I live in Ahmedabad and I've noticed a growing trend toward meat-serving lorry-wallahs as well, whilst I don't eat the stuff myself, a bunch of my more carnivorous friends are finding pretty creative places in which meat is served. Infact, there are certain places on Ashram road in which the menu seems vegetarian but meat is served by request and marketed through word of mouth. However, Gujarat is still 90% vegetarian, which is pretty remarkable. From what I hear a lot of the meat-eaters are college students and young professionals from neighbouring states. I still find Ahmedabad to be very conservative on its views toward meat and of course alcohol, which can still be acquired relatively easily and efficiently on the black market, despite Gujarat being a dry state

I don't think the culture as a whole will change that much, since in Indian cuisine, unlike most Western ones, meat is not an integral part of every meal. While I know many Indians who feel starved unless they eat meat at least once a day, they aren't exactly sitting down for a large steak. They are usually eating meat as part of a larger meal that includes dal, vegetables, rice, or roti--i.e. no one has to cook an entirely separate meal for a vegetarian family member or guest--they just won't eat the meat dish. Contrast that with an American family having chicken pot pies for dinner: the entire meal has meat in it, so a separate meal would have to be cooked for a vegetarian. Also, meat in India still tends to be relatively expensive so most people can't afford to eat it every day. And a lot of these "non-vegetarians" probably only eat meat at restaurants, not at home. Coming from a large extended family of both voracious meat eaters and staunch vegetarians, I can say that no one has every had trouble finding enough to eat at one of our family meals. Living in the US I still cook meat sparingly--I just don't feel like I need to eat it that often.

Only 55% of Brahmins are pure-veggies? Somehow I thought that number would be higher.

I can't speak to what will happen to Indian culture but the shift is happening in other places too...

I've been vegetarian for 16 years and in the beginning (high school) the only other vegetarians I knew were desis and american/west indian blacks. I was the only veg latina. In latino communities ( I have family in Jersey City, Union City, Brooklyn), I was viewed with suspicion or as a joke. If I requested 'no carne' or vegetariano, I got meat anyway, served with giggles. Maybe part of that was my being female or a teenager, I'm not sure.

Now, if I go into a cafe and order, it's like, normal. Many of my family members who were born in the states or lived here more than two decades have converted to vegetarian. When my cousins from Colombia came here a couple years ago they thought not eating meat was loco. Now, after a couple years, they have reduced their meat consumption too. Maybe not eating meat (in the states) implies you are climbing the prosperity ladder?

just as important as the cultural ramifications are the environmental ones, with meat- production being far more resource-greedy.

Vegetarians were more likely to be female, to be of higher occupational social class and to have higher academic or vocational qualifications than non-vegetarians.

Does this have something to do with greater health-consciousness in this demographic? I've been gradually getting more and more veggie in the past year or so, just as part of a natural process of maintaining my physical shape. I wonder if that happens to others too.

just as important as the cultural ramifications are the environmental ones, with meat- production being far more resource-greedy.

I'm an omnivore that was raised in a veggie TamBram household. I still don't keep meat in my apartment, mostly because I don't know how to cook any meat dishes, but I'll eat it when I go out. I've been thinking of going fully veggie for some time now, as I don't feel it would be all that difficult. If I decide to do so, it will be for environmental reasons and not moral/religious ones.

I only eat red meat. Beat that.

I should probably clarify what I said about my immigrant relatives and meat. The first year they were here, 5 adults, 2 children, everybody put on between 10 and 25 pounds because they ate so much more, including much more meat than back home because it is more plentiful/cheaper. They also indulged in fast food regularly. Now they eat meat for dinner instead of for every meal. Does anybody see a correlation here with more/less meat eating and their own freshly arrived relatives?

They were also flabbergasted that Americans eat garlic. Wow.

I don't see non-vegetarianism having any impact on the culture. I am a Brahmin and many of my family members eat meat. They are not allowed to eat meat at home (to maintain the sanctity of the house!). It's only at restaurants. When we go out with the extended family, they just eat veggie food and act like they don't eat meat. It's the white elephant in the room that the older generation tries to ignore. (Yes, eating meat is a big deal in my family and people do it anyway.) Most Indian weddings don't serve meat, either. It's expensive and not sacred to serve meat during weddings. Even my omnivorous friends don't serve meat at weddings to be veggie friendly.

Though my mother downplays it as a factor, I think my being a life-long vegetarian (Yes. Even in the womb.) is a massive turn-off to blood-thirsty Christian Malayalee boys who can't live without their beef curry or meen. Most of the Malayalees I interact with (specifically those who never met my Father, who is the reason why we're strict veg in the first place) view vegetarianism with derision and suspicion.

I'm squeamish, too, so I can't cook it for others the way my Vegan sister and veg Hindu gf do. I find this entire situation massively annoying, since every North Indian or hell, South Indian Hindu boyfriend I've ever had has a vegetarian Mother, Grandmother etc and probably because of that views my diet respectfully. I give up. Time to find a nice Hindu boy. Please be sending biodata to the Ennis.

no mention in the post about us naughty veggie by nature Jains!

This discussion about vegetarianism is interesting. Being a vegetarian myself, I am curious to find out if there's any other place where the concept of vegetarianism arose like in India. I find it annoying when people (usually in the West) assume that I eat chicken and fish after I tell them that I'm a vegetarian. They ask again to double check if chicken and fish are included in my diet.

Regarding comment #3, a lot of Brahmins in Bihar (Bhumihars) eat meat, which might account for the surprisingly low number of Brahmins being vegetarians. Also, I think almost everyone in West Bengal eats fish.

I've noticed the growth in American veggies as well. Maybe Americans are getting smarter ;)

They ask again to double check if chicken and fish are included in my diet.

Not to play devil's advocate unnecessarily, but is that really so uncommon? Perhaps it's just the people I know, but many of my acquaintances who're ostensibly vegetarian don't always exclude seafood or eggs (for example) from their diets. I remember one in particular, who upon being given a vegetarian version of the meal she wanted, was annoyed because they'd excluded the shrimp. She always was a crazy bitch though, so obviously I'm not setting her up as the standard.

I end up eating meat/chicken/fish now almost every meal except breakfast. This is a huge change from 10 years ago, in India growing up, when I ate non-veg about once a week.

While I admit eating quite a bit of meat, I want to cut down. What troubles me is the resource-intensity of a calorie of meat vs. grains/veggies. I can't find the stats right now, but a pound of beef requires insane amounts of water, land and grain (which requires even more water and land). The nutritional advantage is questionable at best.

SkepMod,

Wiki has some good info on environmental vegetarianism.

Also, could someone please explain to me how fish and chicken became separated from meat? It has baffled me since childhood. I define meat as any dead animal. What kind of definition is involved where fish and chicken are excluded?

ANNA: You have never dated a Muslim boy or a boy born to Muslim parents? You are missing out on some of the finer things in life!

I'm squeamish, too, so I can't cook it for others the way my Vegan sister and veg Hindu gf do. I find this entire situation massively annoying, since every North Indian or hell, South Indian Hindu boyfriend I've ever had has a vegetarian Mother, Grandmother etc and probably because of that views my diet respectfully.

I concur with you Anna... I wouldn't and couldn't cook it for anyone.

Vegetarians were more likely to be female, to be of higher occupational social class and to have higher academic or vocational qualifications than non-vegetarians

In medical school a ton of women went vegetarian/vegan..and they still practice. A lot for social/health issues. Some just found animal slaughter morally wrong. To each their own.

Now where the heck is my Morningstar Burger?

My mom was a vegetarian her entire life - most women in India were while men sometimes ate meat. When my parents came to America after they got married, they were working such long hours that the only thing they had energy to eat at the end of the day was a Big Mac from McDonald's. And to think, if there had been more veggie-friendly fast food options back in the day, I might have grown up a vegetarian .. and my meat loving hubby would have never married me .. and I'd still be living in Cali .. ok I'm stopping now.

Also, could someone please explain to me how fish and chicken became separated from meat? It has baffled me since childhood. I define meat as any dead animal. What kind of definition is involved where fish and chicken are excluded?

Yes, I'm also waiting for answers to the same questions. I think some Catholics exclude fish from non-vegetarian items.

I find the inclusion of fowl more puzzling than that of fish. Birds are clearly meat, although not mammal meat. Fish is very different, in taste, feel and other things.

Still, it's funny that in India some people don't consider you vegetarian if you eat eggs, whereas in the UK some people call themselves vegetarian even though they eat Chicken!

p.s. I'd give up chicken before I gave up on Lamb ... it's hard to get non-factory farmed chicken, I have to buy directly from some small farmers. I figure Lamb is pretty much free range ...

Yes speaking as a Catholic, we exclude fish from 'meat'. Meat is mainly beef /pork. In Lent, we are supposed to refrain from meat on Fridays, so we eat fish instead.

ANNA: You have never dated a Muslim boy or a boy born to Muslim parents? You are missing out on some of the finer things in life!

That's not what my Jat Sikh boyfriends said. :D
.
.
.

KIDDING! I am so kidding. (well, they said it, but I didn't believe it. my high school crush was pakistani.)

Al_Mujahid_for_debauchery on December 15, 2006 12:13 PM · Direct link ANNA: You have never dated a Muslim boy or a boy born to Muslim parents? You are missing out on some of the finer things in life!

When my parents came to America after they got married, they were working such long hours that the only thing they had energy to eat at the end of the day was a Big Mac from McDonald's

I've heard this from a lot of my friends too.
I'm not a big fan of burgers, but whenever I order one, I make it a point to request a veggie burger (i.e. don't put the meat 'patty'..just the veggies and cheese will do for me). I usually get varied reactions while ordering this..people double check to confirm that I want just the veggies and no "good stuff" in my burger.

Like circumcision

This is a vegetarian(ism) thread, no meat please. We did that last week for hundreds of comments, a very long tale about some very short tails. Today we're discussing something different.

Wow, on that page of stats:

73% of the respondents believe that the government should ban the consumption of alcohol

That's a very sharp contrast to American society. While many Indian-Americans seem to remain vegetarian (or convert back to being vegetarian between 10 and 20 years old), I believe that drinking has been much more broadly adopted by us second-generationers.

I'm not a big fan of burgers, but whenever I order one, I make it a point to request a veggie burger (i.e. don't put the meat 'patty'..just the veggies and cheese will do for me). I usually get varied reactions while ordering this..people double check to confirm that I want just the veggies and no "good stuff" in my burger.

Did anybody ever try out the BK Veggie Burger? The only such thing I eat is the traditional gardenburger - largely b/c they're a fast meal at the end of a long day. Have never tried to order the BK Veggie at a fast food outlet, although their web site says they're still being offered.

Have never tried to order the BK Veggie at a fast food outlet, although their web site says they're still being offered.

You're better for it. They taste like ass. Dry, cardboard, flavor-free ass. Meanwhile, in the UK, their wedgie burgers were great (AND they had mozzarella HEARTS on the menu- sooo cute). Not fair. They have better vegetarian food AND better looking people.

(ducks)

Regarding comment #3, a lot of Brahmins in Bihar (Bhumihars) eat meat, which might account for the surprisingly low number of Brahmins being vegetarians. Also, I think almost everyone in West Bengal eats fish.

That should explain those numbers.

I can relate to Anna's comment about meat-loving malayalee christian brothers. One of them is a colleague that sits right next to me and we end up, a statistically significant number of times on the veg vs. non-veg needling of each other. Me, being the TamBram veggie, once remarked to him that I thought the distance between a meat-eater and a cannibal is shorter than the distance between a veggie and non-veggie, provoking him for days to wonder about that comment. :)

Me, being the TamBram veggie

But are you single? And of suitable age? Inquiring monkeys want to know!

Ahmedabad used to be hostile towards non-vegetarians. You could only find vegetarian restaurants on one side of the city because the people refused to set foot in non-vegetarian ones. Certain apartment complexes insisted on you being vegetarian if you wanted to rent/buy a place there. Some of them even have separate buildings for non-vegetarians, always located downwind from the vegetarian ones.
I wonder if this is still the case today.

The relation between IQ and vegetarianism is tenuous at best.
From the BBC article:

There was no difference in IQ score between strict vegetarians and those who said they were vegetarian but who reported eating fish or chicken.

Looks like I'm good to go as long as they dont involve booze in that equation :-)

Meanwhile, in the UK, their wedgie burgers were great (AND they had mozzarella HEARTS on the menu- sooo cute). Not fair. They have better vegetarian food AND better looking people. (ducks)

Woo. Yes, that's us. Allegedly. We have ducks on the menu too. They taste fantastic.

Steak? Roast chicken? Even turkey? Am I the only person who thinks that 5 IQ points is a fair price to pay for such delicious carnivorous delights?

http://www.1stoppostershop.com/products/McGaw/celebrities/mg_GeorgeTheTimelessArtOfS.jpg

Sorry to deflate your hopes

Meanwhile, in the UK, their wedgie burgers were great

McDonalds used to have a pretty good veggieburger option here in Britain, although it's not as widely available as it used to be (in my experience, anyway). Burger King have a pretty good veggie but an outstanding Spicy Beanburger -- mixture of kidney beans, pepper, some kind of spicy tex-mex-type concoction (appears to me to be refried beans in the mexican style), deep-fried in (I think) breadcrumbs, with a slice of cheese and a couple of slices of tomato, with ketchup. Excellent stuff.

Maybe Americans are getting smarter ;)

Not on this website they're not ;)

*laughs and ducks like Anna*

This study is idiotic. Vegetarians being more intelligent than meat eaters flies in the face of what is known about human evolution and the effects of protein on the development of the brain. All other factors being equal it is absurd to think that a vegetable based diet is "better" for your intelligence than a meat based diet.

There was a study in LA years back where they found that woman who drank bottled water had a lower rate of miscarriage than women that drank out of the tap. Everyone freaked and thought that the city's water supply was messed up somehow. In fact, the truth was that women who drank bottled water were wealthier and had access to better pre-natal care, etc. It had NOTHING to do with the water. Similarly, vegetarians in the western world (as in this study) are vegetarians by choice and because they have access to enough non-meat based protein, and are probably wealthier. Wealthier people generally have higher IQs. If you'll note, around the holidays food banks put out special requests for people to donate tuna, specifically because of its high protein content which is something homeless people are lacking. There is more protein per calorie in meat than in vegetables which is one of the reasons why Homo sapien started eating meat in the first place. Brain development hungers for protein and oxygen.

This is just silly "pop science."

Aiyoo, Rajni the Monkey, vhy you vant to know, single vingle age vage, vhy it matters?

Drummers do it in rhythm, that's what matters.

Climb down those branches and look here

for the canadians among us who subscribe to the walrus - the latest issue - has a photoessay on what we eat around the world - the family patkar from india is profiled and their budget runs to $45 or so it seems to be heavy on grain and veggies.

fyi the canadian budget is ~$400 and one canadian family has narwhal and elk on its table. Do take a look, it is very iluminating. for instance the kuwaiti family included their 2 nepali 'servants' as part of the family...

i'm afraid the essay is currently only available to print editiion subscribers or for a modest fee. that reminds me the chicago airport seems to have a very very very interesting photo exhibition from around the world in a similar vein - on how we live - it is at the transit terminal where you can get on to the hotel shuttles or take the mta. do look it up.

it makes me feel warm and fuzzy when i think about it. and i'm not wearing any pants right now.

my high school crush was pakistani

All of a sudden, so much is made clear. ;)

Despite my fondness for meat (no jokes involving rump roast, prime rib, tenderloin and the like, if you please), I occasionally go through hard-core "I only want to eat vegetarian food" phases; I've found that the UK did far outdo the US in terms of both flavour and options. I was bummed though, because I couldn't find the Morningstar Farms Spicy Black Bean Burger at any Tesco in Zone 1. It was saddening.

Then again, it just meant that I got to eat a hella lot more hash browns.

Drummers do it in rhythm, that's what matters.

Damn straight!!

Here is some light on the relation between meat and resources required to produce it.

Find the article here.

Some snippets

"If all the grain currently fed to livestock in the United States were consumed directly by people, the number of people who could be fed would be nearly 800 million," David Pimentel, professor of ecology in Cornell University's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, reported at the July 24-26 meeting of the Canadian Society of Animal Science in Montreal. Or, if those grains were exported, it would boost the U.S. trade balance by $80 billion a year, Pimentel estimated.

Animal protein production requires more than eight times as much fossil-fuel energy than production of plant protein while yielding animal protein that is only 1.4 times more nutritious for humans than the comparable amount of plant protein, according to the Cornell ecologist's analysis.

I am myself a born vegetarian turned non-vegetarian considering going back into the vegetarian fold.

I tried for almost a good year to be veg. My Punjabi husband, after making many veg only means -- tastie meals, would comment, "honey what's with all of the side dishes, where's dinner?

The man wore me down.

Hey the BK veggie burger is not so bad! Actually, it's the only thing that they make fresh when you order -- you can find whoppers sitting around for hours.

As for including eggs in the vegetarian diet, my veterinarian friend pointed out that eggs are an animal byproduct. If you can drink milk, you can eat eggs. They will produce eggs regularly and only when it's fertilized does it have potential. You're not "killing" when you eat eggs. But, yeah I've gotten dirty looks in India for eating an egg (I was traumatized at 10).

BTW, I'm a born again vegetarian.

I ordered eggs florentine at a cafe in DC a couple of months ago with no meat. Waitress brings it out with a thick slice of ham. I looked at it and said, "but I asked for no meat." Waitress says "That's not meat, that's ham."

????

It's a bit of a hassle being vegetarian in America, especially if you loathe salads like I do, or like fully cooked, flavorful food. I have mad respect for people who were raised in America and are (or turn) vegetarian. If I wasn't raised in strictly veg home for 14 years in India, I'm not certain I would still be 100% veg.

Ennis,

The following Brahman communities are non-vegetarian; Maithils, Asomiya, Begali, Oriya, Sarasvat, and Kashmiri, as once were all Brahman communities 1000s of years ago. And I am not sure of the Pahadi brahman communities of Garhwal, Nepal, Java, Bali, Siam, Anam, and Khamboja. Many migrant Brahmans in the Caribbean are non-vegetarian, which could mean that the shift to a vegetarian diet may be more recent and not due to the popularity of vanaprastha and sanyasa that was enhanced following the times of Buddha and Mahavira who BTW did not found the ascetic tradition, simply made it a little more popular.

Hindus at one time may have eaten beef; but today many will not. So let's respect that sentiment and leave it at that. We aren't about to discuss other types of meat - forbidden or otherwise right? You can find Hindus relishing many other kinds of meat - the Mahabharata talks of rishis enjoying venison.

Vegetarianism is popular not only among Hindus today, but also among some orthodox Jews (who find it's easier to observe kosher as a vegetarian), and of course from many other faith groups. The 7th Day Adventists are ovo-lacto vegs. No onion/no garlic veganism is a long standing Buddhist inspired dietary custom, in China, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam etc. In Phuket you have a week-long vegan eating festival everyhwere with plenty of mock meat grillz.

Bengali Hindus and Gujarati Hindus are possibly the least clannish Hindus anywhere; because the former are all non-vegetarian, and latter all vegetarian! As a rule Indian Airlines at one time would serve chicken only NV meals. The only time I have had mutton was when I flew out once out of Ahmedabad to Delhi many years ago!

Is India gradually moving towards factory farming as is practiced in the US and Europe? I'm all for the increased protein in people's diets, most Indians need more protein BADLY, plus I think we cook the best non-veg food in the world, but the ecologic implications of > 1 billion potential meat-eaters are staggering. That being said, children especially should have plenty of milk and eggs (at least the egg whites) while growing, and ideally meat too. I think factory farming is inevitable in India, and will be even more disgusting than it is here, given the shortage of space and general disregard for animal welfare (except the cows of course).

Building on shiva's comment, as far as I know not one of the major Hindu texts calls for a vegetarian diet. My understanding, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, was that Hinduism adopted vegetarianism to differentiate itself from the Mughals and at the same time deal with the increasing popularity of Bhuddism, which did call for a vegetarian diet.

Building on shiva's comment, as far as I know not one of the major Hindu texts calls for a vegetarian diet.

Not true. See Thirvalluvar; Manu.

Relevant verses from the Tamil sage Valluvar:

Verse 251 How can he practice true compassion Who eats the flesh of an animal to fatten his own flesh?

Verse 252 Riches cannot be found in the hands of the thriftless, Nor can compassion be found in the hearts of those who eat meat.

Verse 253 Goodness is never one with the minds of these two: One who wields a weapon ad one who feasts on a creatures' flesh.

Verse 254 If you ask, "What is kindness and what is unkind?" It is not killing and killing. Thus, eating flesh is never virtuous.

Verse 255 Life is perpetuated by not eating meat. The clenched jaws of hell hold those who do.

Verse 256 If the world did not purchase and consume meat, There would be none to slaughter and offer meat for sale.

Verse 257 When a man realizes that meat is the butchered flesh Of another creature, he must abstain from eating it.

Verse 258 Perceptive souls who have abandoned passion Will not feed on flesh abandoned by life.

Verse 259 Greater then a thousand ghee offerings consumed in sacrificial fires Do not do sacrifice and consume any living creature.

Verse 260 All that lives will press palms together in prayerful adoration Of those who refuse to slaughter and savor meat.

My understanding, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, was that Hinduism adopted vegetarianism to differentiate itself from the Mughals and at the same time deal with the increasing popularity of Bhuddism, which did call for a vegetarian diet.

Correct me if I am wrong, but did Buddhism not die out before the time of the Mughals, except in Bengal, and wasn't vegetaranism adopted a long time before the advent of the Mughals, a long time before, when there was an competition between Buddhism and Hinduism for the heart and soul of adherents, which was when, Hinduism co-opted vegetarianism, and a ban on animal sacrifice, the concept of ahimsa, or noninjury to animals, n order with theological matters?

But would Valluvar a sacred text of Hinduism? I was thinking more along the lines of the Vedas, Gita, etc. I don't ask this to be sarcastic, I just don't know.

I meant to say, along with some theology

My understanding, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, was that Hinduism adopted vegetarianism to differentiate itself from the Mughals and at the same time deal with the increasing popularity of Bhuddism, which did call for a vegetarian diet.

I've noticed the growth in American veggies as well. Maybe Americans are getting smarter ;)

Also, for the "social/world hunger" angle, I think there are much better ways to get your protein that are more environmentally friendly.

It's a bit of a hassle being vegetarian in America, especially if you loathe salads like I do, or like fully cooked, flavorful food. I have mad respect for people who were raised in America and are (or turn) vegetarian.

Also, my understanding of the scripture was that, along with ahimsa, or noninjury of animals, people believed that some of the characteristic of animals were transferred (mystically?) to people who eat meat. That is, baser tendencies tend to arise more easily if one eats meat. That was the explanation I was given in my family, and this explanation was also what I encountered in the Hare Krishna meeting I went to last time. If someone wants to correct me on this, please do so.

I am curious to find out if there's any other place where the concept of vegetarianism arose like in India

yes. see the pythogoreans or essenes, though some might assert this is the influence of indian gymnosophists.

But would Valluvar a sacred text of Hinduism? I was thinking more along the lines of the Vedas, Gita, etc. I don't ask this to be sarcastic, I just don't know.

I would say so. There is an orthodox understanding which preferences shruti (the Vedas) over smriti (like the Mahabharata, Manu, and Ramayana). Pragmatically, the Kural is held in sacred esteem. Its often referred to as Tamil Veda.

Also, most "injunctions" in Hindu texts tend to be descriptive rather than prescriptive in any case.

Or maybe they've learned how their meat is packaged and processed in the U.S. Unless you can afford that fancy schmancy organic free-range business, my gut reaction to the meat industry in the U.S. is,

even within the organic faction - there are two schools of thought - one believes in a 'factory-like' large scale production and the other in a holistic way of life - practice water recycling, compost generation etc.

organic is not fancy schmancy - the concept of factory farming is just morally repugnant to me. there's no non-cruel way of killing animals for meat but ... to detach from the process of killing is something i can not stomach . and frankly i make enough money to pay ten times what i would pay for meat - so why the heck should i support the slaughterhouses. .. more later. got to run.

The problem with the "we got it from Buddhism" argument is that the Buddha never prohibited meat. Pragmatist that he was, only prohibited monks from accepting meat offerings slaughtered specificaly for them. There is more merit, imo, in influence coming from Sam Harris's favorite religion.

OTOH, the only place to get pure vegetarian food in China is from Buddhist monasteries.

The problem with the "we got it from Buddhism" argument is that the Buddha never prohibited meat.

In my city (and my former cities) I have usually lived amongst other carribean/south american folks who, smack in the middle of the inner city might have a veggie garden, several chickens and a goat. This actually kind of relates to Siddhartha's Venkatesh post in that part of our 'underground economy' was the trade or sale of eggs, chickens, rabbits and goat milk/meat, etc. during the warmer months.

My neighbors next door are from the west indies. They say they are vegetarians but they eat fish. They have rabbits, chickens and nine dogs in their yard, along with four non-working cars, vegetable garden and a thriving sewing business/auto mechanic. It may not sound sanitary but I just wash the eggs before breaking them. The neighbors down the way sell goats milk products. I'm suspicious of the milk but I eat the cheese.

So there you go, come on down and get yer fresh cheap protein from my block, no factory farming and you support the underground economy to boot!

Anyone heard of Dr. Peter Singer? He was on the Colbert Report the other day talking about his new book The Way We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter.

Thought it would be relevant to topic being discussed.

another random moral conundrum.

so i am shopping for bhindi (okra) - and this being canada, the only option is to get it in the frozen foods section. i pick up this pack - it says 'product of india' - and i go hmmm... i really want to have the bhindi tonite... but i dont feel good about the transportation baggage. i will always buy local if i have the option. let me look around... and there's another pack.. it says packaged in canada, but product of guatemala. now i'm really at a moral impasse... ultimately i ended up getting the indian bhindi because it was packaged whole.

'twas a foul predicament but we made it across.

hairy_d,
If you lived down here you'd get your $2 chicken from your neighbors down the alley and the moral conundrum of transportation baggage would be erased. Of course, you'd have to kill and pluck it yourself. ;) My grandma taught me how.

Come to think of it, maybe that's why I am a vegetarian.

This is a fascinating article by a quebec vet mulling over our disconnect between pets and livestock.

The gap between pets as companions and the flocks and herds of similarly sentient creatures that provide us with food seems to be widening each year. The deeper our empathy grows toward pets, the more startling becomes our indifference to the animals we eat.
After a few thousand years of providing casual companionship and help with hunting, guarding, and pest control, it has taken only fifty years, along with a few technological and medical innovations, to allow cats and dogs to cross the final frontiers that separated them from the most intimate spaces in our homes. Now they sleep in our children’s arms, occupy our beds, stroll along our countertops, and laze in our bathroom sinks.

organic is not fancy schmancy - the concept of factory farming is just morally repugnant to me. there's no non-cruel way of killing animals for meat but ... to detach from the process of killing is something i can not stomach . and frankly i make enough money to pay ten times what i would pay for meat - so why the heck should i support the slaughterhouses. .. more later. got to run.

hairy_d: what you said.

Anyone heard of Dr. Peter Singer? He was on the Colbert Report the other day talking about his new book The Way We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter.

vinay: I am reading this book now. I think Singer is pretty interesting and have been following his work for a few years now. He is a pretty controversial guy (not in an Ann Coulter kind of way) and, in my opinion, a tremendous status quo pushing thought leader and philosopher.

Have you read Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy by Mathew Scully (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2002)? For those who dismiss Peter Singer as a way out contrarian leftie, Dominion is a provokative call for humans to discover their moral responsibilities for animalkind (Scully is a religious conservative and the former senior speechwriter for George W. Bush).

His overall argument is a bit slippery to handle with ease and it goes a little something like this--Scully starts off by saying animals don't have any rights, per se (as in legal rights; and although humans can be punished in a court of law for animal abuse, it isn't because the rights of the animal have been compromised, it's because the human has been beastly) and goes on to develop "powerful arguments behalf of animals’ “moral claims” and humankind’s corresponding responsibility to animals. “Laws protecting animals from mistreatment, abuse, and exploitation are not a moral luxury or sentimental afterthought to be shrugged off,” he says. “They are a serious moral obligation.” Refuting the idea that morality is a mere matter of “culture,” “opinion,” and “choice,” castigating the caprice that allows us to treat animals whom we know with some decency while condemning animals in farms and laboratories to “lives of ceaseless misery,” he declares that “the moral claims of other creatures are facts about those creatures, regardless of when or where or whether it pleases us to recognize them.”

Please go to (www.satyamag.com/mar03/davis2.html) to read the rest of this review. Warning: the review and the book are not easy reads. You might get sick, you might cry, you might get sick and cry. Tissues.

The gap between pets as companions and the flocks and herds of similarly sentient creatures that provide us with food seems to be widening each year. The deeper our empathy grows toward pets, the more startling becomes our indifference to the animals we eat.
After a few thousand years of providing casual companionship and help with hunting, guarding, and pest control, it has taken only fifty years, along with a few technological and medical innovations, to allow cats and dogs to cross the final frontiers that separated them from the most intimate spaces in our homes. Now they sleep in our children’s arms, occupy our beds, stroll along our countertops, and laze in our bathroom sinks.

and hairy_d:
Eggsactly. No seriously, exactly. Dominion gets to this very place as well. Thanks for linking this I will check it out.

Heh. Don't get me started on how people treat their pets. I've read enough instances of people preferring their pets to their children. I don't want animals to suffer unnecessary cruelty but I don't want to treat them like little humans either. They're not.

If God didn't want us to eat animals, why did He make them out of meat?

-- Homer Simpson

Heh. Don't get me started on how people treat their pets. I've read enough instances of people preferring their pets to their children. I don't want animals to suffer unnecessary cruelty but I don't want to treat them like little humans either. They're not.

If you did that, though, we would also have to talk about the prevalence of domestic animal abuse and its indicator of future violence against humans :)

hairy_d on December 15, 2006 01:27 PM · Direct link for the canadians among us who subscribe to the walrus - the latest issue - has a photoessay on what we eat around the world - the family patkar from india is profiled and their budget runs to $45 or so it seems to be heavy on grain and veggies.

What im curious to know is how many meat-eaters would be willing to slaughter their dinner themselves? Sometimes seems hypocritical to me, when people balk at the sight of animal slaughter but drool at a steak on a platter. The detachment from the act of killing, how it makes life simpler for meat-eaters and armchair war wagers. If I could stand the taste of meat, I'm sure I'd find solace in the "its dead anyway" argument.

I should stay out of this thread since my previous omnivorous comments really grossed out ANNA.

So my alternate two cents: why do people assume that carnivores don't like veggies? Sri Lankan veg dishes are a delight, and now that I've got two curry plants (yeah, that's right. potted in my apartment. I feel your envy) I can go nuts making beetroot and snake gourd and yellow dahl and okra and all those yummy, fragrant, deeelishes veg curries.

It's just a shame that Americans don't know how to cook vegetables. It's getting better, as many already pointed out, but damn...how do you vegetarians eat when on a road trip or in a small-town diner? You don't have much besides some form of potato (fries, hash, baked, au gratin) or fruit. The America vegetarians I've known had horrible diets - they seemed to subsist on fries, carrot sticks, cheese, cereal and pudding cups.

I've got two curry plants (yeah, that's right. potted in my apartment. I feel your envy) I can go nuts making beetroot and snake gourd and yellow dahl and okra and all those yummy, fragrant, deeelishes veg curries.

You'd have to fire up that stove and cook first :P

[ducking]

What im curious to know is how many meat-eaters would be willing to slaughter their dinner themselves? Sometimes seems hypocritical to me, when people balk at the sight of animal slaughter but drool at a steak on a platter. The detachment from the act of killing, how it makes life simpler for meat-eaters and armchair war wagers. If I could stand the taste of meat, I'm sure I'd find solace in the "its dead anyway" argument.

Yes, I agree and somewhat addressed the issue here.

There is something primitive about eating meat. I think we need to face it and not try to dress it up by deboning or reshaping. It's hypocritical to coo at little bunny wabbits or scream at people who wear fur or put your little doggie in a $200 sweater while happily tearing into a steak. For me, it's more about not wasting anything. So yeah I'd support more humane ways of rearing chickens and cattle, etc. and I think it would be more cost effective if we produced less meat and use/eat all the parts of already killed animals. The "its dead anyway" doesn't make sense to me, since they killed it in the first place because you'll eat it. If you need to justify it, don't eat it. But if you do, don't waste. Don't be a picky eater.

So my alternate two cents: why do people assume that carnivores don't like veggies?

I agree completely (except for the fact Cicatrix that carnivores by definition don't like veggies and you meant to use the term omnivore :). I eat meat but I love ALL veggies and most fruits. I can't think of a single vegetable I won't eat. I can think of plenty of meats I won't eat however. Sometimes when I go to my favorite Thai restaurant I order tofu because I want to and not because I am trying to be nice and not offend my vegetarian dinner companions (like they assume). End rant.

er, that previous comment was supposed to sign off with

/aunty cicatrix>

Ennis, you'd better duck! All the slowly rotting veggies I bought but never cooked are being aimed at your head right now!

Sometimes when I go to my favorite Thai restaurant I order tofu because I want to and not because I am trying to be nice and not offend my vegetarian dinner companions (like they assume).

I never get offended when people eat meat around me. I figure it's none of my business and I really don't have the energy/give a shit what they eat. Most people who know me don't even realize I don't eat meat. I am 100% anti-evangelical. I just won't go somewhere that doesn't have food for me or I'll eat before.

Besides, everybody would rather come to my house 'cuz I can cook my ass off.

Besides, everybody would rather come to my house 'cuz I can cook my ass off.

I vote for a meetup at Coach Diesel's house. We can eat her good veggie food, see the livestock in her neighborhood, and comment on the underground economy.

What im curious to know is how many meat-eaters would be willing to slaughter their dinner themselves? Sometimes seems hypocritical to me, when people balk at the sight of animal slaughter but drool at a steak on a platter. The detachment from the act of killing, how it makes life simpler for meat-eaters and armchair war wagers.

That's a faulty argument to begin with.
Do you expect a vegetarian to first go in knee deep muddy waters in the paddy fields and then prepare his beloved idli/dosa.
Meat-eaters can easily get squeamish on seeing animals slaughtered, the same way as a vegetarian (like me) can get squeamish just by looking at the gobi concoction that my roommate used to cook. :)

If you eat meat, it might be because you are not smart enough...yet :-)

Link

SenaX, that's the same study that this post is about :)

Ditto brown_fob

Udit:What im curious to know is how many meat-eaters would be willing to slaughter their dinner themselves?

Hey Udit,
done that..at me grandma's place. The Chicken was easy. The goat with my friends on Bakri-Id, now that needed some getting used to.

If I could stand the taste of meat, I'm sure I'd find solace in the "its dead anyway" argument.

Another pet peeve of mine is when people think (often out aloud) that because I'm a vegetarian I try my best to resist the temptation to eat meat. The fact is I'm a vegetarian because I find meat rather disgusting. And yes, I agree with several of the previous posts about the quality of vegetarian food in the US. That's one of the reasons why people here wonder what vegetarians eat. Actually, I have often wondered what American vegetarians ate, since they have very little choice here.

That's a faulty argument to begin with. Do you expect a vegetarian to first go in knee deep muddy waters in the paddy fields and then prepare his beloved idli/dosa.

point taken. one can extrapolate this as ensuring everyone understands semiconductor physics before attempting to use an LCD monitor. :-) that being said, i feel an awareness of where food (any food) comes from should be essential to one's education. as an aside, for those who've read mccourt's 'angela's ashes' will recall the passage where the author and his brother come across some critters in an irish meadow and ask their dad about them - 'they're sheep son'. getting back, ... i just think, knowledge of where food comes from leads one to appreciate the delicate relationship humanity has with nature. to tell you the truth, i'm not the evangelical kind either, much like coach above, but just knowing what's under the covers leads to a sensitivity in such matters.
I have another sidebar here from ultrabrown.

People often find it odd that I am vegetarian and work with lab animals. They instantly ask "do you have to kill them?? how could you kill the cute little mice? Do you have to dissect them?!" Well yes. Yes I do. I don't see how that has anything to do with the food I eat. I just don't want to eat meat...the rest of my family eats it, I just have an aversion to it now. But that doesn't stop me from doing my job.

I haven't been vegetarian for long (I stopped eating meat towards the end of college), but I discovered that the availability of good vegetarian food definitely varies depending on where you are. Over here in the San Francisco area, it's fine...but in Texas? Ugh, they seem to think that all vegetarian people eat is salad!

Not sure if this is a wider trend but a lot of people from my extended family who live in Bangalore, gave up meat in their middle ages some for religious reasons and others for health reasons because they were eating it too often. Also, for me, it has a lot to do with the quality of the chicken. Cheaper varieties tend to be a lot softer which turns me off. I had almost given up completely till I found a frozen variety at Costco which tastes really good. A lot of it probably has to do with availability too. I can't eat chicken more than a couple times a week or I end up getting an uneasy feeling in my stomache. Anyone else have that problem?

Mathematically IMPOSSIBLE.

There's no way that India's vegetarian population can be anywhere NEAR 40%. Brahmins are only 55% and the next highest concentration of vegetarians is 28% Even if _EVERY_ non-Brahmin group were considered 28% vegetarian, Brahmins would have to be 45% of the Indian population (solve .55*x + .28*(1-x) = .4). And if non-Brahmins are lower than 28% vegetarian, the Brahmin population of India would be in excess of 45%.

Does no one look at the numbers to see if they make sense??? This is supposed to be an Indian forum, right?

Moreover, I see the percentage of vegetarians only declining based on the usda.gov report stating "Indians are vegetarian by tradition; moreover, many can only afford a vegetarian diet." As many Indians stop being vegetarian out of necessity, we'll see how many actually want to be vegetarian.

Another way to dice the numbers to show how inconsistent the report is:
Even if we pick the lower value of 31% vegetarian (based on the Men and Women %vegetarian = 28 and 34, which jives with the "who don't eat eggs" criterion), Indians who are neither Brahmin nor even upper-caste are at most 15% vegetarian based on the same chart. However, Indians who are neither Brahmin nor even upper-caste are at least 40% of India. That means that the group of Brahmins and other upper-castes are at least 42% vegetarian (solve .4*.15 + .6*x = .31) which means that Brahmins outnumber all other upper-castes (at least 52% of total upper-castes, solve .55*x + .28*(1-x) = .42) -- another absurdity based on that nonsensical hindu.com chart.

THE CHART IS RUBBISH.

SST - the caste section may be rubbish, or it may not be complete.

Where they provide a complete breakdown of groups - for example, Men and Women - the numbers are plausible. I ignored the actual numbers in terms of caste, and just looked at some of the relative information contained therein.

Ennis,

The caste section is definitely the bone of contention. Even if it were more complete, say with the inclusion of non-Dalit non-upper-castes with a %vegetarian that's significantly higher than 15% but bounded by 28%, the math still doesn't work. What would make the math work is to have a much higher %vegetarian among Brahmins and perhaps other upper-castes as well. As someone stated earlier, I suspect 55% is an under-reporting or a mis-interpretation by the reporter. 55% of vegetarians in India being Brahmin makes much more sense, but, alas, that caste-chart isn't a demographic breakdown of vegetarians (since the numbers sum to 121 even while omitting non-Dalit non-upper-castes).

I think it's dangerous to accept the rest of that hindu.com chart while knowing full well how horrendously blundered the caste section is. Even while the non-caste portions of the chart look plausible, the way math was butchered in the caste section casts doubt over quality of the entire chart (which doesn't provide references or describe methodology for collecting statistics).

Al Mujahid for debauchery,

ANNA: You have never dated a Muslim boy or a boy born to Muslim parents? You are missing out on some of the finer things in life!

Have you ever dated a Muslim boy or a boy born to Muslim parents?

Ennis,

P.S. I love the photo of you inside the Chicago Bean.

Have you ever dated a Muslim boy or a boy born to Muslim parents?

I am one!

Mary Moon, she's a vegetarian
(Mary Moon, Mary Moon, Mary Moon)
Mary Moon will outlive all the septaugenarians
(Mary Moon, Mary Moon, Mary Moon)
Oh she loves me so, she hates to be alone
She don't eat meat but she sure like the bone

Al Mujahid for debauchery

Have you ever dated a Muslim boy or a boy born to Muslim parents?

I am one!

You're avoiding answering the question.

Vegetarianism is declining in India, to the point where vegetarians are now a minority, with only 40% of the population. This is apparently a major shift from the recent past.

I don't think so.. It is just that perceptions are changing to match with facts on ground. I'd guess that India had always been a non-vegetarian majority country.. The Hindu article that goes with the charts is link From the article..

The survey shows that regional location matters more than caste or community. As expected, the lowest proportion of vegetarian families are in coastal States such as Kerala (two per cent), Tamil Nadu (eight per cent), Andhra Pradesh (four per cent), Orissa (eight per cent) and Bengal (three per cent). Most land-locked States, especially in the west and north, are places with the highest proportion of vegetarian families: Rajasthan (63 per cent), Haryana (62 per cent), Punjab (48 per cent), Uttar Pradesh (33 per cent), Madhya Pradesh (35 per cent) and Gujarat (45 per cent).

I think the Hindu report is probably genuine. Atleast the Tamilnadu numbers of ONLY 8% being vegetarians gels with my observations..

Even if it were more complete, say with the inclusion of non-Dalit non-upper-castes with a %vegetarian that's significantly higher than 15% but bounded by 28%, the math still doesn't work.

SST --

Re: Caste. Consider that religious Hindus are 43% and non religious Hindus are 28% vegetarian. This also makes the rest of the caste numbers problematic unless there is a missing caste group with high numbers of vegetarians. This might make the math work out. Or it means that the caste section is crocked, but the other numbers might still be fine.

Like circumcision, hells yeah! ;)

Yeah, I just lurrve it in my there ;)

People often say that many Indians are de facto vegetarian because they can not afford to eat meat/chicken on a regular basis...which is probably true...but can someone explain how Muslims, who on average are even poorer than most non-Muslims, manage to consume meat daily (if not at every single meal)? Even in Pakistan, which overall is not as prosperous as the richest parts of India (for example Punjab in Pakistan is poorer than Punjab in India) people eat so much meat, whereas in even the richest parts of India, it's a few times a week, tops (for non-Muslims). Is it because most Muslims are eating cheaper, lower-grade meat? Or is it that Muslims are willing to spend a bigger % of their income on meat?

Or is it due to cultural factors, that even those in India (non-Muslim) who COULD afford to eat meat daily if they so desired, limit their consumption due to the fact that culturally they are just not attuned to eating it daily?

The Hindu report makes some stupid conclusions, associating location with diet. Many parts of Gujarat are more 'coastal' than parts of West Bengal. Calcutta especially, is "land-locked" and not on the sea. Non-vegetarian dishes in India are sides and not the main course, which continues to made of rice (or other coarse grains), lentils, and vegetables. Despite the world's largest cattle herds, meat on the hoof isn't cheap. And large masses of people will simply not eat beef, whether Hindu or not.

Or is it due to cultural factors, that even those in India (non-Muslim) who COULD afford to eat meat daily if they so desired, limit their consumption due to the fact that culturally they are just not attuned to eating it daily?

Yes, for example Diwali/Deepavali is one of the few festivals celebrated in our region by many people with a lot of non-veg dishes.. But if it falls on one or the other auspicious days (we have plenty) it will be a no non-veg day.. Many people don't eat meat on Saturdays (and probably on Tuesdays..) Ofcourse when I say meat, it is mostly non-beef by Hindus.. Fish and other seafood/chicken/mutton constitute the non-veg food for a lot of Indians I know..

Have you ever dated a Muslim boy or a boy born to Muslim parents?

I am one!

You're avoiding answering the question.

No, I am not gay.

deshiksa (#2):

...no one has to cook an entirely separate meal for a vegetarian family member or guest...

I was invited to dinner at the house of the principal of one of the colleges here in Madurai (Tamil Nadu). The only dish that didn't involve meat was the salad. I've known several vegetarians who've come to Tamil Nadu on a relatively long-term basis (1-2 years) who've ended up eating meat just because whenever they went to someone's house for dinner, they found it impossible to find a vegetarian dish - or because Chicken 65 is the best stuff on Earth!

Granted, these families most likely don't eat meat every day, but when they have guests for dinner, mutton and/or chicken are most certainly on the menu (in non-Brahmin households).

several vegetarian foreigners*

Vivek, I'm surprised that some of your friends started eating meat because they couldn't find enough vegetarian dishes in Tamil Nadu. I've been living here for the last two years and think that it's a haven for vegetarians, with so many "pure vegetarian" restaurants which don't cook meat. I've ended up eating a lot more vegetables than I would have otherwise, after being here. In sharp contrast, it was harder for me to find such places in Delhi.

"Ahinsã is not just non-violence. It also encompasses respect and consideration for life and peaceful, harmonious living.

Explanation:
The Concept of Ahinsã
Ahinsã is the feeling that attempts to reduce harm to all living creatures. The concept of Ahinsã is meant to be practiced by:

*
thought - not having thoughts of ill-will towards others
*
word - not using speech to slander or malign others
*
deed - not performing violent physical actions

In renowned Hindu scriptures such as the Mahãbhãrat (3-207-7), the Vãsudev Mãhãtmya (20/21), and the Padma Purãn (1.31.27), Ahinsã is referred to as the highest virtue of life: Ahinsã paramo dharma. Bhagwãn Swãminãrayan has referred to the practice of Ahinsã throughout His Shikshãpatri - the code of conduct for devotees:

*
“All scriptures advocate Ahinsã as the highest dharma.”(Verse 12)
*
“My devotees should not harm any living being. They should not intentionally harm even small insects.” (Verse 11)
*
“Even for performing yagnas (ceremonial and divine sacrifices) to please deities or ancestors, no harm should be inflicted on any living being.” (Verse 12)
*
“Even for acquiring women, wealth or a kingdom, one should never, in any way, harm or kill any person.” (Verse 155)

Vegetarianism: An Application of Ahinsã
A practical application of Ahinsã seen in Hinduism is vegetarianism - as it fosters the sentiment of respect for other living creatures. The most ancient Hindu scriptures curbed the practice of killing animals by imposing strict ritualistic regulations which are very difficult to ordinarily meet. Those who were following the spiritual path and wanted to attain God were prohibited altogether from killing animals and consuming animal flesh because such consumption hinders spiritual progress. Hindu scriptures say that killing animals and consuming their flesh leads to violence in our thoughts and behavior. It spoils one’s character and obstructs one’s acquisition of noble virtues.
Today, some people feel that because they are not actually killing the animal themselves, eating the flesh and other body parts of a dead animal does not violate the code of Ahinsã. However, Hindus consider the consumption of dead animal flesh to be a barbaric practice. The Vãsudev Mãhãtmya and other Hindu scriptures state that one who consumes animal flesh, who sells animal flesh, or who prepares animal flesh – all of these people accrue the same sin as the person who slaughters the animal. This is similar to the Western idea that the murderer and the accessory to the murder are both guilty of the killing.
Some people argue that God has given us the ability to kill animals and digest animal flesh; therefore God must have wanted us to eat animals. One could easily respond that God has given us the intelligence and ability to kill humans and digest human flesh, so in that belief system, did God give us this ability because he wanted us to eat human flesh? The flaw in this argument becomes clear here. These people have made the grave error of confusing ability and civility, or ethics. Men may have the ability to kill animals and eat animal flesh, but that does not make it right. Humans have the ability to do some very bad things. But civilization, ethics, morality, and dharma are all meant to restrain man from exercising his full barbaric, animalistic capability and instead, to elevate him from this animalistic condition to the plane of humanity and even higher to the plane of spirituality. It is with this intent of elevating mankind from just a human being to a spiritual being that Hinduism has propagated the value of Ahinsã and its corollary vegetarianism.

Q.6 How does the practice of self-defense fit into the concept of Ahinsã?
A. Ahinsã is not just non-violence or not resorting to arms, but it is also the feeling that tries to reduce harm to all living creatures. Sometimes, force or violence may in fact be necessary to prevent harm. Suppose a train is heading towards a child who is standing in the middle of railroad tracks. We would be inclined to push the child out of the way to save his or her life. Suppose that a wild animal is running ferociously to attack a group of tourists. The animal may need to be wounded to prevent harm to numerous people. Ahinsã recognizes the right to defend one’s self, family, community, and country through the most feasible and appropriate, yet least violent, means necessary. However, defending oneself should never be used to justify violence that is not provoked or warranted. One should be careful that defending one’s self does not become a hidden form of aggression."

http://www.baps.org/faq/hinduism.htm#5

Do you expect a vegetarian to first go in knee deep muddy waters in the paddy fields and then prepare his beloved idli/dosa.

Would a vegetarian have a problem seeing rice harvesting on TV? Would you change the channel if your 4 year old wacthed an indian farmer wading through a paddy field? Would you mind taking her to the fields and showing her where her dinner comes from ? Apply same to semiconductor physics.

Or would you change the channel if they showed a cow being slaughtered on TV? Or would you agree to give her a tour of the meat packing plant, show her how cows are stunned(UCLA ishtyle) before they're slaughtered?

Is it the same ?...umm.. dont think so.

Ok, so you might say, its different with children.

Coming back to my original argument, how many people will be unwilling to harvest their own rice AND cringe or feel uncomfortable at the sight of a paddy farmer in the fields BECAUSE of moral reasons. Im not just talking about (un)willingness to do it yourself.

3 Different things:

1.Unwillingness to be a participant
eg. Me refusing to go harvest my own rice because I think its uncomfortable to stand in all that water and get messy, so Id rather have someone else do it for me. No moral issues involved here.Would watch it on tv.Plain comfort seeking.

2.Unwillingness to be a participant and discomfort in witnessing action
eg.
I would not like to clean city sewage lines or necessarily be comfortable watching sewage lines being cleaned on tv, but I have no moral issues about it. Same with performing post-mortems. I wouldnt like to do it, and I wouldnt like to witness it, but Im ok with someone else doing it.Again, no moral issues here.

3. Unwillingness to be a participant and discomfort in witnessing action Because of moral issues.
This is where killing your own food would come in.

So now you might say, well how do you know there is an element of morality involved when people cringe at animal-slaughter? It just could be that the person thinks that blood and guts are gross just like untreated sewage is gross and so dont wanna get involved with messy stuff. Agreed, there could be some people who would be uncomfortable just because they think its gross, but what about the rest? I think most people find it morally disturbing to witness an animal killing. This is because they can relate to the manner of death. If I cut a plant and it bled and kicked and screamed, I would probably have the same issues. But plants dont die like that, so we cant relate to that death or pain (if plants feel pain...dont know if they do?!?). My opinion is that death can be easily related to if the subject happens to be in the same kingdom as the witness. So we dont have moral issues with killing bacteria or viruses or plants or fungi because we cant relate to their death. But if we can relate to the death of a fellow member of the animal kingdom, and that death morally disturbs us, but we choose to turn away BECAUSE we enjoy the end product of that death is Hypocrisy to me. phew!!...A detailed rant-ish explanation of what i said in the first comment.

Though my mother downplays it as a factor, I think my being a life-long vegetarian (Yes. Even in the womb.) is a massive turn-off to blood-thirsty Christian Malayalee boys who can't live without their beef curry or meen.

Anna, I went to school with quite a few Malayali Christian boys. Not one vegetarian amongst them! One or two have married women who were vegetarians but who now cook meat (even though they don't eat it). I think that's quite a feat- to get yourself to cook something you don't care to eat. I can't bring myself to cook meat so my husband eats mor kozhambu and vendakkai at home and sushi outside!

ANNA: You have never dated a Muslim boy or a boy born to Muslim parents? You are missing out on some of the finer things in life!

How about Muslim girls? I haven\'t dated a Muslim girl yet, am I missing out on some finer things in life too?

I too have real problems believing the numbers - 40% of indians being vegetarian is not supported by the numbers on the link.

Besides, I have lived in several different parts of India (delhi, culcutta, madras, Bangalore, bombay and other small cities) and really, the vegetarians were always rare - less than 10% , even though I hung out in highly educated groups which tend to have a disproportionately large percentage of brahmin and other high caste origin.

Lang (#112)

Yeah, there are plenty of vegetarian restaurants to get huge rice meals with lots of sambar, kuzhambu, rasam, and poriyal.

But I was referring to going to people's houses for dinner: meat meat meat meat meat. Special occasions dictate meat here, in my experience (to re-iterate: in non-Brahmin households). Eventually my friends wanted to make friends with people, and the easiest way to do this was to eat what they were offered.

In renowned Hindu scriptures such as the Mahãbhãrat (3-207-7), the Vãsudev Mãhãtmya (20/21), and the Padma Purãn (1.31.27), Ahinsã is referred to as the highest virtue of life: Ahinsã paramo dharma.

The Vedas trumps all other scriptures in hinduism. It is Sruthi. You will find animal and even human sacrifices sanctioned in the Vedas. Many hindus still sacrifice animals. It took the British to outlaw human sacrifice and widow burning in India. How do you reconcile these facts with "Ahinsã paramo dharma"?

"How do you reconcile these facts with "Ahinsã paramo dharma"?"

Why did Lord Rama go deep into the woods? To camp out? No, to kill a deer for either sport or food.
I wonder if the principle of "ahinsa" in Hindu scriptures conveniently excluded the killing of animals for food. And what about the Gita, in which the killing of the bad guys is supposed to be the Pandava's "karma," and letting them go free a sin?

One has to admire the relativism of Hindu principles. So much in life is relative and contextual, not absolute.

I still find Ahmedabad to be very conservative on its views toward meat and of course alcohol, which can still be acquired relatively easily and efficiently on the black market, despite Gujarat being a dry state

My cousin's husband is a Kathiawadi (region in Gujarat that wants independence...just kidding), and he told me that although the women never ate meat or drank alcohol, and meat was never cooked at home (nor alcohol served), the young men would often get together, go to somebody's fields, and cook meat and drink there. He said this was a widespread practice where he grew up. Sometimes I wonder if he's exaggerating the prevalence of that practice in order to fit in more with our meat-eating, alcohol imbibing family. But it sounds cool to me. One of the best tandoori barbeques I ever had was at a Gujju friend's wedding (in Ohio of all places). His dad was the chef.

Floridian,

"How do you reconcile these facts with "Ahinsã paramo dharma"?"

One has to admire the relativism of Hindu principles. So much in life is relative and contextual, not absolute.

"Ahimsa" is a guideline in Hinduism, yes, but principles of non-violence such as "ahimsa" are found in most major religions. 'Thou shalt not kill' comes to mind. Note the lack of qualifiers in Romans 13:9. I think it is not to be interpreted as an absolute there either.

For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Non-cruelty:
Vegetarianism is sometimes justified on the basis on non-cruelty, although I personally question applying it in this context. A textual analysis of the Mahabhartha reveal that non-cruelty (anrsamsya) occurs as the highest dharma more often than "ahimsa". A quote from wonderful "Rethinking the Mahabharata" by Prof. Hiltebeitel (who is a great guy by the way) :

Of the fifty-four instance I have found in the Mahabharata, the taly for different excellences said to be the "highest dharma" is anrsamsya, 8: truth, 5; ahimsa, 4; what is in the Veda, 2; offspring, 2...

Rishi Tirumular. Author of the Tirumantiram. Considered shruti (revealed) to Shaiva Siddhantins, and contrary to what Vivek says, Brahmins are not the only traditional vegetarians in the state. this is a horrific translation but the only one I can find on the net. Vegetarianism will always be an ideal among Hindus.

http://www.gutenberg.com/eBooks/HimalayanAcademy/SacredHinduLiterature/tirumantiram/TantraOne.html

6 NOT KILLING

197: Don't Kill Even an Atom of Life
Flowers many to dear, loved Master's worship;
Even one atom of life, kill not:
The lovely garland, the steady flame, the firm will,
The passionate heart--such the worship's crowning part.

198: They Who Kill Reach Hell
The men who shouted,"Kill and stab,"
Them with strong ropes Death's ruffians bind;
And stationing them at the fire-gates of Hell,
The agents yell, "Stand, go; and in the fire pit roast."

7 MEAT EATING--FORBIDDEN

199: Meat Eaters Will Have to Face Hell's Torments
The ignoble ones who base flesh do eat,
Death's agents bind them fast for all to see;
And push them quick into tthe fiery jaws of hell,
And fling them down there for ever to be.

200: Shun Sinful Living
Killing, theiving, drinking, lusting, lying--
These horrid sins detest and shun; to those
Who Siva's Holy Feet attain and the Bliss eternal,
They come not; such men in Wisdom's bliss ever repose

Vegetarianism will always be an ideal among Hindus.
I would have to disagree with a blanket statement like that. There are instances in the Puranas and so forth of Brahmins eating meat (Agastya, for instance). And, of course, Hinduism as such has no normative book, so specific quotes from particular books would not apply to Hindus as a whole.

Once upon a time, you could not get meat on the streets of Ahmedabad, now the road by IIM is lined with little 3 wheelers selling chicken.
Ain't that the truth? There is even a stall selling food of doubtful provenance that goes by the name "Chinese something-or-the-other". Chinese food in India is actually "better" than authentic Chinese because it often has garam masala, an oft-ignored spice in Chinese restaurants in the States. And, BTW, if you have never tried Pizza Hut in India, you should. It is da bomb!

I think one of the shifts that will happen is the availability of a greater variety of cuisines, since cuisines around the world are generally non-vegetarian. With growing affluence, there is probably going to be a growing market for food and drink from around the world.

I would have to disagree with a blanket statement like that.

I would have to disagree with you. I said an ideal, not a stricture. Ideals by definition cannot be followed by everyone, or they wouldn't be ideals!

Do you expect a vegetarian to first go in knee deep muddy waters in the paddy fields and then prepare his beloved idli/dosa.

Or would you change the channel if they showed a cow being slaughtered on TV?

I came to the US and within a couple of years, I was very disturbed by the way people here treat meat. In India, everyone seemed to have been aware that they are eating an animal. There was no such thing as ground beef which utterly removed the animal-ness of the meat. Here, it was not readily distinguishable from other foods and it was this remoteness from the actual living animal which began to really bother me. This, it seemed, was at the root of factory farming and tremendous environmental damage that is caused by the over-consumption of meat.

As far as cruelty to animals went, it was not the death itself, but the horrible lives of animals and manner of death that seemed most disturbing. I agree with many above that a visit to the factory farm and meat packing plant would be a very uncomfortable experience for most meat-eaters. Anyway, finding out the facts about the meat industry, left me no choice but to turn vegetarian. Still, I'll be fine with eating the meat if I saw the animal being raised or knew that it was wild, and especially if I were a part of the killing and preparation.

Reading this thread, it seems funny to me that my reasons for turning vegetarian were kinda opposite of what was said earlier, i.e., "if only you could see it".

risible,
I would have to disagree with you. I said an ideal, not a stricture. Ideals by definition cannot be followed by everyone, or they wouldn't be ideals!
Everyone or anyone? Do you mean ideal in the sense that it is not practical for each and everybody (and thereby, if it were practical for you, you SHOULD do it and which was not followed by Agastya, Rama, Krishna, etc.)? In the sense that it is some state of perfection that really can never be achieved by anyone? (In which case, everbody will 'Face Hell's Torments' and will be there 'for ever to be'?) Modern Hinduism is informed by the values of the European Enlightenment, and has a universal view of human values and behavior.

There was no such thing as ground beef which utterly removed the animal-ness of the meat.

Well, there is kheema (ground goatmeat usually) and kofte (meatballs). But you made excellent points.

Everyone or anyone?
(In which case, everbody will 'Face Hell's Torments' and will be there 'for ever to be'?)
Hell in Hinduism is a temporary state, there is no eternal damnation.

Modern Hinduism is informed by the values of the European Enlightenment, and has a universal view of human values and behavior.

Baloney. If we're going to make categorical statements about "modern Hinduism", I will contend that its not based on European enlightenment, but the real 'enlightenment' which is the transcending of the limited I for the universal self, via the experiential dimension of spirituality. If anything, the trend in modern Hindu thinking has been towards vegetarianism, not in any judgmental way, but rather because its exponents for the most part believed that a vegetarian diet was more conducive to spritual enquiry; in addition they believed that the great chain of being included all life forms, who are suffering in samsara just as we. Not everyone seeks spritual enquiry; not everyone cares about the wellfare of animals - so absolutely, an ideal.

The thinkers and mystics who preferenced vegetarianism, off the top of my head: Vallalar (Ramalinga Swamy); Arumuga Navalar; Ramana Maharshi; Vivekananda (for sanyasins); Chinmayananda; Swami Lakshman Joo (the preeminent modern exponent of Trika Shaivism); of course Gandhi. Most of these figures aren't Brahmins. I can't think of a single major figure who ate meat, excepting Shirdi Sai Baba.

I haven't had a chance to read through all the comments yet, but I have a few questions:

For #75 and #78, what does eating meat and LIKING veggies have anything to do with it? No one is saying that meat eaters don't like veggies are they? People just complain about the meat eating part of your diet.

Also, for all the vegetarians out there who condemn the killing of animals, do you all wear or buy leather products? silk? where do you draw the line? If you are concerned about the treatment of the animals, especially here in America, shouldn't you become vegan? (I know it's easier said than done)

The thinkers and mystics who preferenced vegetarianism, off the top of my head: Vallalar (Ramalinga Swamy); Arumuga Navalar; Ramana Maharshi; Vivekananda (for sanyasins); Chinmayananda; Swami Lakshman Joo (the preeminent modern exponent of Trika Shaivism); of course Gandhi. Most of these figures aren't Brahmins.

Hmmm, why is Sathya Sai Baba missing from your list? He is by far the most significant spiritual guide India has seen in ages, perhaps since the Buddha himself. And he has probably led more millions worldwide to vegetarianism within his lifetime than anyone else.

there is kheema (ground goatmeat usually) and kofte (meatballs).

Q: What is Jain chicken?
A: Chicken without onion.

Q: What is Jain chicken? A: Chicken without onion.

No the correct answer is : Chicken who has been completely vegeterian.

#131

Also, for all the vegetarians out there who condemn the killing of animals, do you all wear or buy leather products? silk? where do you draw the line? If you are concerned about the treatment of the animals, especially here in America, shouldn't you become vegan?

As far as I can tell no one in this thread has taken an evangelising role in promoting vegetarianism. Food habits and lifestyles are personal choices colored by the environment one grew in and it is a continuum. Different people draw the line at different places. Modern society has drawn the line at cannibalism. Most people draw the line on some kinds of meat as OK and not others. Eg: For Americans cows are OK but not dogs, cats and horses. For the French the horses are just fine. For Koreans and Chinese the dogs are fine as well. For many vegetarians not eating anything involving killing is the norm. Some have extended it to excldue milk and any other animal products. As you said it is hard to go against societal norms, so it is upto the individual to draw the line wherever they are willing and able.

Post 119 truthseeker,

Ok so you agree that the primary Hindu scriptures advocate ahinsa. People are always misled and taken advantage of by those who misinterpret the scriptures for their own advantages. Even before the british got to gujarat in the 18th century the practices of animal scarifices and widow burning were being abolished by Bhagwan Swaminarayan. The british acknowledged the fact that their job was easier because of the influence of Bhagwan Swaminarayan over the people of gujarat, especially the likes of the notorious kathis. That work is being continued by Pramukh Swami Maharaj. THis is the reason you see gujarat with most vegetarians.

Even before the british got to gujarat in the 18th century the practices of animal scarifices and widow burning were being abolished by Bhagwan Swaminarayan.

Gujaratis and Marwaris are vegetarian due to Jain influences on the Vaishnavism they traditionally follow. Swaminarayan devotees didn't really become prevalent till very recently.

Animal sacrifice was more of a shakti worship thing probably most prevalent in the North East (Kalighat).

The Vedas trumps all other scriptures in hinduism. It is Sruthi. You will find animal and even human sacrifices sanctioned in the Vedas. Many hindus still sacrifice animals. It took the British to outlaw human sacrifice and widow burning in India. How do you reconcile these facts with "Ahinsã paramo dharma"?

There are not that many vedic literalists around. Most hindu reformists sects including Vivekananda's Santana Dharma claim to be 'rooted' in the Vedas not directly based on them. Then there are nastik sects that reject the Vedas completely.

Secondly very few Hindus sacrifice animals, most of these are regional tribal traditions that are rapidly disappering due to mainstream Hindu and Christian evangalization.

Animal sacrifice was more of a shakti worship thing probably most prevalent in the North East (Kalighat)....

Secondly very few Hindus sacrifice animals, most of these are regional tribal traditions that are rapidly disappering due to mainstream Hindu and Christian evangalization

Animal sacrifice is fairly common in a lot of places, not just the east or northeast. It is not just related to shakthi worship alone although that is more widespread. Sacrifice is a concept that is still very prevalent in Indian traditions and for those with an agrarian background (~60% of India) sacrifice involves making offerings of their wealth and food, which is produce and goat and chicken and some cases liquor. Whatever it is that one consumes, one can offer it symbolically and ritually to the various dieties before consuming. So for example most villages in Tamil Nadu and Kerala and most likely Andhra and Karnataka have village gods that accept goat and chicken as offerings. Especially Mariamman temples and various other versions of Ammans. The priests are not Brahmins usually and they get a part of the goat or chicken, while the rest is consumed by the worshiping family as a feast. It may be uncommon in some parts of urban India, but is most definitely NOT disappearing! All you have to do is visit any Mariamman temple in Tamil Nadu, Sri Lamka, Malaysia or Singapore. I myself have often seen this rituals during great festivities in my ancestral village. A few examples from the internet follow.

Muthappan temple

When gods accept whisky

Temple overflows with liquor on Ashthami

Among the numerous temples in Goa, one of the most sacred is the Vodgeshwar temple. It is very unique because the God accepts every kind of offering including fish, meat and pheni (liquor made by the fruit of cashew nut, which grows there in abundance). According to the priest of the Temple, this is so because the God feels that whatever business a person does is sacred to him/her as long as the offering is made with a pure heart, it doesn’t matter what the offering is.

From: http://www.bolokids.com/2006/0297.htm

Should we ban animal sacrifice in temples?

Sacrifice Lost and Found--Colonial India and Postcolonial Lanka

Just google for more.

I posted in #41.

for the canadians among us who subscribe to the walrus - the latest issue - has a photoessay on what we eat around the world - the family patkar from india is profiled and their budget runs to $45 or so it seems to be heavy on grain and veggies.

Page 80 - Top panel

Gatineau Canada - The Finken Family: Kirk 43, Danielle 50, Anna 11 and Coco Simone 16. The Finkens try to eat locally produced organic fruit and vegetables ... The children are particularly fond of Indian food - anna lists her favourite food as matar paneer, and Coco, who recently became a vegetarian, likes spiced lentils and chapatis: Weekly expenditure: $158

Page 80 - Bottom panel

Ujjain India - the Patkar Family: Neha 19, Akshay 15, Jayant 48, and Sangeeta 42. Like most devout Hindus, the Patkars are vegetarians. .. Sangeeta notes that the Patkars are more flexible about their vegetarianism than her family was when she was growing up. Akshay, for one, says that he has eaten chicken and likes it. Weekly expenditure: $45.

risible,
I can't think of a single major figure who ate meat, excepting Shirdi Sai Baba.
Ah! I was just saying, you know, that eating meat does not make you less of a Hindu. As you correctly point out, there have always been exceptions.

There was a Thai restaurant, and this is back in the bad ol' eighties before the Internet, that I went to for almost three years until I discovered that they had fish sauce in even the veggie food (and I don't eat fish). Might sound familiar to some.

Also, for all the vegetarians out there who condemn the killing of animals, do you all wear or buy leather products? silk? where do you draw the line? If you are concerned about the treatment of the animals, especially here in America, shouldn't you become vegan? (I know it's easier said than done)

Risible:

You listed Vivekananda as an advocate of vegetarianism, but in fact i0ve found in his works that he actually was advocating meet eating to Indians saying that as now they are too week an so need more rajas etc and that he himself was eating meet before becoming a sannyasin (when that is prohibited). Not an example for vegetarianism (as well as Ramakrishna or other major disciple Swami Brahmananda (Rakhal) who used to go fishing all his life I think.. )

My salutations to all those who are the worshippers of saiva neri, which only would lead to understanding of true love. Any person who follows this neri, was worshipped by all the living beings/animals, as explained in Deiva Thirukkural, by its author Saint Thiruvalluvar, before 2000 years ago. Even after that, even though there are so many thirukkural mandrangal are existing, they are least bothered to propogate the importance of suddha saiva neri--Arulaatchi Aanggillai oon thinbarku, these words have been not given importance by the members of mandrangal through out the world. A revolution to the society before 2000 years could also be seen from the siddar paadalgal, for the upliftment of human race to reach eternal kingdom, through love. Love, Love, Love every living this, which only would lead you to the kingdom of GOD.
Vaazhga Dayavudan.
Adiyen, VR Jayaram Ramanujam.

Guruvarya,
I will ask one question send me the answer on my e-mail is ysunilysunil@yahoo.com.in 1)Desires should be done what power shirdi sai baba will use what is that power name? 2)Desires should be done what power they will tell what is that power name?