History of Vegitarianism and Cow Veneration in India

Author(s): Willem B Bollee
Publisher: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd

Page 11

HISTORY OF VEGETARIANISM IN INDIA
Heesterman objects to Alsdorf's taking the contradictions in texts such as Manu as chronological successions and would rather parallel the monk, who can only lead a sinless life thanks to the layman's killing his food and water, to the yajamāna, the person who pays for and profits from the sacrifice, enabled to partake of the meat by the Vedic priest who kills the victim. Thus the cycle of life and death can only be broken by renouncers who avoid death by ahimsa. This would explain the juxtaposition of contradictions and also point to the problem of the origin of ahimsā.
As to this problem, Schmidt in his first paper 'Origin of ahimsa' (1962, reprinted here) thinks Alsdorf 'lost sight of the difference between ahimsa and vegetarianism' (last para but one of p. 626) and would himself imagine the latter to be a popularized version of the former doctrine. To that end he is searching 'for the specific motives on which the rule of ahimsa for the brahmanic renouncer is based' (last para of ch. I). He then establishes that in Vedic texts ahimsā is not expected of the common man, but a brahmin 'following the ahimsikā vṛtti accepts only food... killed by others' (last para but one of p. 635) and a Vedic student has to keep the vow of ahimsa which is a means of penance. Thus the idea of ahimsā may have 'originated among world renouncers, was adopted by the Brāhmaṇas and finally considered to be a rule for the whole society' (first para of ch. III) for which the brahmins were the social example.
From the Bhrgu-legend Schmidt deduces that the ritualists were animists who put plants and animals on a par with man and animals and thus wanted to eliminate the evil consequences of killing and hurting them. The verb 'to kill' is replaced by 'to appease'. Schmidt then emphasizes the similarity of the Vedic and Jain animistic Weltanschauung, and the connection of ahimsa and belief in reincarnation. Absolute renunciation: may lead to final release from transmigration, but 'the ethical motivation of non-violence is secondary: the original motive was fear resulting from the breakdown of magico-ritualistic world-conception' (last sentence of p. 655).
In Schmidt's second appendix here he continues his study of ahimsa and reincarnation, the ideas the three Indian religions share and which thus in his view may also have a common source. Salvation from transmigration is only possible for renouncers, those that is, who strictly practise ahimsā, as against the loose ahimsa of the laity (which Śvetâmbaras of course disagree with). Schmidt further argues with Wezler who thinks magico-ritual fear of destroying life in any form is not the only ground of ahimsa, but does not suggest other causes.