 A brishabh that is a bull offered to the deity. And Gopat Brahmin mentions 21 jagyas, sacrifices, in which a bull was offered to Indra. Then a cow was offered to Maruth, a copper-colored cow was offered to Aswin, and a cow was also sacrificed to Mitra and Barun. Now, this is what we see in Gopat Brahmin. The point that one has to keep in mind is that in the royal sacrifices, or public sacrifices, which are associated with kingship, that is royal power or authority, like Ashwamedh, that is the whole sacrifice, or you see Rajasui, that is also associated with kingship, and Bhajpe sacrifice, in these sacrifices there is clear evidence that cattle were killed, especially the cow was killed. And this is mentioned in the Aethirya Sanghita also, not only in Gopat Brahmin but also in the Aethirya Sanghita. The Ashwamedh sacrifice, you see, was very important, and 600 animals and birds were killed in Ashwamedh sacrifice. So, you can imagine what was the importance of this particular jaggery. So, these are some of the jaggery which are related to kingship, to royal power. So, how far then this sacrifice meat was eaten by the people? You see, in Aethirya Brahmin it is said that whatever is offered, that is whatever beef is offered, that is food. The actual passage is, One can interpret it in some other way but then most people have interpreted it this way. Aethirya Sanghita also praises Agast, Sage Agast for the sacrifice of 100 bulls, and these sacrificial animals or victims were meant for human consumption, which is evident from the fact of how these animals were distributed. You see, for example, the Gopat Brahmin mentions that the sacrificial victim has to be divided into 36 parts. And the 36 parts that the cow was killed, it has to be divided into 36 parts. So, which part of that 36 parts will be divided into 36 parts? This is mentioned in the Gopat Brahmin. It is also said that when you go to a meat salad, you say, give me this portion or that portion or that portion. This is the case. So, this is written in the Gopat Brahmin. And the one who killed the cow, he was called Samitra. S-A-M-T-R. So, what I would say is that sacrifice and sustenance went hand in hand during the Vedic period, or even later when there was sacrifice performed. Now, I think I'll cut short some portion, but I would like to mention that it is not only for weak sacrifices or royal sacrifices that cows were killed, cows were also killed for small domestic sacrifices, domestic rituals, for example, for agriculture. If there is a beginning of agricultural activity, then there is a sacrifice and this sacrifice is called Shur Gava. That is sacrifice of the ox of the spirit. This was one sacrifice. The other sacrifice was, you see, on the occasion of the arrival of a guest or reception of the guest. If you have a guest, then, and what kind of guest? Your teacher, your son-in-law, your son-in-law's father or your son's father-in-law and teacher and, of course, Brahmin. So, because Brahmins are never the losers in early society. They are always the winners, you see. So, you can't leave them out. So, this was another ritual and this ritual was called Madhuparak. But it had other name also, that is, Argya. In the Rig Veda, the word is Argya, but later on it became more popular to call it Madhuparak than guest reception. So, this was another occasion when cows were killed. Marriage was an important occasion and there were several contexts in the marriage ceremony when the cow killing was required. And since, you see, for the guest, killing of cow was compulsory. Therefore, Panini, the grammarian, you may have heard his name, I don't know, Panini uses a word, Gogna, G-O-G-H and A, which means one for whom the cow is killed. This is how Sanskritists interpret it. There may be a difference of opinion about the compound in which this word is used, but the word Gogna means one for whom the cow is killed. Now, and this is because of the frequent killing of cows in Madhuparak. Then, you see, many of you may know that there is a ceremony when a woman is pregnant, then after three or four months of pregnancy you have a ritual called Godbhari. And in the Dharmasutras there is a ritual, Simantol Nayan. This is equivalent to Godbhari. Simantol Nayan would mean parting of the hair. Now, on this occasion it was absolutely necessary to kill the cow. And then, you see, in lifetime if you kill the cow, then in death also the cow must accompany you. And so in Sradha, that is after the death, when you perform funerary rites, then you have to please the maids. So, you know, this Sradha after death, cows were killed so that the maids are pleased and maids had to be well fed. You see, in the Dharmasutras this ritual is described in great detail. And it is said that the flesh of the cow gratified the pit-trees, that is dead ancestors, for a year. So, Sammasaram Gabbian Preeti. This is written, I have not written it. This is written by a priest in the Dharmasutras. So, after this, buffalo, even the buffalo, that too will go away. Then wild animals, domesticated animals like goats, if they will play with this, then the maids and the pit-trees will live happily for a year. And you see, apart from this, there used to be a community function, community meeting, where these animals were killed. It was called Mahabrat. It was a kind of bacchanal, bacchanal, communal function. There used to be a group of people, who used to come around. And there used to be a lot of gathering, so there used to be a lot of animals killed. So, its name was Mahabrat. And you will definitely find a place for this. And after that, there is archaeological evidence, which I am going to skip. Now, despite all this evidence, there are people, many people who argue, that the cow was not killed by the cow. In the Vedic period, the cow was not slaughtered. I will tell you what is its basis. Its basis is that in the Vedic texts, there are two words used in four places. One is Agnya and one is Agnya. Agnya was for male and Agnya was for female. Male ending and female ending. These four places are used in Rig Veda and Athal Veda. This means, not to be killed. So, on the basis of this, generally, those who are from the Middle East, those who meet you, those who do mauling, rinsing, they will ask you the same question. There are Agnya, cow, Agnya, these people are dead, they are Muslims. They know what had happened. And they start arguing. So, their basis is that in four places, Rig Veda and Athal Veda, this word is used. And in several places, this is used in the feminine ending and in several places, it is used in the main ending. So, one is their basis, that is why they say that cow is sacred. The second argument is that in the Vedic texts, such epithets are used or something like that. Metaphors are used, like the cow is called earth, the cow is called earth, the cow is called mother of gods. Gojad is a category of gods. It is also mentioned in the Vedic texts. So, that is why people say that the cow was not used. But this does not prove that the cow was sacred. The cow was sacred. This does not prove it. These are four references. There must have been a secret for some people although I am going to tell you why there was a secret. I will tell you now. But there was no secret for everyone. So, this argument is not a very long-term argument that the cow was sacred. Now, the question arises that fire or fire, that is why it must have been used that the cow would be recognized by its economic value and that is why they would call it fire or fire, not to be slain. Because in the Vedas it is mentioned that when milk, they gave additional nourishment. They produced oxen, which were used as drought animals. Then cattle-hide was used in various other ways. The Jaya Bo Bo history, this was made of cattle-hide. Even nowadays, when you look at the South Indian Mirdang, it cannot be made without cow-hide. You cannot have that Mirdang without cow-hide. And this was said to me by some people who are experts of Mirdang themselves. They are Badakhs of Mirdang. They had written an article in an outlook written by Jagraj Anand, and he mentioned that no Mirdang can be made without cow-hide. Even in the olden days, they could not be made. They could not be made by boasting. They could not be made by musical instruments. So, it can be said that all these arguments were sacred, and all these arguments were of great importance. But one thing must be considered, and that is that it is good for you to believe that the songs of the Brahmins were inviolable. You could not have made them. The songs of Brahmins were inviolable. It is shown in Vedas that you will not be able to make my songs. You have no right. If you want to make your songs, then you can make some other songs. I will not make my songs. So, the reason for this was that the Brahmins used to get cow-hide. And that is why the Brahmins were interested that no one could make my songs. And the Brahmins were very greedy for their cow-hide. So, the Brahmins used to get cow-hide. So, they got cow-hide. It is very sacred. There will be no harm to it. And in every Vedas, the Brahmins have warned the Brahmins which I will tell you that O King, Nipati, the gods did not give you that cow to you to eat. O warrior, Raja Nipati, do not desire to eat the Brahmins' cow because she is not to be eaten. That is Anadhyam. Anadhyam was used there. Brahmins' cow-hide cannot be eaten. So, you can say that the Brahmins' cow-hide used to enjoy a special status like the Brahmins. They used to enjoy a special status like the Brahmins. They could not kill it. So, this is the thing. It is good to accept it that the Brahmins will not believe it. Now, I think we will turn to another important thing that while all these developments were taking place in the Vedic period, what we see in the post-Vedic period is that you have the rise of Jainism and Buddhism. Now, Buddhism was a very large portion of the doctrine of Jainism. Jainism was also a portion of Jainism and Buddhism. So, all these things that started were a kind of challenge for the Vedic sacrifice that the Brahmins who take place and fight and do something were very challenged because of Buddhism and Jainism. By the way, the beginning of the doctrine of Jainism and Buddhism has not happened. Even though people are angry but I do not believe that Buddhism is very dangerous because of Jainism and Jainism. The beginning of the doctrine of Jainism and Buddhism is different. And they can talk about it later on. Now, as I was telling you about Buddhism, that Buddhism challenged the Vedic sacrifice very much. Similarly, you would also know that Gautam Buddha was he died of pork meat. I hope you remember Gautam Buddha died of pork meat. In fact, I like pork better. I used to like pork better than beef. Gautam Buddha took pork and he died of eating pork. The word that is used is sukar maddab. That was the word used. Now people interpret it as sukar maddab is a mushroom. The question is that wherever there is such a reference people say that this is a mushroom. Mushrooms are such things that you can remember. So, Gautam Buddha was an example of Gautam Buddha, but he died of pork meat. Ashoka was against killing of animals, but even he did not prohibit the killing of cow in his kitchen. He prohibited the killing of animals for his kitchen, but not the cow. You see, so this is the evidence that Ainsa was not very strong initially.