 13.22-24 -- Melbourne, June 25, 1974:

Then these animal killers, they may not be encouraged, "So then we are doing nice, because one living entity is food for another. So we are eating every, anything. Any moving animals we can eat. Bird, beast, goats, cows, horse, ass, whatever is available." Yes, you can eat. But that is the natural law for the animals and uncivilized man, not for the civilized man. Because one living entity is food for another living entity, you cannot eat your father, mother or children. Why? Because you are human being, you have got discrimination.

Of course, in the human form of life, in Africa, they are cannibals. They eat their grandfather as a feast. They make a feast. And, you will be not surprised, they like to eat white man. Yes. In some parts of the Africa, they, whenever they get opportunity to kidnap a white man, they like to eat very much. (laughter)

So although the nature's law is like that, one animal or one living entity is the foodstuff for another, but that should be, there should be discrimination. So so far we are concerned, Kṛṣṇa conscious men, we are not animals. We are perfect beings. We don't eat any living entity.

Those who are lower grade living entities, there... This is the struggle. One living entity is the food for another living entity. That is lower grade life. In the higher grade life, no, they cannot kill anyone for eating purposes. Therefore in the Bible the First Commandment is "Thou shalt not kill." But all these Christians, they are violating the First Commandment. That is their business. Simply engaged in killing, big, big slaughterhouse.

And they give the example that "Others are eating vegetable, that is also killing." Yes, that is also killing. But that I have already explained, that because one living entity is foodstuff for another living entity, that does not mean you shall eat your family members or any human being. No, there must be discrimination. But so far we are concerned, we are not killing anybody for eating purposes. We are eating kṛṣṇa-prasāda, foodstuff which is offered to Kṛṣṇa and then we eat. The remnants of foodstuff we eat.

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

There is order that one life is meant to be eaten by another. That is nature's law. But we should use discrimination in what kind of foodstuff, what kind of living entities we shall eat.

Lecture on SB 1.10.5 -- Mayapura, June 20, 1973:

So, in this way, there is order that one life is meant eaten by another. That is nature's law. But we should use discrimination what kind of foodstuff, what kind of living entities we shall eat. That Kṛṣṇa... (?). We have taken vow to eat only Kṛṣṇa's prasādam. There is something. Whatever Kṛṣṇa orders. So that is a fact that each and every living entity is meant for another living entity for eating. When we get human form of life, the animals, they, just like, another eat vegetables. Similarly, the cows. Nature's law is there. Although one animal is meant for by another these animals, they use their discrimination by nature's law. Tigers will never come to your garden to eat fruits and vegetables. No. By nature, they have got teeth and jaws to kill another animal. They want to eat, drink blood, fresh blood. Nature has given them all the provisions for that. Similarly, we human beings, this is scientific. Our teeth are meant for eating fruits. That is one Dr. Cooney, in your Germany. He said that... And actually, if you eat fruits and milk, you will have never any kind of sickness. That's a fact. So they're also life.

So we should use our discrimination. We... We, our only business is to become Kṛṣṇa conscious. So under Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we cannot eat anything which is not offered to Kṛṣṇa. So Kṛṣṇa says: patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati (BG 9.26). Kṛṣṇa does not say that "You give me meat, eggs and fish." Kṛṣṇa does not say.

The law is, nature's law is that "One living entity is the food for another living entity." Jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. But a human being should be discriminative. If I can live by eating fruits and grains and milk, why shall I kill animal? This is human consciousness.

Lecture on SB 6.1.17 -- Denver, June 30, 1975:

So that is sādhu, no meat-eating. Here you will find. In Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement you will find, nobody is meat-eating. Nobody is prepared to kill even an ant, what to speak of big animal. They put argument that "You are vegetarian, and you are also killing vegetable life." Of course, we are killing. But we are not killing vegetables. First of all, vegetables are not killed. If I take a fruit from the tree, the tree is not killed. Or if I take the grains from the plant, before the grains are ripe the plant dies. So actually there is no question of killing. Although the law is, nature's law is that "One living entity is the food for another living entity." Jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. But a human being should be discriminative. If I can live by eating fruits and grains and milk, why shall I kill animal? This is human consciousness. Milk, if you get milk, you can prepare hundreds of nice preparations, all full of vitamins and nourishing. In our New Vrindaban we are maintaining cows and having so many nice preparations, rābri and lagdu and this peḍā and baraphi and sandeśa and rasagullā and yogurt—varieties enough. The other farmers they come, they are surprised, that "Such nice preparation can be made from milk?" Yes, you do not know. You do not know how to utilize the animal. Ignorance. The milk is also produced out of the blood.

So it is intelligence. You are drinking the blood in a different way, produced by nature with more vitamin values and more taste and more gentleman. Why should you kill one cow and try to drink the blood? The blood is there already, but in a different form, without any violence. And we have seen it. It is practical experience that if the cows are assured they would not be killed, they will give you double milk. That we have experience.

Even we eat vegetable, that is also killing. But because I have to kill somebody to eat, that does not mean that I can kill my child also. That is also going on. There is discrimination. Similarly, our principle is that we are kind, merciful, to everyone. But we have to eat, so we eat Kṛṣṇa prasādam.

Lecture on SB 6.1.17 -- Honolulu, May 17, 1976:

Why we are preaching "No meat-eating"? If you stop meat-eating, then the poor animals will be saved. So what business we have got with the animals? Suhṛdaḥ sarva-bhūtānām. A saintly person is friend to everyone. "Why unnecessarily an animal should be killed?" That is his feeling. You can eat animals because by nature this is the arrangement, that ahastāni sa-hastānām. Even we eat vegetable, that is also killing. But because I have to kill somebody to eat, that does not mean that I can kill my child also. That is also going on. There is discrimination. Similarly, our principle is that we are kind, merciful, to everyone. But we have to eat, so we eat Kṛṣṇa prasādam. Because after all, Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord. So if He eats something, the responsibility is His. But we are not advocate of vegetarianism or nonvegetarianism. No. That is not our business. We are Kṛṣṇa-ites. What Kṛṣṇa said, we have to do.

Philosophy Discussions

You can say that "I must eat some, another living entity. That is by nature's law. So I produce my children and I kill them and I eat them so that the population problem will be solved." You can say that. Will you be accepted? So therefore there must be discrimination.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Śyāmasundara: I observe in nature that everything is killing something else for eating so it seems only rational that I should be able to eat animals.

Prabhupāda: Well, that also accepted in the Vedic philosophy, jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. One life is, one living being is food for another living being. But that does not mean that you shall kill your son and eat, and it will be supported by the society. That is discrimination, that is conscience. You can say that "I must eat some, another living entity. That is by nature's law. So I produce my children and I kill them and I eat them so that the population problem will be solved." You can say that. Will you be accepted? So therefore there must be discrimination. That you have to eat another living being, that is nature's law, but if you eat fruit, you don't kill the tree. You take the fruit. If you eat vegetables, you take, still it is growing, and that is a factually not killing. But if you eat animals, you are killing. Actually he is being dead. So things should be done intelligently so that... The word is to make the best use of a bad bargain. So our philosophy is that although you can take that, although it is not killing, it is taking fruits, flowers and vegetables, it is taking from him, it is not killing, and we are offering to Kṛṣṇa and so if there is any responsibility, it is Kṛṣṇa's responsibility. We take the prasāda. Therefore we have no such responsibility and that is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, bhuñjate te tv agham pāpā ye pacanty ātma-kāraṇāt (BG 3.13). Anyone who is cooking for himself, he is taking all responsibility for sinful activity even if he is a vegetarian, it doesn't matter. Yajña-śiṣṭāśinaḥ santo mucyante sarva-kilbiṣaiḥ. But if he takes the remnants of yajña—we are offering Kṛṣṇa daily—this is performing yajña. So we are taking the remnants of yajña. This is our philosophy. We are not taking directly. If I take directly, either a vegetarian or non-vegetarian, then I become responsible. Sinful. This is our philosophy. The law is there, but we have to tackle things very intelligently.

1975 Conversations and Morning Walks

Discrimination is the better part of valor. Whom should we kill? It is all right. Jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. But there is important. If you eat vegetables there is no crisis, you can go on.

Morning Walk -- May 7, 1975, Perth:

Gaṇeśa: Some people say that in our philosophy, if we do not wish to slaughter the animals, what about the trees? We are killing the plants. They are also living entities.

Prabhupāda: If you compare the animals and the trees as the same, then why not kill yourself, your brother? Why do you distinguish? Why don't you slaughter your own son? Why do you distinguish?

Gaṇeśa: He's a relative.

Prabhupāda: You discriminate. If you are slaughtering animals and you are comparing that killing of the vegetables and the killing of the animals is the same, then killing your son and killing an animal is also the same. Why do you discriminate? Just kill your own son and eat.

Paramahaṁsa: He's a human being, though.

Prabhupāda: Ah, therefore there is discrimination. Discrimination is the better part of valor. Whom should we kill? It is all right. Jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. But there is important. If you eat vegetables there is no crisis, you can go on. It is a fact that an animal is eating another animal. It may be vegetables or animals, but they are disturbing. Therefore it is said, "As it is allotted." You should eat such and such. Not that indiscriminately you can eat everything.

There is enough supply of grass, but you cannot have enough supply of cows. Therefore discrimination is that it is better to live on grass than on animals.

Morning Walk -- May 7, 1975, Perth:

Prabhupāda: If you think killing of an animal and killing a vegetable is the same, then killing of your son and killing of animals or vegetable is the same. Why do you discriminate? What is your answer?

Gaṇeśa: So if we discriminate between the animals and the plants, well what about the discrimination between the human beings and the animals? Is it not all right to kill animals and not human beings?

Prabhupāda: No. You discriminate actually. You do not kill human beings, but you kill animals. Similarly you discriminate: instead of killing animals, kill vegetables. Importance. Just like this grass. There is enough supply of grass, but you cannot have enough supply of cows. Therefore discrimination is that it is better to live on grass than on animals. Now, still they are eating seventy-five percent other than animals. They are not eating only animals. Why not twenty-five percent more? In the market they are not eating animal. When the animal-eaters I see, they have got a little flesh, surrounded by salad and these peas and so many other things. Why don't you eat only meat?

Śrutakīrti: Because we require a balanced diet.

Prabhupāda: No, you cannot supply. If everyone eats meat only, then one day all animals will be finished.

Paramahaṁsa: But we want to have a balanced diet with meat, and vegetables and fruit.

Prabhupāda: That balance of diet can be done by grains and vegetables. Why should we kill animals? We know that, the balance can be done. You learn from us that balanced food can be done.

Amogha: But in the Bible it says that God gave animals to the man.

Prabhupāda: For protection. Not for eating. Rascals. Bible does not say that you kill animals. Then Jesus Christ is a hypocrite. His commandment is, "Thou shalt not kill." If he allows killing, then why does he say, "Thou shalt not kill"?

God has given to the human society so many things to eat: nice fruits, nice flowers, nice grains, first-class milk. And from milk, you can prepare hundreds of nutritious foods. But they do not know the art. They are maintaining big, big slaughterhouse and eating meat. No discrimination. That means they are not even civilized.

Room Conversation with writer, Sandy Nixon -- July 13, 1975, Philadelphia:

Sandy Nixon: Does one function better in society as a result of affiliation with Kṛṣṇa consciousness?

Prabhupāda: What is the meaning?

Ravīndra-svarūpa: Is he a better citizen?

Sandy Nixon: And also sociologically or cultu... Can he work better in the community?

Prabhupāda: That you can see practically. They are not drunkards, they are not meat-eaters. From physiological point of view, they are very clean. They will never be attacked with so many diseases. Then they do not eat meat, means that is the most sinful, to kill others for the satisfaction of the tongue. God has given to the human society so many things to eat: nice fruits, nice flowers, nice grains, first-class milk. And from milk, you can prepare hundreds of nutritious foods. But they do not know the art. They are maintaining big, big slaughterhouse and eating meat. No discrimination. That means they are not even civilized. When man is not civilized, he kills one animal and eats because he does not know how to grow food. Just like we have got one farm land, in New Vrindaban. So we are preparing so first-class preparation from milk, the neighbours they come, they are astonished that from milk such nice preparation can be done, hundreds. So that means they are not even civilized, how to prepare nutritious food from milk. Milk-accepting that cow flesh and blood is very nutritious, that we also admit—but a civilized man utilizes the blood and meat in a different way. The milk is nothing but blood. But it is transformed into milk. And again, from milk you make so many things. You make yogurt, you make curd, you make ghee, so many things. And combination of these milk products with grains, with fruits and vegetables, you make similar hundreds of preparation. So this is civilized life, not that directly kill one animal and eat. That is uncivilized life. You take the-accepting that cow's flesh and blood is very nutritious—you take it in a civilized way. Why you should kill? It is innocent animal. Is simply eating grass given by God and supplying milk. And from milk you can live. And the gratefulness is that cut his throat? Is that civilization?

1976 Conversations and Morning Walks

In the human form of life if one thinks—now they are eating—that "Another living being is my food, so I kill my own child and eat," so you mean to say to apply the same law, that "A living entity is food for another living entity. Therefore a human being kill his own child and eat?"

Room Conversation -- April 23, 1976, Melbourne:

Guest (2): That's true. And we have many people who are in the church who strive to teach people of the church to eat more grains and milk products and...

Guru-kṛpā: That is not the point Śrīla Prabhupāda is making.

Prabhupāda: No, point is that every living being has to eat another living being. That is the law of nature.

Guest (2): Right.

Prabhupāda: Jivo jīvasya jīvanam. That we admit. But in the human form of life if one thinks—now they are eating—that "Another living being is my food, so I kill my own child and eat," so you mean to say to apply the same law, that "A living entity is food for another living entity. Therefore a human being kill his own child and eat?"

Guest (2): Well, see, we...

Prabhupāda: "Discrimination is the best part of valor." So you have to eat something, but if you have got grains, vegetables, milk, very nice preparation, why should you kill cow?

Guest (2): Well, we believe that the Lord ordained that food for man, and that He even said in scripture to the prophet...

Prabhupāda: So He said? He ordained cow for your food?

Guest (2): He ordained meat. Yes.

Devotee (4): But only in times of starvation and famine.

Guest (2): Well, the matter.... It also said...

Devotee (4): That is the word of wisdom in the Mormon scripture.

Guest (2): I don't want to get in contentions about it, but the scripture also says that who abstains from meat is not ordained of God. So you can take it whatever way you want.

Prabhupāda: What is that? "One who abstains from meat"?

Guest (2): Well, he's trying to say that the Mormons overeat meat. And all I'm saying is, well, the scripture which was revealed to the modern-day prophet Joseph Smith was that "Whoever.... Who does abstained from meat is not ordained of God." And I have no intentions to get contentious about it. So all I'm saying is I'm honored to be here, and it's good to be here.

Prabhupāda: No, no, the point is that in the Commandment it is clearly said, "Thou shall not kill." So what does it mean? That unless there is absolute necessity, we shall not kill.

Guest (2): I think that's right, and I feel that way.