Video summary
The video transcript presents a heated debate regarding the ethics of killing animals for food and the validity of religious dietary restrictions. The discussion begins by challenging the notion that certain actions are inherently wrong simply because they violate traditional norms, suggesting instead that individuals should seek government intervention if specific practices like goat slaughter need to be banned rather than relying on personal moral arguments. A central point of contention is whether causing pain or killing an animal for sustenance can ever be justified; while one participant argues that animals feel pain equally and thus deserve protection from violence regardless of their ability to speak, the opposing view suggests that eating meat is a matter of personal choice and religious freedom, noting that even those who eat chicken do not necessarily believe it causes less suffering than other forms of consumption.
The conversation delves deeper into the logic behind vegetarianism versus non-vegetarian diets, with one speaker arguing that breeding animals specifically for food creates unnecessary suffering compared to eating wild-caught prey where nature dictates the food chain. However, this argument is countered by the reality that modern agriculture involves caged breeding rather than hunting in the wild, leading to a paradoxical conclusion that if killing bred animals is wrong, then even plant consumption might be questioned since plants are also living entities harvested for survival. The dialogue highlights the disconnect between civilized society and natural instincts, questioning whether humans have truly evolved beyond being predators or if their current lifestyle of breeding livestock makes them complicit in disrupting ecological balances without realizing it.
Towards the end, the discussion shifts to human interactions and the concept of intent, drawing parallels between how people treat animals and how they interact with others through teasing or compliments. The speakers argue that while negative actions like bullying or harming someone are wrong regardless of justification, positive intentions such as giving genuine compliments do not constitute harm because they are consensual and uplifting. This distinction is used to explain why some followers might justify eating meat based on personal happiness rather than moral obligation, though this utilitarian approach raises concerns about potential societal decay where individuals feel free to act violently if it brings them joy without regard for consequences or laws.
Ultimately, the video concludes with a reflection on whether such permissive attitudes toward violence and selfishness have led to a chaotic world filled with crime and disregard for life. One participant expresses skepticism that their videos can awaken people anymore since society seems already desensitized, yet they maintain that true change comes from within when compassion arises in an individual's heart rather than through external laws or protests. The final takeaway suggests that while personal freedom allows individuals to choose what makes them happy—even if it involves killing animals—the collective mindset of prioritizing one's own desires over the suffering caused by others is a dangerous trend that undermines social harmony and ethical responsibility.
Read the full video transcript
It is wrong. But it does not leave. That's his [laughs]
head.
Your religion tells some people to
kill, and others to not kill.
Where is goat used religiously? It
is Bakra Eid.
Look, look, look. If the government wants, the
seeds can be banned, right?
Absolutely.
Yes. So ask the government. Don't ask us, please.
Why are you asking us? You should ask this thing
from the government.
You got angry with someone. We have come to
McLord Ganj this time to talk to the people about an important issue
which may be a little
controversial. These
dogs roam in the street every day. If
I don't like him and I chase him away with a stick, am I
doing anything wrong? It is a
good thing to know something without any age.
You tell me, I have to do it.
That is wrong. Just because they are
voiceless, it does not mean that
they do not have rights.
What is your problem? If you
don't like the dog then get him moved on,
why should you get him beaten by the municipality people, by
Allah, he is coming to harm me,
if he goes to harm me then why should he be beaten, friend,
this is a very subjective thing, it is
wrong and it is not wrong, well,
why is it wrong, the answer to it has been given by them,
why is it wrong
because animals should not be killed
and why is it not wrong, if
you don't like it now then it is not wrong, you
could have
kicked the dog, okay
yes, what is that, what is the whole thing in it, the
kick should be given gently, right?
I am an animal lover. So for me,
beating and driving away is not an option.
What's the problem in beating me?
What is the like problem? It hurts him. What's the
problem?
They also feel pain equally like we
humans feel pain. It
is wrong to kill any mute animal.
Cats beans?
Yes. Are you talking about any animal? Do
you also agree?
Yes.
Yes, why did you kill the mute animals?
He didn't say anything to you. It
is strange.
[ __ ]? The rooster is weird.
Look, I will also say that he should
not be killed either. Is it a goat? Everything is there.
So do not kill any animal.
Of course not.
So the person will not eat non-veg also.
That is a different matter. He is eating as per his requirement.
If he is showing brotality then do
you eat on him?
Yes sir. Everyone has their own
religion. He tells someone to
hit him and tells someone else not to hit him. That
is a different matter.
So the dog is beyond religion.
Look, this is a very big debate.
It tastes desi. Does the
chicken feel pain? It happens
definitely it happens so you
should not eat it you should not
eat it you do
n't eat it at all
oh well
now you will eat even those whom you serve
then what's the big deal
[laughter]
swear on this one tell me how many days it's been since you left him
tell me [laughter] how many days it's been since you left him
two days later, did
someone die that's why you left him
20 days ask your brother he is my
friend he is no one he doesn't even have a
bone [laughter] he would have left me even now he was still
saying that grandfather died so he should have
eaten meat here he should have
left the plate of mutton and rice there let's go I am no one I understand it is
wrong according to you it is
wrong but he doesn't leave it it is a dog's habit
[laughter]
[laughter] you
don't eat you are
saying you got caught caught
[laughter]
sometimes I don't eat I avoid it
mostly
sometimes [laughter]
I have problem in digestion that's why do
you eat it or don't eat it
I don't eat
you said I don't eat it sometimes I don't eat it that's why
I avoid it mostly
The time
you also don't eat non-veg,
you will immediately tell me that it is wrong to
kill a mute animal. It
depends why you are killing? Okay,
why are you killing the goat?
What harm did he do to you? There are
some enamels which are
used for meat, they have been in use for many years and are
also used religiously.
And [music] After that,
where is the goat used religiously? Do
you eat Bakra Eid only on Bakra Eid?
Because you don't eat dogs, you shouldn't
beat dogs. You probably eat chicken.
Yes, we eat it?
Goats too.
Goats would also eat.
They don't feel pain. Right now we say that there is life in
them.
So see, the [ __ ] does not bite, right? Friend, the
dog does bite, so what about mistakes,
bite the one which does not even bite,
you
bite for food, it does not
bite like that, so
if I assume that the dog bites for food,
then it will be fine when there is no question on the choice of the other,
now I understand, so
according to you it hurts but because it is my
choice of food, then we can ignore that thing, I do
not want to see, okay, so it is
painful, I don't know, the
curtain of the eyes has
come off, one should
eat non-veg because if their
number increases, then they will eat more plants
and we will not get to eat that.
That is really smart. But this would happen if
we were eating animals caught from the forest.
We breed these animals for
food. Then we will not breed them at all. If you do
n't breed, you won't have to eat.
God has also created it like this. The smaller
fish eats the bigger one. If the elder one is
not eaten like this and there is any obstruction anywhere, the entire
system gets disrupted. [laughter] That's the
food. Okay, right? The food chain gets disrupted.
Look at the food chain that happens when we are in the wild.
Then I know, brother, I am a lion.
I am killing the deer. We are
not in the wild. We are getting dressed.
We have Tich mobile. We are
civilized. We are out of the wild.
We are not catching wild goats and chickens and
eating them. We are breeding them in cages.
Then you should not eat this also. Don't even
eat vegetables. That too in a different way. This is what happened.
You are killing a living thing. Did
you ask the leaf without consulting? Am
I eating you? I am hungry.
You are saying that it is not possible to live without suffering causes.
So when we
eat plants directly, instead of first taking plants and
feeding them to goats and chickens, then all the
plants die and the
goat and chicken also die, is it
not better that I
eat a few plants, according to your own logic that suffering should be
minimized. Can do.
Now, at the end of the
day, it is everyone's preference of food. The
choice comes.
Yes, I understand. All animals feel pain.
But what is our preference?
Can we kill him on that basis or not? It is
not inherited by those who are vegetarians. His family has not been eating it. If they have been
eating in our house then we are
eating.
You have children.
No, thank you so much.
No, I am not giving it to you. No. No.
[laughter]
Suppose you had children,
what value would you give them? What you have been doing or what
you think is right.
I would give him the choice. I would show him
what was wrong and tell him
I was eating it despite him. It's up to you
to eat and no. It
is wrong to tease a girl.
Off course.
Of course it took you time to come to this conclusion.
Because sometimes the girl prepares accordingly and thinks that
of course she is
wrong.
Sorry, he did not understand. There is
a teasing or teasing from a negative point.
But one also has to tease from a positive point.
He complements girls.
Ok, I look beautiful today.
But if we are doing the same thing to anyone from a negative point of view then
it is wrong.
So our intent matters.
How will he know?
Girls know before us whether
it is teased positively or
negatively.
Exactly.
Good.
You complement your wife.
Yes. Is
he wrong?
No.
Why? Is
n't it consensual? She is living with me of her own free will,
right?
Yes sir. Isn't it
? Okay, I will not do this, you are talking about
an unknown girl,
I am actually seeing a girl,
I will go and compliment her and do it
live in front of you and she will not have any problem,
but at the same time, if I
start showing off on that quality, then there will be a
problem in looking at her from a distance, staring at her,
okay, I understand, maybe I did
not understand completely, I will not lie, but
for the second of conversation, let's move ahead, then will
you ever tell your child that look son,
these negative people tease like this, it is wrong, but it is your
wish.
Why should I say?
Because even in the case of non-veg you are saying that it is
wrong but it is your wish.
Sir, there
is a huge difference between eating and talking to someone else.
Taking someone's life, sir. For
some things it comes in the form of an animal.
That thing happened. The object is done.
No, he comes in an animal. Now you
make it very big and put it here. Yes,
I am not going to stop it because of your persuasion, any protest or any government law.
I believe in Osho. And Osho says that
eating chicken or eating non-veg is
not wrong unless you feel that eating non-veg
is wrong. This is when the feeling arises in your heart
that I have caused pain to the other person.
Why didn't that compassion come into your heart
? When that compassion arises in my heart,
I will let go myself. I believe that
I should act according to what makes me happy.
It doesn't matter if
I have to kill a human being, I have to
kill a dog, I have to kill a chicken,
I have to cut a tree.
Which makes me happy.
Which makes me happy. Do
n't you think that the world is in a complete
mess today because of this attitude? It must have happened,
sir. Then it seems as if
they have become rapists,
murderers. Whoever wants to do what, let him do it. He is doing it, right
?
So it's okay. It has been a
while. You have made a law
for that. Make a law for this. But then I should do it
that way.
The way I can mold it. You say this,
you are saying that but this attitude is okay, if
someone is hurt then it is
my problem, this is what you are saying, right? Yes, exactly
as much as is inside my mind,
right now in these cases I will feel that
yes, I should kill someone, I should
murder someone, the day I feel that
yes, I should do this, then I will do it, it does not matter what consequence
I have to suffer, this is what
I am saying, right now there is nothing like this
in my mind-set, are
all the followers of Osho like this, is
n't it sir,
someone is dangerous, right
earlier when we used to make these videos, people used to
come because our questions
forced them to think things which they had never
thought before. But I don't think
our videos will awaken anyone now because
they have already awakened. Yes, it is different
that he has just closed his eyes to the world also.
[music]
Hmm