Can Hindus Eat BEEF? | Kerala Story 2 EXPOSED | Dhruv Rathee

Hello! Recently, another hateful propaganda film was released. No, I am not talking about the one out just now. I am talking about the one before this. Kerala Story 2. It had the same narrative. Show every Muslim as a villain, and show every Hindu girl as a fool. But there was one scene that was very special. It went viral. In the film's trailer, a Hindu girl was forced to eat beef. Interestingly, the same discussion was going on in the comments. It is a crime to feed someone beef without parotta. It is not a Kerala story; it is a North Indian story. We like the Parotta-Beef combo. Imagine 100 Hindus are sitting in a room. How many of them eat meat? Guess and tell me. 20? 30? Well, Pew Research Center's data says 56. More than half of Hindus are non-vegetarian. And 45% of Brahmins are non-vegetarian. So the question is, where did the idea come from that real Hindus are only vegetarian? How did beef become such a sensitive issue for some Hindus? The answer to this is hidden in the scriptures and our history. Let's understand it in today's video. Today, there are millions of Hindus in the country who do not eat meat for religious reasons. And this is true according to the scriptures. In chapter 116 of the Anushasan Parva in the Mahabharata, Bhishma is asked by Yudhishthira, "Does meat harm you?" Bhishma says that a king who does not eat the meat of any animal for his whole life finds a great place in heaven. Meat-eaters are cooked in the Kumbhipak hell. Innocence is the supreme religion. It is the supreme self. It is the supreme gift and the supreme penance. Now, you might think that this is clear. But wait a minute. Bhishma says something else in the same conversation. Quoting Manu, he says, "The meat that has been sanctified by the mantras according to the rules of the Vedas, and is made for the ancestors, that meat is pure." In other words, both points are being made in the same conversation. And this contradiction is not limited to Bhishma alone. In the Vyas Samhita, a major text of Hinduism, it is clearly written that a Brahmin should not eat the meat of any animal that has been killed for any purpose other than religious sacrifice. And when performing religious rituals, the Brahmin should eat meat. The warrior should eat meat after pleasing the gods and his ancestors. And the poor can eat meat bought after worshipping their ancestors. Now look at Manusmriti. In Manusmriti chapter 5, verse 27, it is said that you can eat meat that is purified by a mantra and sprinkled with water. You might be thinking that it is fine, and that there are a few references in the scriptures, but who actually eats it in practice? Today's world is different, and traditions have changed. It is difficult to digest, but it is true. Even today, eating meat is part of the culture of many Brahmins. And it is not a secret. many Saraswati Brahmins in the Konkan region eat fish as "sea flowers." They say that once the Saraswati River dried up, causing a famine. fish was their only livelihood. It is common for Bengali Brahmins to eat fish. And fish is not just food, but part of their rituals as well. There is a ritual in Bengali weddings, Tatva Rasam, in which the groom's family gives the bride's family a gift of a rohu fish. Even during the death rites, fish is eaten on the 13th day of the Matsya Mukhi Anushthan. And not just fish, fish and mutton in the Tarapith Temple, mutton in the Kalighat Temple in Kolkata, fish and mutton in the Kamakhya Temple in Assam, mutton in the Tarakulla Devi Temple in Uttar Pradesh, fish and mutton in the Vimla Temple in Odisha, and chicken and mutton biryani in the Muniandi Swami Temple in Tamil Nadu. You heard it right. Biryani in a temple. There are many temples where the goddess and the gods are offered meat. And it is offered to the devotees as Prasad. Many people say that the mention of animal sacrifice in the scriptures is merely a metaphor. Meaning, the sacrifice of the animal inside you. But in reality, even outside the scriptures, in history and in temples, we see it literally happening. Meat and religion are often connected. Now, a question arises that many people have raised. Did the Pandavas and Shri Ram also eat meat? If common sense were applied, who would have been making paneer butter masala for them for 12 years? Did the Pandavas spend 12 years eating only fruit from trees? We do not need to guess here. Look at chapter 256 of the book Vana Parva in the Mahabharata. Yudhishthira dreams of some deer coming to him and saying that his brothers have killed so many deer that only the last few are left. They request Yudhishthira to let them live like "seeds" so that they can repopulate. Yudhishthira is sad, and he says to his brothers that they have been depending on them for the past year and eight months. Now, he goes to another forest. One year and eight months! Imagine, the Pandavas were eating deer meat for such a long time that the deer population started to dwindle in the forest. This question arises in the Ramayana with Shri Ram. Did Ram eat meat too? The truth is that in the Vedic and Valmiki Ramayana, there are examples of people eating meat. Swami Vivekananda also wrote in his book, The East and the West, that modern culture finds itself in a dilemma. In the Ramayana and Mahabharata, there are examples of Ram and Krishna eating meat and drinking Madira. Sita Devi, to the river goddess, vowed to Ganga that she would offer meat, rice, and wine a thousand times. Sita ji is offering meat to Ganga. This is the Ayodhya Kanda, chapter 52, verse 89 of the Valmiki Ramayana. Swami Vivekananda refers to this verse. And in the Mahabharata's Udyog Parva, chapter 58, verse 5, Sanjay says that he saw Krishna and Arjun wearing sandalwood paste, wearing a garland of flowers, and drinking a glass of Madhvasav. And look at Arjun's own oath. Drona Parva, Chapter 73. When Arjun goes to fight Jayadratha, he says, if he is unable to kill Jayadratha by tomorrow, he should be punished as one who has committed sins. As if he kills his parents, or kills a Brahmin, or says something wrong about someone, or eats kheer or meat without offering it to the divine. Do you understand? Arjun is not saying that eating meat is a sin. He is saying that eating meat without offering it properly is wrong. Meaning that eating meat was normal, provided they followed a ritual protocol. Now, those of you who are Hindus in states like Himachal, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Rajasthan, or Haryana, would find this very strange. Because in all these states, even touching meat is seen as ruining one's religion. And yet Arjun talks about feeding meat to the gods. But this still happens in many temples. The Dakshineshwar Kali Temple in West Bengal, the Thanthanya Kali Bari Temple, and a fish feast is offered at the Parassinikadavu Temple in Kerala. Apart from this, I will also mention some other shlokas of the Ramayana that have references to meat, in case you think these references were cherry-picked. In the Ayodhya Kanda, Chapter 52, Shloka 102, where a boar, antelope, and deer were hunted, their meat was mentioned. In Chapter 96, Shlokas 1 and 2, there is a discussion about roasted meat. In Chapter 36 of the Sundara Kanda, when Hanuman goes to Sita, he says that Ram neither eats meat nor Madira. In the Sundara Kanda, not eating meat is a matter that has been specifically mentioned. When something is specifically mentioned, it means that it was otherwise normal, and current abstinence is unusual. There are some people who interpret Madira as honey and meat as roots or fruit. Their agenda is to promote vegetarianism. And I respect their intentions. In fact, I am a vegetarian myself. I never eat meat. And I am not promoting non-vegetarianism through this video. I am showing you the truth of the scriptures. Saying that our Hindu scriptures only promote 100% pure vegetarianism is wrong. In chapter 6, section 4 of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, look at Shloka 18. It is said that if a scholar wishes to have a son, he should eat rice cooked with a vigorous bull's meat. He and his wife should eat it with ghee. This is not just about the scriptures. We also find evidence in actual history that in ancient India, meat was a common food. Meat was recommended for treating many diseases in the Charaka Samhita. But the biggest question here is, how and when did all this change? Since when and why was vegetarianism considered pure and meat considered impure? We will discuss this in the next video. But before that, did you notice that so many different references have been used in this video? Some are surveys, some are historical texts. It takes a lot of time to compare all this data. But today, AI can do this kind of research, data analysis, and reporting very quickly. Today, people are doing hours of research in minutes, making professional presentations, without writing code, and creating their websites and projects. Even the visuals in this video have been greatly helped by AI. I teach you all these things in my AI Masterclass. It is a 3-hour workshop where I personally teach you the 25 most important AI tools. The next session is this Sunday, and this is the last opportunity for you to join. The link to join can be found in the description below, or you can scan this QR code. More than 100,000 people have become part of this AI revolution. And this is the most affordable and fastest opportunity for you to upskill yourself in AI. You can join quickly. Now let's get back to the story of this shift. Its story begins in the 5th century BC. Mahavir Jain advocated a strictly vegetarian diet. Live and let live. Gautam Buddha once said that if someone offers meat to a Bhikshu as alms, the Bhikshu should eat it. Because a Bhikshu should not ask for anything specific. Apart from this, they have always promoted vegetarianism. The history of this region is very interesting. This is the reason why, to stop the growing influence of Jainism and Buddhism, the Hindu religion incorporated vegetarianism. Many Hindus, especially Brahmins and traders, became vegetarian. Brahmins derived moral authority from it. Because they did not eat meat, they were considered pure. They felt superior because of it. And the traders became vegetarian too because they could afford the lifestyle. Do you see the pattern here? Being a vegetarian was an economic privilege. Those who could afford it became "pure." And those who could not afford it were declared impure. Dalits had a different situation. They were poor and they continued to eat meat, including beef. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar noted that food restrictions created two dividing lines. One between vegetarians and meat-eaters, and the other between those who eat beef and those who do not. He said the second line was the one that separated the untouchables from others. You can find Dr. Ambedkar's writing on the International Monastery website. You can also find the link in the resource document. The dividing line that Dr. Ambedkar talked about is not just theoretical; it is also seen in actual numbers. Three large-scale government surveys have estimated that most Indians are non-vegetarians. The percentage of non-vegetarians is estimated to be between 63% and 77%. Talking about communities, we see even more interesting data. In India's communities, the most extensive survey, the Anthropological Survey of India, was conducted in 1993. It was called "The People of India." 500 sociologists were selected based on their local community knowledge. They were sent to the field with a team of 3,000 researchers. They researched 736 traits in 4,635 communities across the country. This went on for 8 years. And they prepared a report of 46,000 pages. A report of 46,000 pages. According to this report, across different religions, approximately 88% of Indian communities are meat-eaters. The Pew Research Center survey also shows a religious divide. It found that only 44% of the Hindu community is vegetarian, whereas 92% of the Jain community is vegetarian. And this is no coincidence. The entire history I told you about is clearly evident here. People who could afford a strictly vegetarian diet were often part of Jainism. Only 3% of them are SC and 1% are ST. Even today, Jains are India's wealthiest community. The question here is, didn't the other 56% of Hindus have any connection with religion? No. 39% of Hindus are non-vegetarians, but they apply conditions. First, their religiousness stops them from eating specific types of meat. Second, they stop eating meat on specific days. Like they won't eat meat on Tuesdays or during Navratri; some Hindus avoid eating meat for the whole month. According to this survey, only 16% of Hindus are non-vegetarians who have no restrictions. And most importantly, caste affects choice. The survey also shows that the percentage of non-vegetarians in SC, ST, and OBC groups is high. In these communities, 60% were non-vegetarians, while the general category had 47% non-vegetarians. In 2006, the State of the Nation survey by The Hindu and CNN-IBN showed this difference. In a survey of 15,000 respondents, it was shown that 88% of tribals eat meat. While 45% of Brahmins were meat-eaters. Listen to this number carefully. 45% of Brahmins are non-vegetarians. Another interesting thing found in the NSSO survey of the Indian government, which was conducted on 1,001,000 households, was that 70% of the Hindus who ate beef were from SC or ST backgrounds. The dividing line that Dr. Ambedkar mentioned can be seen in the actual numbers. By looking at this data, you can understand Indian politics better. You can understand why Congress leader Rahul Gandhi openly cooked mutton with RJD leader Lalu Yadav. Because he knew that most Hindus would not be offended by it, especially SC, ST, and OBC members. While PM Modi, during the elections, was making an issue out of mutton and fish. Because many people call the BJP the party of Brahmins and Baniyas. In the month of Sawan, you are enjoying making mutton. Not only that, you make a video of it and make the people of the country angry. Many people in the general category, upper-caste Brahmins, support the BJP because the BJP favors the upper castes. Or at least, that is how it is perceived. Because the double standard of the BJP is clearly seen in Kerala and the Northeast. In the ASI study in Kerala, it was found that Even 20 years after the ASI survey, we get reports from the Times of India, Tribune, and The Print that even today, there are Hindus in Kerala who eat meat. And if they are non-vegetarian, they eat beef like any other meat. Eating beef is not a social stigma in Kerala. And you can see the impact on politics once again. In 2017, during the Malappuram by-election, BJP candidate N. Sreeprakash promised that if people voted for him, he would ensure good quality beef. You heard it right. A BJP candidate promised quality beef. In 2021, the BJP promised to stop cow slaughter in Tamil Nadu. But for the Kerala state elections, this promise was nowhere to be found in the BJP manifesto. 83% of the people in Tripura are Hindus. But during the Tripura state elections in 2023, in the manifesto of the Bharatiya Janata Party, there was no mention of beef or cows. The RSS spokesman and election manager of the BJP in Tripura, Sunil Deodhar, said in 2018 that there is a large number of Christians and Muslims in the Northeast. It may be difficult for people to understand, but many Hindus here eat beef. And if they do not want a beef ban, then it should not happen. There are many Hindus in the Northeast who are having a hard time getting food. But it should be known that facts are facts. Some people are Hindus who eat beef. If they do not want it banned, it should not be banned. That's why they didn't ban it. And then watch this video. A viral video of BJP spokesperson Sudhanshu Trivedi. Is cow eaten in the Northeast? No. It is called Mithun. So the politics that the BJP is playing in North Indian states, making people violent in the name of beef, and scaring people in the name of beef, and their propaganda films which once again polarize people, using fear of beef. It is all a drama. When they want votes, beef becomes okay for them. And when they want polarization in the Hindi belt, beef becomes a sin. It has nothing to do with religion. It is all about politics. Geography plays a big role here too. In the State of the Nation survey conducted by CSDS, it is seen that there are regional variations. In coastal states, the population of vegetarians is very low. In Kerala, only 2% of the population is vegetarian. In Andhra Pradesh, only 4%. In Odisha, only 8%. In West Bengal, only 3%. Whereas in landlocked states in the West and North, where it is difficult to find fish and easier to grow wheat, the percentage of vegetarians is the highest. In Rajasthan, 63%. And in Haryana, 62% of the population is vegetarian. Apart from caste and geography, there is a gender divide as well. Can you guess who has the highest percentage of vegetarians among males and females? Pause the video and think for a second. You might guess that women have a higher percentage of vegetarians. And this guess is absolutely correct. This has been seen in many surveys like the National Family Health Survey 5; the percentage of women who occasionally eat meat is 70, while for Indian men, the percentage is 83. This trend is not only seen in Hindus but also in other religions, where men eat more meat than women. Surprisingly, even after all this, most people say that being a vegetarian is about their faith and their religion. But all these surveys show that being a vegetarian does not depend on personal beliefs as much as on the cultural practice of their heritage. Being a vegetarian or non-vegetarian, geography, economic well-being, and caste play a much bigger role than creed. This is the truth of Hinduism. India is a diverse country, and Hindus also comprise a wide variety of people. On one side, there are non-vegetarians, who might even be Aghoris in certain contexts. On the other side, there are people like Sudha Murthy, who take their own spoon and plate with them. Because they are such strict vegetarians that they can smell meat even in clean utensils. They are so pure, they can smell meat anywhere. "I can smell mutton in this." If you want to be a vegetarian, then do it. Because it is better for the environment. From the perspective of animal cruelty, it is morally and ethically right. Even from the perspective of climate change, a vegetarian diet contributes less to climate damage. And from the perspective of health, many scientific studies have found that people who eat less meat live longer and stay healthier. Considering all these points, choose to become a vegetarian. Like me. But do not become a vegetarian just because you think eating meat will destroy your religion. Meat is not inherently "impure." I don't eat it on a Tuesday, for example. Honestly, the philosophy of non-violence is genuinely powerful. Jainism and Buddhism have kept compassion at the center, and many Hindus have adopted that path by choice. It is a beautiful philosophical tradition. But the problem begins when it becomes a tool for moral superiority and caste hierarchy. The diversity of the Hindu religion is evident in its scriptures and history. And this is something that you will never find out from these hateful propaganda films. There are many such films that are full of lies, with the sole purpose of spreading hatred among people. Sometimes they distort history and present it in a way that goes against their own religion. To learn more about myths like Love Jihad, I have exposed them in this video. You can click here to watch it. And don't forget to join the AI Masterclass by clicking here. It's your last opportunity. Thank you very much!