It is generally believed that meat,eggs etc. are needed to build strong bones and muscle. These would be called Rajasic foods. Does scripture allow Kshatriyas to directly eat Rajasic/Tamasic foods? Or do these foods have to be made Saatvic through mantras/rites before they can be eaten?

This question is not focused on meat. It is about non-Sattvic food in general.


1 Answer 1


Or do these foods have to be made Saatvic through mantras/rites before they can be eaten?

According to Mahābhārata, Kṣatriyas can hunt all wild animals and consume their meat directly:

Desirous of benefiting all men, the high-souled Agastya, by the aid of his penances, dedicated, once for all, all wild animals of the deer species to the deities. Hence, there is no longer any necessity of sanctifying those animals for offering them to the deities and the Pitris.

The Critical Edition (Bibek Debroy's translation), provides additional context:

Listen to the ordinances that have been laid down for kshatriyas. If they eat meat that has been obtained through their own valour, they do not incur any sin. All deer and wild animals are said to have been dedicated to all the gods. O king! This was done by Agastya in ancient times and that is the reason hunting is praised. There can be no hunting without being prepared to give up one’s own life. O king! There is thus no difference in form between the one who is killing and the one who is being killed. O descendant of the Bharata lineage! That is the reason all the rajarshis went on hunts. The learned say that this does not lead to their being tainted by any sin.

  • To bring relevance of above scripture to current lifestyle, there must also be a definition in the same text, on who exactly is a Kshatriya. Most people today who eat at McDonalds are not, so above cannot be misconstrued as leeway for everyone to binge on meat.
    – ram
    Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 0:38
  • @mar Only flesh of a hunted animal can be partaken lawfully. McDonalds' cases ain't included anyway. Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 3:04
  • @Mr.Sigma. - semantics. what exactly is hunted ? killing them with a knife is part of hunting. killing a 'free-range' cow with a stun gun is also 'hunting'. any amount of justification can be made to call something as hunting.
    – ram
    Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 3:06
  • @mar "They do not incur any fault by eating flesh that has been acquired by expenditure of prowess..." — Bhishma. Hunting has commotions of prowess at the expenses of one's life... If I were to obtain flesh by hunting, however unlikely today, I won't accrue any sin. Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 3:15
  • @Mr.Sigma. walking to mcdonalds and buying chicken is an expenditure of my prowess. hence it is hunting. hence no sin.
    – ram
    Commented Apr 1, 2021 at 4:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .