My writing is very much cricial to the ariticles, Nayha in fact believing nature and the same time denying nature. She is vegetarian by faith it means nature has prohibitted the non-veg. It is totally wrong in her perspective, because in within the Hindu fold Hindu community or sect they eat meat and those earter called themselve Hindus. Further if you study Hinduism the religious authorities they eat meat, and blood. There are many hindu festivals where they sacrifised the animnals just to eat them. Now come to the natural point, humans are created and make to eat meat, according to the digestive system, according to the teaths and according the body requirements. All these socalled vegetarians they eat and drink milk and cream called (Ghee) and they claim it as vegetarians. But science says that milk is non-veg. because the milk comes out from the fat of the animal body. Eat meat is natural systems, animal grows in multiciplicity in order to supply food, and also from animal we derived the benefit of skin, medicines etc. It is totally illogical not eat the meat and claimed that based on the religion some body is vegetarian it is totally lie.

My apologies to the Alexandra David-Neel Foundation. This remarkable author and explorer was indeed French, and wrote extensively of her experiences in Tibet. Her website lists all of her work, although in French. She died just short of her 102nd birthday in September of 1969.

The way I see it, everything that lives, eats at the cost of something else's life.

Rabbit eats carrot - carrot dies. Wolf eats rabbit - rabbit dies.
Cow eats grass - grass dies. I eat steak - cow dies.
And when I am dead, my body will become food for insects and microbes, become part of the soil, and then become food for plants, which will become food for animals, which will become food for other animals. In the end, everything gets eaten by something - it's the ultimate recycling plan.

All living things have spirits. Having a spirit does not exempt you from the food web. I have a right to eat broccoli, and a bear has the right to eat me. The only difference is that I have the ability to run away, or to put up a struggle, whereas the broccoli doesn't.

If not eating meat makes you feel closer to the Divine, that's your prerogative. For me, eating with respect to the Divine means getting as much of my food as possible from local sources that use environmentally friendly production methods, and offering thanks to the beings whose lives were ended to make my meal, knowing that someday I will repay the debt with my own body.
I am fortunate to be able to grow vegetables in my back yard, and to have access to a farmer's market where I can buy locally produced meats, seafood, dairy, fruits, and vegetables, and actually discuss the methods used with the folks who grew, raised, or caught them. I realize that not everyone has that opportunity, and they eat what is available. That doesn't make them less in touch with the Divine.

Becoming a vegetarian was a personal choice for me, it had nothing to do with the saving of animals.

Why save animals when they can be put to good use for a worthy cause. As far as I am concerned animals can be killed and eaten, by anyone that chooses to eat them. The belief that animals should not be killed is just plain "crazy" to me.

I do not eat meat simply because I do not like it, nothing more. But those that want to eat meat....gor for it and enjoy!

Do vegetarians believe they stand a better chance of being re-born in better positions by virtue of their meat-free bodies? I recommend that all folks interested in their post-mortem fate read the Tibetan Book of the Dead for possible insights.

In addition, the Tantric Buddhist tradition as practiced in Tibet is accompanied by remarkable 'siddhas' or occult powers that certainly fall into the realm of the paranormal. These are a people that consume meat, mind you.

And the most remarkable power is the creation of the 'rainbow body'. A highly adept practitioner of the Tantric arts will always anticipate their death - and will request that their body remain undisturbed for 7 days, in a state of concealment. In fact, this is good advice for anyone. A dead person may actually spend several days detaching from their own corpse, according to the Book of the Dead.

Anyway, at the end of seven days, it will be found that the body is completely gone, and only hair and nails remain. The body has been re-absorbed into the primal fundament from which all things come.

So, no corpse to lay out - this is a sign of extraordinary spiritual development, and a state of 'no return' has been reached. While we in the West are doubful of such things, Madame Alexandra David-Neal, the English lady that spent many years in Tibet, chronicles such things and much more in her classic work on Tibet.

She herself toyed with the occult arts, and it was nearly her undoing.

Vegetables are not necessarily what we need for our spiritual well-being.

I don't think we should condemn anyone! I never called the condomess in Africa wrong because they do not have condoms. Nothing was ever said about being morally superior. The point is we should not view our behavior as being less right for us because somewhere in the world others don't possess the capability to act in the same way. The point is that just because people in Africa get by without protection does not make the view many westerners hold of it less right for them.

Nayha is not condemning or trying to act morally superior to anyone. Meat consumption is predominant in the US (especially veggiless Alaska!) and she feels closer to her faith because she abstains from doing so. No one is saying let's judge people who only have the resources to eat meat as wrong. It is a personal decision that Nayha made and the fact that some people can't act in the same way due to limited resources makes her no less right.

I don't think we should condemn anyone! I never called the condomess in Africa wrong because they do not have condoms. Nothing was ever said about being morally superior. The point is we should not view our behavior as being less right for us because somewhere in the world others don't possess the capability to act in the same way. The point is that just because people in Africa get by without protection does not make the view many westerners hold of it less right for them.

Nayha is not condemning or trying to act morally superior to anyone. Meat consumption is predominant in the US (especially veggiless Alaska!) and she feels closer to her faith because she abstains from doing so. No one is saying let's judge people who only have the resources to eat meat as wrong. It is a personal decision that Nayha made and the fact that some people can't act in the same way due to limited resources makes her no less right.

Actually, Volcker, you're the one that's off base: Just cause people don't have condoms in Africa doesn't mean you can condemn them as 'wrong' for not having them (usually as an excuse to deny them said devices, anyway,)

...Any more than you can claim it's 'morally superior' to treat plant-crops as souless commodities and claim 'moral superiority' for not treating *things with eyes* as soulless commodities,*

Driving around for an hour and a half looking for a correctly-Vegan restauraunt that got its out-of-season veggie food shipped across the country in a rolling refrigerator, isn't inherently better for the world than eating what you can get.

Agribusiness does suck, but idelogical vegetarianism is a luxury for most in this world, and that for those with the metabolism for it. They don't inherently respect their *food,* or living animals, either.

It's sometimes just a world where they don't want to admit we're meat, too.

Nayha, thanks for sharing. I know how difficult it is to be tempted - Lunchtime is no fun during Ramadan. But fighting for something, whether we know why we do it or not, makes us stronger and appreciate what we dont have even more. So going off topic...i will miss you when you go back to school next month :(

Sally, your comments are asinine. If people in a certain area don't have certain options available to them it doesn't make a practice any less wrong for people who do. In Africa, people don't have condoms and have unprotected sex and transmit AIDS. That doesn't mean we should completely disavow safe sex. Likewise, just because some people live in barren areas of Alaska that lack vegetation does not mean that Nayha (a female name, by the way) should not be a vegetarian - she should do whateve it is that makes her feel closer to God so long as others are not harmed. My point is we can not allow the misfortunes and shortcomings of certain populations undermine our core beliefs.

Paganplace, if you think bodies are pumped full of plasti. You clearly have no understanding of the embalming practice.

Vegetarianism is a sign of cultural indoctrination. It has nothing to do with religion. In fact vegetarianism is a life-choice as humanity does eat meat, and has done so for thousands of years (cave drawings).

I would ask the Author whether he has visited Alaska or the back-end of Argentina where no vegetables grow? In fact I ask all those who think vegetarianism is the "real" thing to genuinely ask themselves, in their reflective moments, whether, when forced to eat meat or starve, they would starve.

Philosophers who wax pompously about vegetarianism are especially irritable to me as they have rarely experienced ghetto poverty or lived in a climate like Northern China or Russia where vegetables are scarce. I wish they would get out of their offices more.

The poor of the world eat what they can, when they can and eat what they can afford to buy.
And they obviously buy only what is available.

Thare ain't no cabbages in Siberia, kiddo.

After journeying around the world on the seat of my pants, I have learned that vegetarianism is best understood as a life-choice luxury.

In the Gobi desert (Xinjiang Province, China), it would be a foolish man indeed who refused to eat meat in favour of religious practices. This is because there's simply nothing else to eat there.

Unfortunately the "know-alls" of the world believe that becoming vegetarian makes one holy, more pure or some such rot and try to shove this doctrine on the rest of us.

One eats what one can when one is poor. Obviously the author has forgotten this, or if he hasn't forgotten this, lacks life-challenging experinces that illuminated the validity of my claim.

Aha: here we are in a way:

"Or, as Rabbi Hillel said when asked to summarize the Torah, "Do not do unto others, that which is hateful to thee.""

"I have no wish to be caught, killed and eaten -- and since animals and fish also resist being caught and killed, it is no by no means a stretch to include them in "others."

Not if that's how you see it. If that's how you honor our animal brethren, that's good practice enough. But it's not 'the way things are.' Unlikely as it may be, I'd much rather be eaten by animals, (And you bet your bippy I'd put up as worthy a fight as I could, and think it a good death apart from creating other problems for the Fish and Wildlife Service. :) )... than die in a sterile room and get pumped full of plastic and stuck in a metal box in some effort to exempt my body from the Wheel.

Really, the hour of the Hunter comes for us all, and that's something to remember in the act of taking meat. To take from need and not wantoness, etc, etc, knowing we share the same eventual fate: this is something seen to *connect* us with our prey, not put them beneath us.

As was mentioned about the Dalai Lama, the Buddhist monks have their own bodies put out for carrion birds, not unlike the Gaels revered corvids, who carry us on, literally or symbolically.

"Unfortunately for this line of thinking no matter what actions you take you will die. After this your flesh will be food for other creatures. Cremation can mitigate this to some extent."

Funny, but I actually see cremation as a modernly-acceptable way *not* to get shot full of plastic and stuck in a box in some attempt to keep the meat body from returning to Earth. :)

As a Catholic, I believe that Spiderman2 is still in the monkey stage :-p

Spiderman2 and a lot of other people are rude and ignorant, among other things.

I think it is great that Nayha feels that she can feel closer to her faith through vegetarianism. It certainly doesn't hurt anyone and it's a healthier lifestyle, so I think it should really be applauded instead of criticized. To the person (I believe it was Spiderman2) who was aghast at the notion of faith triumphing over reason, I would like to say that faith DOES triumph over reason. When it comes down to it, everyone has faith. What makes this world intelligible by reason? You have to have a fundamental faith that things are capable of being understood by reason.

My only disagreement is that potatoes could possibly be the feature of a meal. I have a saying that goes: "it's not a meal without potatoes." It means that you aren't eating a "meal" if you don't have a side of potatoes, but I think from it that you could logically infer potatoes alone to be a meal.

And everyone needs to lighten up about Nayha having difficulty only eating potatoes for a month in Peru. That's understandable and I think anyone would have the same problems. She is not being provincial or ungracious, she is simply expressing that it was a challenge for her. Guess what! She wasn't born in Peru and she's not from Peru so potatoes aren't going to be a luxury to her. There is always someone who has it worse than us but that doesn't mean we don't have a right to be frustrated and that we should just shrug off our struggles.

Good job, Nayha!! Don't listen to these idiots.

Spiderman2 - I swear, you seem to lose brain cells with every post .... you should see a neurologist about that.

Before long you'll be chattering like a rhesus monkey.

Good attempt Deb , to be vegetarian us the nice thing. I do think that people do it just for the sake of satisfying the demand of their tongue. Killing any one is sinful act,and eating them as well. God will not forgive them who are doing these sinful act.
________________________________

Roger
Digital Infosys

Spiderman2:

You amuse me. I have a question: what's a "false" religion ? Is Christianity also a false religion as it is a summation of "beliefs" that are really unproven ? Is adherence to vegetarianism a unique path to salvation, and other paths "false" ?

Regarding the evils of caste system in Hinduism, the situation is more of a tradition of exploitation than "religious" sanction.

The holiest of the Hindu scriptures, Bhagavad Gita cautions against such racist views. Chapter 16 (verses 14 to 16) clearly states that those who will assume supremacy because of birth into a higher caste family status, will be sent to torment in eternal hell in subsequent rebirths, and shall be deprived of any salvation.

However the origins of this caste system is complicated. Its origins are found in the Vedic eras, where in the Manusmriti (Code of Manu) it is stated that:

XII. 4. "If the shudra intentionally listens for committing to memory the veda, then his ears should be filled with (molten) lead and lac; if he utters the veda, then his tongue should be cut off; if he has mastered the veda his body should be cut to pieces."

(See the link: http://www.raceandhistory.com/worldhotspots/hindulaws.htm )

This stricture was negated and abrogated later in the revelations in the Bhagavad Gita.

Deb

Thank you for the additional information about Bengali Brahmins. I agree it would take active Brahmins in India to get rid of the evils of the caste system. If they don't, I strongly recommend mass conversion of lower caste Hindus to other religions which have no caste system. One of the Nambudiri Brahmins from Kerala who did much to bring about equality in Kerala is EMS Nambudiripad. He proved that communism could be used as a force for good. Although Kerala is not a rich state, and there is very little high tech industry there, (none of the world class achievements of Bengalis) there is more social equality in Kerala than anywhere else in India. It also has a literacy rate comparable to any Western country. That is attributed to the three Cs: Commerce, Christianity and (Democratic) Communism.

The caste system in Hinduism is complicated indeed. For example the Nambudiri Brahmins in Kerala who follow the oldest Vedic religion, consider themselves superior to all other Brahmins. Why this is so I cannot say. Their rules for living would make the most orthodox Judaism seem simple in comparison. Similarly Hindus (and even Christians) outside Kerala are not aware of the fact that many Christians in Kerala who converted by Apostle Thomas in 52 AD were Nambudiri Brahmins (the ancestry can be traced with Christian family names which closely resemble or are similar to Hindu Nambudiri family names) and other high caste Hindus. It is only because they refused to give up their Hindu social customs and caste consciousness and did not mix with others that Christianity did not spread within India as it should have, considering the command to spread the good news of Jesus and His work of salvation around the world was given by Jesus Himself.

Since I represent a Brahmin convert to Christianity, I can claim that Vivekandanda's statement "God forbid that a Hindu, Christian or Muslim should convert" is simply not true. Every human being should have the freedom to follow a spiritual path of their choice and the freedom to convert is part of that basic human right. Even a spiritual giant like Vivekananda was mistaken in his notion that conversion is wrong.

A word about consumption of meat: it is generally known that too much meat is consumed in the West. The way animals are raised for meat and the way they are treated is not laudable. I liked the idea of kosher meat as described by Rabbi Waskow in his essay recently. We should treat the animals better and eat only as much meat as is absolutely essential for optimum health.

AJ wrote "Let me take the example of white supremacy".

White supremacy is not a Christian doctrine. It comes from a theory which true Christians despise. It's called Evolution.

True Christians don't believe in evolution but Catholicism believes in it. That is because Catholicism is not Christianity. It's a fake.

Catholicsim believes that their "god" made them a monkey first before they turned to human.

Now you know why this chuch is good in monkey business.

Vegetable is good for the health and too much meat is not. But if a person becomes vegetarian because his religion says so, it becomes a triumph of STUPIDITY over REASON.

False religions are destructive because it trains people to be stupid.

The religion that teaches Nayha to be vegetarian is THE SAME RELIGION that teaches that some people are born UNTOUCHABLES - a sector in Indian society who are treated as heathen.

****

excerpt from wikipedia :

In the context of traditional Hindu society, Dalit status has often been historically associated with occupations regarded as ritually impure, such as any occupation involving killing, handling of animal cadavers or night soil (human feces). One million Dalits work as manual scavengers, cleaning latrines and sewers by hand and clearing away dead animals.[4] Engaging in these activities was considered to be polluting to the individual who performed them, and this pollution was considered to be 'contagious'.

As a result, Dalits were commonly banned and segregated from full participation in HINDU social life (they could not enter the premises of a temple or a school and stayed outside the village), while elaborate precautions were sometimes observed to prevent incidental contact between Dalits and other Hindus.

Croaker - the Dalai Lama has explained elsewhere why he eats meat. And this is typical among Tibetan Buddhists....among their traditions, is the laying out of corpses to be consumed by other creatures. Meat is as meat does....

It seems to me that your Buddhist friend is overly pre-occupied with his 'pure' body being a 'charnel ground' for dead meat? I sense some self-righteousness there. A vegetarian diet can be a wise choice, but just not the only choice.

On the other hand, the meat industry is a very nasty business in many respects - the humane treatment of animals being raised for slaughter should be a foremost consideration, and is not. This is an abomination, in my opinion.

Kosher meats are a different story - and are raised and slaughtered in accordance with certain rabbinnical bi-laws.

However, kosher meat does not have to be raised by a Jew - I once knew a very non-Jewish farmer that made his living raising kosher beef. The beef (veal) is typically slaughtered at a young age.

Most people I know abhore unnecessary suffering in other creatures - something called bio-filia..or a natural empathy for and with other lifeforms. As for me, I have a hard time killing flies, and cockroaches - but will do it if provoked! I'm not a Jain, but I never kill spiders.....other folks seem to think it's a duty to kill arachnids. It's really irritating.

However, when I'm cremated (and I will be), I hope to God they throw the damn ashes in the river, or even the trash....ain't nothing there, anyway. Why clutter up the mantle?

Norm Phelps wrote:

"I applaud Mr. Patel for not eating the bodies of our murdered brother and sister beings, ..."

This means you are happy that Eboo Patel is not eating murdered (dead) human beings ?

I am confused !

I'm sorry, I've never written on this forum before and am not even a vegetarian (although I don't eat red meat) but the comments of "Secular" below are among the most asinine I have ever read anywhere. A cow's life carries the same value as a piece of grass?

What ever you believe, if you can't even be intellectually honest in an anonymous forum, you are certainly damned to suffer.

Mr. Patel devotes an entire column to vegetarianism without once mentioning the animals who are imprisoned, tormented, and killed while they are still children so that their dead bodies can be turned into food that we do not need to lead long, healthy lives. Instead, he makes it all about him, treating vegetarianism as a personal, almost ritualistic, statement of commitment to Hinduism, and is dismissive of the reasons why Hinduism commited itself to vegetarianism in the first place. The primary reason is compassion for the suffering of animals, a consideration that does not appear to be on Mr. Patel's radar screen. An ancient Tamil scripture, the Tirukural says that, "Riches cannot be found in the hands of spendthrifts/Compassion cannot be found in the hearts of meat eaters." (252) In the modern era, Mahatma Gandhi spoke uncompromisingly of "The Moral Basis of Vegetarianism," (available on the web) The International Society for Krishna Consciousness promotes vegetarianism as a foundation of Hindu ethics, and the popular magazine "Hinduism Today" frequently carries articles calling for vegetarianism as a compassionate practice at the heart of Hindu belief--for the sake of the suffering animals. I applaud Mr. Patel for not eating the bodies of our murdered brother and sister beings, but I would urge him to look deeper into why his faith has taught vegetarianism for thousands of years.It wasn't as a way show commitment to a Hindu identity; it was out of compassion for the suffering of animals. It's not about us; it's about them.

I grew up in India in a progressive, urban, non-traditional, completely agnostic/atheist household where both meat and scotch were consumed with gusto. However, our meals also featured wonderful vegetarian dishes. So, when I decided to become a vegetarian in my early 40s, I wasn't victim to the absurd notion that being a vegetarian meant losing out on taste and variety. Some of the world's most tantalizing cuisines - Indian, Thai, Italian, and those around the Mediterranean present more choices than there are days in the lifespan of the average American. While my decision to become a vegetarian is primarily based on a secular respect for all animals, and a belief that evolutionary biology doesn't dictate that I, unlike a large cat, need meat to survive, I have to credit growing up in a country where vegetarianism is normative to happily embrace my new vision. To me, meat has come to represent the cries of an animal who would rather live.

I grew up in India in a progressive, urban, non-traditional, completely agnostic/atheist household where both meat and scotch were consumed with gusto. However, our meals also featured wonderful vegetarian dishes. So, when I decided to become a vegetarian in my early 40s, I wasn't victim to the absurd notion that being a vegetarian meant losing out on taste and variety. Some of the world's most tantalizing cuisines - Indian, Thai, Italian, and those around the Mediterranean present more choices than there are days in the lifespan of the average American. While my decision to become a vegetarian is primarily based on a secular respect for all animals, and a belief that evolutionary biology doesn't dictate that I, unlike a large cat, need meat to survive, I have to credit growing up in a country where vegetarianism is normative to happily embrace my new vision. To me, meat has come to represent the cries of an animal who would rather live.

I grew up in India in a progressive, urban, non-traditional, completely agnostic/atheist household where both meat and scotch were consumed with gusto. However, our meals also featured wonderful vegetarian dishes. So, when I decided to become a vegetarian in my early 40s, I wasn't victim to the absurd notion that being a vegetarian meant losing out on taste and variety. Some of the world's most tantalizing cuisines - Indian, Thai, Italian, and those around the Mediterranean present more choices than there are days in the lifespan of the average American. While my decision to become a vegetarian is primarily based on a secular respect for all animals, and a belief that evolutionary biology doesn't dictate that I, unlike a large cat, need meat to survive, I have to credit growing up in a country where vegetarianism is normative to happily embrace my new vision. To me, meat has come to represent the cries of an animal who would rather live.

My father's family line came out of cattle raising Wyoming. As a child and young man I hunted and fished following the lead of my father and grandfather. However, after many years of finding venison (deer or elk meat) intolerable to eat, I came to the conclusion, at age 17, that I wanted nothing more to do with eating meat. Now 40 years later, I honor the wisdom of that choice. I have never missed it even for a moment.

If one is aware of the how the meat industry works--with the addition of artificial flavors and colors, as well as antibiotics and/or synthetic hormones, not to mention feeding animals "non-vegetarian" diets-- it becomes clear that meat consumption is decidedly not good for your health.

Look at the largest land animals...elephants, rhinoceros, oxen, horses--none of them are meat eating. If one choose to eat meat that is their personal choice and to be respected. But perhaps one should consider the directive, "Thou shall not kill", in that choice.

Peace.

RAS:

Asked why he was a vegetarian, a friend of mine (a Buddhist monk) responded simply:

"I don't want my body to be a charnel ground for dead animals."

Or, as Rabbi Hillel said when asked to summarize the Torah, "Do not do unto others, that which is hateful to thee."

I have no wish to be caught, killed and eaten -- and since animals and fish also resist being caught and killed, it is no by no means a stretch to include them in "others

Unfortunately for this line of thinking no matter what actions you take you will die. After this your flesh will be food for other creatures. Cremation can mitigate this to some extent.

For every animal the author does not eat, I will gladly consume three....

I am a "Vegetarian” non practicing Hindu". I never developed taste for Non Vegetarian food because I was raised by strictly vegetarian (not very religious) parents. However I do believe that as far as possible animals should not be tortured and butchered for food.
I believe Hinduism does not specifically prohibit meat eating in any written literature (Agreed Hindus do not have their Bible or Koran to refer to). At the same time it is very natural to think that Hinduism requires its followers to be Vegetarianism because it teaches compassion for all living creatures.
Geography plays important role, where most Hindus residing near sea (all Southern Indian states and state of Bengal, except perhaps State of Gujarat) eat meat. Hindus in Northern State are generally vegetarians. Most young Hindus living in urban area eat Chicken. I also believe that one reason of Vegetarianism is the fact that it is less expensive and can feed a lot more people than non vegetarian diet can.

spiderman 2. You say - it's the same religion that says avoid untoucbles - let me tell you, that the religion has nothing to do with it, but the people who created the caste system at that time. Let me take teh example of white supremacy - "good Christians" considered that god is white and they are superior to blacks and others - i dont think i have to explain further spiderman 2 . Think about yourself before you find fault in others.

Asked why he was a vegetarian, a friend of mine (a Buddhist monk) responded simply:

"I don't want my body to be a charnel ground for dead animals."

Or, as Rabbi Hillel said when asked to summarize the Torah, "Do not do unto others, that which is hateful to thee."

I have no wish to be caught, killed and eaten -- and since animals and fish also resist being caught and killed, it is no by no means a stretch to include them in "others

well written nayha! i'm really sad about your peru experience though i hope in time that you learn to eat/appreciate what your host graciously and proudly offers to you especially if you're burdening them with your stay as well. didn't like the whole vegetrn=hindu=vegetrn spin either. but very well written although it didn't put you in good light (with me)

something worth repeating:
"Reluctance to eat meat in Hinduism may also be due to belief in reincarnation, since Hinduism generally associates only animals with reincarnation; not plants or fish."

I was born and raised in a family where one part of family my mother and grandmother were vegetarian because their ancestors adhered to vegetarian diet. My father on the other hand was not.

I became vegetarian after my father died and for years I had no yearning or cravings or even a slight desire to be non-vegetarian again. In fact till few years ago I was totally vegetarian and never missed the chickens, eggs or meat.

Then couple of years ago, I reverted to being a non-vegetarian on insistence of my kids. During the past couple of years I found to my surprise that non-vegetarian diet was not suitable for my health. Even though I practiced eating measured portion of non-vegetarian diet, I gained weight at an alarming rate, even though I exercised regularly.

So I decided that it was best for me to revert back to vegetarian diet if only for reason of health, which I did few months back. I feel comfortable again and reduced the exceptionally high weight gained during past couple of years.

I know from my personal experience, that people should not only consider religious beliefs to decide their diets.

It is important to consider what is best for health. After all food is just fuel for body - in both calorific and spiritual sense.

I hope this discussion has made people realize one thing about Hinduism. You can believe in anything and still be a Hindu. There is no compulsion in Hinduism, unlike the other religions. It is one of the most egalitarian religions out there.

you can also be an atheist and be a Hindu.

Mag Pie:

You are truly an idiot.

[Secular] Tsk! Tsk! such invective is unbecoming.

What is "hogwash" about doing no harm (ahimsa)?

"It is . . . an universal fact of nature that a species has to subsist on another species for sustenance and survival."

How do you figure? Many species in the animal world are herbivores. Horses (including thoroughbred racers), deer, and cows eat plants, not meat. Humans' tooth and jaw design has been shown scientifically to be suited to processing plant foods, not flesh.

[Secular] Mag I will let you in on a secret "Species" includes animals and plants, all living things.

"They rather deprive the poos calf and use cow's milk for themselves."

Hate to burst your bubble, but those "poos" calves don't get their mothers' milk, either. In the dairy industry, cows are artifically impregnated as often as possible, and their calves are taken away immediately so that the milk can be harvested for humans. They are kept pregnant constantly for this purpose.

[Secular] Mag, Mag, Mag - vegetarianism is not today's thing it comes from ages. The present days industry is nothing but process re-engineering to meet the demands of the populace. All that to meet the demand for milk.

"The don't mind letting the meat rot but won't mind the wearing leather coats, bags, etc, etc."

The meat wouldn't rot if it stayed on the animal. And the beef industry in this country is responsible for much of the world's hunger, because we feed grain that humans could be eating to the cows we kill for meat. The amount of grain required to "grow" a pound of beef would feed a starving family of 6 for a month.

[Secular] Then how will you get that Gucci bag, if you don't kill the animal. That is cow's problem - you see the cow needs to live off of something that is another species.

As to leather, if you actually talk to committed, strict vegetarians, you'll find that they don't use leather at all. There are many good substitutes nowadays, and lots of "leather-looking" bags and shoes are, in fact, synthetic.

[Secular] That is today's option. Again leather goods have been used for several millenia.

Wake up and do some reading. Learn something!

[Secular] Mag Mag Mag, dear Mag I do read contrary to your opinion. First you need to get this every living thing is a living thing and is a life. Consume what you like in moderation. Eat what you want in moderation and stop being sanctimonious. Above all dont take the crap out of stone age myths called scriptures and follow them irrationally.

Like Nayha, I was brought up vegetarian by my Indian parents while growing up here in the US. While here in the US, it's been quite easy to lead a vegetarian lifestyle, I foresee, in my future travels, having to confront this very issue as I travel to places a bit farther off the beaten path. I honestly don't know what I will do.

Soja wrote:

"I'm not sure if I got this one right (Deb Chatterjee could correct me) Bengalis eat fish and still consider themselves vegetarian."

Unfortunately, though I am born into the upper level elitist Brahmin family, and I consume animal products, except beef & pork, I am not by any stretch of accepted norm a vegetarian. This does not bother me at all, however.

What bothers me is the racisim that is shown towards Bengali brahmins by non-Bengali Brahmins from the North and South of India. In many instances I have encountered that I was not allowed to enter certain temples because I was not a vegetarian Brahmin. I had to perform "shuddhi" (purification) and chant prayers that proclaim my unclean status and then enter the temple complex. This racism by the stupid vegetarian Hindu Brahmins is a part and parcel of the racist Hindu culture. When I told a priest in Orissa (where I went to visit a temple in 2003), that I live in USA, this uneducated joker assumed that I automatically ate beef/pork and flatly refused to accept offerings because he (erroneously) thought I have turned into an apostate through my eating habits. He told me that I shall burn in eternal hell in my afterlife.

Little do these idiots forget that Vedic racism is not going to lead to their salvation. (Swami Vivekananda had similar problems too, in 1897).

However such humiliation has not taken off my faith from the religious/spiritual/metaphysical aspects of Hinduism. But, I understand that I am more privileged to combat such racist attitudes than other unfortunates; these are undelying reasons why many (and could include Eboo Patel's ancestors) Hindus may have converted to Islam.

RELIGION IS THE OPIATE OF THE MASSES.

To Rajneesh Gupta:

You say, "Faith and Diet!! Are they connected?? Don't think so. Does being a vegetarian make you more spiritual and/or less violent? Hitler was a vegetarian."

It is because animals have the capacity to suffer that vegetariansim has a spiritual component. By sparing this suffering, we enrich our spiritual connection with all of life.

And, no, Hitler was not a vegetarian. This is a commonly repeated falsehood. There are several books on the subject, and biographies of Hitler also address this misconception. He may have extolled the virtues of eating vegetables, but he was an enthusiastic consumer of sausages throughout his adult life.

Secular:

You are truly an idiot.

What is "hogwash" about doing no harm (ahimsa)?

"It is . . . an universal fact of nature that a species has to subsist on another species for sustenance and survival."

How do you figure? Many species in the animal world are herbivores. Horses (including thoroughbred racers), deer, and cows eat plants, not meat. Humans' tooth and jaw design has been shown scientifically to be suited to processing plant foods, not flesh.

"They rather deprive the poos calf and use cow's milk for themselves."

Hate to burst your bubble, but those "poos" calves don't get their mothers' milk, either. In the dairy industry, cows are artifically impregnated as often as possible, and their calves are taken away immediately so that the milk can be harvested for humans. They are kept pregnant constantly for this purpose.

"The don't mind letting the meat rot but won't mind the wearing leather coats, bags, etc, etc."

The meat wouldn't rot if it stayed on the animal. And the beef industry in this country is responsible for much of the world's hunger, because we feed grain that humans could be eating to the cows we kill for meat. The amount of grain required to "grow" a pound of beef would feed a starving family of 6 for a month.

As to leather, if you actually talk to committed, strict vegetarians, you'll find that they don't use leather at all. There are many good substitutes nowadays, and lots of "leather-looking" bags and shoes are, in fact, synthetic.

Wake up and do some reading. Learn something!

My sister became a vegetarian because she went fishing and witnessed a fish dying on dry land. Personally, if I had to kill an animal in order to eat it, I wouldn't. But since someone else kills my food, I eat my steak & cheese with glee. However, I have cut back dramatically to avoid the woeful health consequences of overconsumption of animal products.
However, the judeo-christian faith has fasting. Though most Christians will not fast in the same vein as Moses and Jesus (who actually completed a fast- and for those who don't know, a fast is completed when the hunger sensation returns), some Christians do a partial version of the ritual so-to-speak. The whole purpose is to put the flesh under submission to the spirit. So, yes, I do believe there is a connection between eating and the spirit. Anyone can see that outside of the religious domain- with anorexia, bulimia, emotional eating leading to morbid obesity... I don't think it's a long shot to connect the two.

It is the most silly thing all these superstitious religions (I know to all us atheists, that it is an exercise in redundancy.)to restrict diet. Diet should be completely left to the individual, and should be restricted by the individual's own whims, fancies, squeamishness and its edibility. It is , often not explicitly recognized, an universal fact of nature that a species has to subsist on another species for sustenance and survival. Given that the choice of the other species should be left completely to the individual and the individual alone. This ahimsa, purity, violence are just hogwash perpetrated by un-reason - religion. I know every one of these vegetarians & even the vegans consume diary products and leather products (especially when they have brand name like Gucci, Coach, etc) without batting an eye. They rather deprive the poos calf and use cow's milk for themselves. The don't mind letting the meat rot but won't mind the wearing leather coats, bags, etc, etc. Yet they get all sanctimonious with likes of me - who relishes his 16Oz medium-rare New york strip. I tell the sanctimonious, that when I kill a cow I take one life and sustain myself on that one cow for at least two months easily - and they get to wear their leather coats and carry their leather purses. In contrast a vegetarian each time when she/he eats a bowl of rice kills tens of thousands of rice grasses - of course I get to burn they hay to grill my steak. Now how do you compare at least a few orders of magnitude difference in the number of lives they are expending compared to me. Who is the more ethical person one who expends one life a month compared to millions of lives every month. After all life is a life is a life, isn't it? My two cents on the topic.

Dear Ms Arora

From what I remember of Indian customs (I left India in Dec 1987) only Hindu Brahmins are vegetarians. I understand that in Gujarat even most Hindu non-Brahmins are vegetarians because of the strong Jain influence. In the South, Hindu non-Brahmins who do eat meat refrain from eating beef and pork. However the lowest Hindu caste eats any kind of meat. In North East India Hindus are known to eat all kinds of meat, as also gypsies everywhere.

I'm not sure if I got this one right (Deb Chatterjee could correct me) Bengalis eat fish and still consider themselves vegetarian.

To my knowledge there are three schools of Hindu thought regarding eating. First, meat is considered rajasic and supposedly gives the mind a different kind of outward bound energy, not conducive to meditation, hence meat is generally prohibited for those aspiring for higher spiritual levels. Second: one could be a vegetarian and still be violent person, hence food in itself does not lead to virtue. Third: When one is spiritualIy advanced, food has no impact on one's temperament. E.g. Jesus. He ate meat and yet was non-violent to the extreme.

Reluctance to eat meat in Hinduism may also be due to belief in reincarnation, since Hinduism generally associates only animals with reincarnation; not plants or fish.

A strictly vegan diet is not recommended since there is likely to be some deficiency of Vitamin B12.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on why you choose to be a vegetarian. Of course you are right, people who have no idea of the vast vegetarian Indian cuisine mistakenly imagine all Indian vegetarians must live on bland boiled vegetables. Even those of us who eat meat after all eat more vegetables than meat.

Vegetable is good for the health and too much meat is not. But if a person becomes vegetarian because his religion says so, it becomes a triumph of STUPIDITY over REASON.

False religions are destructive because it trains people to be stupid.

The religion that teaches Eboo to be vegetarian is THE SAME RELIGION that teaches that some people are born UNTOUCHABLE - a sector in Indian society who are treated as heathen.

"Oh, What Blindness !! What Lack of Understanding!! " (Jose Rizal)

It is true that everything has a spirit, including fruits and vegetables. It is believed in Hinduism though that there is less bad karma associated with killing a fruit or vegetable as there is associated with killing an animal.

We are living in this world and we must eat to survive. But if we can still get by without killing animals, I would support that, as a Hindu.

To draw a parallel, many of us want to save energy to help the environment, but we can't live in the dark. So we can use lightbulbs that conserve energy instead. If we keep speaking in extremes, we'll never come to a conclusion. Marrying practicality and pure intention is how faith can last through the ages.

Paganplace,

That's a very compelling argument. Indeed, Hindu forms of spiritualism believe that everything has the touch/manifestation of the Supreme (Atman).

So, yes plants have life too following that line of thinking. If you are a vegetarian, you *ARE* indeed killing plants to keep yourself alive. One can pander to the "survival of the fittest" verbiage, but that does not absolve the vegan/vegetarian of the "sins" committed while "killing plants/plucking fruits" for proper balance of the vegan's gastric juices. In fact, my principled opposition to the dogma of vegetarianism is precisely what you have written here.

Being vegetarian is a nice option if you are of the right blood type and all. I think what cheeses a lot of people off is (often hypocritically, in the case of pig-pickin-barbecue Fundies) ...those who get moralistic about it, often with the convert's zeal.

Not everyone was made to 'run on unleaded' in that manner, however 'virtuous' it's considered to be not to eat anything you have to face to get your life from. My attitude is, 'Plants have spirits, too, if you can't respect a vegetable, how you expect you know about disrespecting an animal?'

You respect your food, whatever it is. And you thank the field mice that died so a massive combine could bring you your tofu.

Faith and Diet!! Are they connected?? Don't think so. Does being a vegetarian make you more spiritual and/or less violent? Hitler was a vegetarian. Most jihadis, including bin laden are non-vegetarians.

So I think people do not care what you eat as long as you do not kill humans.

Many Americans/ Christians are now vegetarians and likewise many Hindus are non-vegetarians. To each his/her own.

Sandeep wrote:

"...vegetarianism is the recommended life style, more so for people desirous of spiritual advancement."

How so ? Swami Vivekananda, disciple of Sree Ramakrishna, was not a strict vegetarian. I don't know what sources you are citing that recommends vegetarianism for its direct connection with spiritual progress. For "sanyasis" (monks/hermits) I might agree it is recommended. It is assumed here that monks/hermits have one objective: to attain spiritual progress, and abandon material pleasures. But not for "grihis" (family people). So, what you are implying is that "grihis" who may engage in material pleasures and would resort to non-vegeratianism shall not attain "mukti" or progress in the path of spiritual upliftment. If that's an implication, then such is purely absurd.

If you can succintly summarize your reasons and sources for your view, viz., that "mainstream" Hinduism advocates vegetarianism for all its adherents (monks/hermits), it would be of much help.

Stuart and Sandeep:
| Most major paths of Hinduism hold vegetarianism as an ideal.

I don't agree with this statement.

| That other Hindus eat meat does not change this basic ideal of the faith.

Like Deb also says, Hindus have eaten and do eat meat. I don't think Hinduism has anything to say about this subject. Whether one is vegetarian or not has more to do with your upbringing / culture / environment / circumstances in general, and less, if anything to do with Hinduism.

Vinay and Deb:

I agree with Stuart. Hinduism suggests/recommends practising vegetarianism, there is obviously no strict "rule", if you will. That is the beauty of Hinduism, you are free to practise whatever "brand" suits you. But for a variety of reasons (which I won't go into), vegetarianism is the recommended life style, more so for people desirous of spiritual advancement.

Hello Nayha,

So, long as the cardinal functions/traits/features of your "faith" don't cause others any harm, it is OK - that is I mean as a practice compatible with a free, secular, civilized society.

However, what I find unacceptable is that if your faith does not have any philosophical basis but is rather an assemblage of rituals and beliefs passed on from generations. Such beliefs or practices, regardless of how harmless they are, are man-made and may not necessarily be a modal form of spirituality/transcendentalism that Hindus adhere to.

Hindus have associated the Divine as a realization of the "inner self". The various sacred texts of the Hindu belief system - the ones that have philosophical leanings, have nothing forbidden in them with specifics on eating habits. The Bhagavad Gita does not prohibit eating beef or non-veg.

Many of the Hindu kings slaughtered cows, water buffaloes and their meat was used for general feast. (We read of the Aswamedha Yajna performed by Kings and Emperors, and the detailed descriptions testify to this fact.) The practice in Thailand, at the temple of Angkor Vat, Lord Vishnu was worshipped by meat of the water buffalo. Angkor Vat was built by seafaring Hindu traders during the times of Samudragupta (100 BC). So, that practice was/is not Hinduism ?

My point is that you remain a vegetarian is fine. That's your interpretation and comes from the way you were born and raised. No one should ask you to change at all. Its your birthright. However, you are projecting a very narrow spectrum of Hindu belief system, which otherwise is very permissive, and accepts many paths as leading to the realization of the same Supreme Goal (Paramathma/Param-Brahma).

Of course members of the Abrahamic family (particularly Christians and Muslims) would be dumbfounded by the existence of this wide variety, as theirs is very starkly rigid view. Similar assertions can be made of the RSS and VHP in present-day India, who often attempt to impose their brand/version of Hinduism on others.

Vinay: Most major paths of Hinduism hold vegetarianism as an ideal. That other Hindus eat meat does not change this basic ideal of the faith.

Very well written article...thank you!

Whenever I come across vegetarian-Nonvegetarian dabates in western media, it makes me chuckle.

Reading westerners' reaction to being vegetarian gives me impression that they think vegetarians just eat a plate of boiled vegetables three times a day.

They don't seem to have any idea that there are literally hundreds of vegetarian dishes, that include everything from snacks, fastfoods, main courses to desserts. Vegetarian menu is just as diverse and expansive as meat-based menu. And yes it also includes lean-mean healthy choices and unhealthy ones full of sugar and fat.

Following up on my comment earlier, I would assert:

TRUE: Some (many?) Hindus are are vegetarian
FALSE: All Hindus are vegetarians
FALSE: :-) All vegetarians are Hindus

Nayha-

Thank you for this story. I was inspired by it, and I have begun to think of other ways that we are reminded of our faith, whatever faith that may be, by the intentional pauses we put in our lives. I enjoyed your view of religious “restrictions” as not mindless outdated laws, but as true spiritual gifts.
We live in a world of want-take-have and moments like these, where want does not equal have, are important. They give us perspective, make us thankful, and guide us to be more intentional about our wants and our faith.
Great article!

If it makes you happy, great!

In the meantime, I'll gleefully be consuming your share of almost every meat I can find! NUMMY!

PETA = People Eating Tasty Animals

I am a Hindu but am not a vegetarian.

While I congratulate Nayha on her fortitude and determination to remain vegetarian in difficult circumstances, I object to her characterization of Hinduism as requiring its adherents to be vegetarians.

Millions of Hindus eat meat.

I have just recently become a vegetarian and for very different reasons than most as I am finding out.

As an atheist, I can't claim that it was faith in a higher power that lead me to this decision. Nor was this decision based on a love of animals. It was based on the value I give to human beings all around the globe and my belief that we humans are the only ones responsible for our own well-being.

For most of my life I always figured going meatless was a matter of personal choice. In that regard, I always thought of it as a silly choice for myself. Why would I purposefully avoid something I found readily available and so tasty?

I have recently spent some time in West Africa with the Peace Corps and it has opened my eyes to many situations going on in the world outside of America. I have been listening to reports about the world food shortage and they have scared me. For the first time since records have been kept on the subject the number of starving people in the world is set to grow rather than decline. And then I found out that it takes about 20 tons of grain to produce 1 ton of red meat here in the US. A 20 to 1 ratio. 20 tons of edible food converted into 1 ton on a regular basis and the consumption of red meat in America is still on the rise...

Needless to say, a decision I once considered a silly personal choice became one of social responsibility to me. Before this, every time I would go out to eat I would order a burger or steak; I did this so regularly that my wife took to calling me her 'red meat man'. Once upon a time, had vegetarianism been forced on me, I would have considered it a punishment. I would have hated every second of it and truly struggled with the idea of not eating meat.

Now, since I've become enlightened to the issues that other human beings are dealing with, it seems almost too easy. I know I still love the taste of meat and when I smell it cooking it is very pleasing to my senses, but I never crave it the way I used to. I can honestly say I don't miss it. I guess the best way to explain this is with an example: when my father used to order me to go mow the lawn, I always saw it as a chore and hated it - but on the occasions that my father told me that it would help him out a great deal if I mowed the lawn, I always really enjoyed doing it and was proud of the role I played in helping my family.

I think it is the same thing with going meatless. Now that I see my eating of meat as stripping food from the mouths of others, I've lost the desire to have it.

PS. Though I wasn't vegetarian at the time, I knew a lot of people in the Peace Corps with me who were vegetarian. Many West Africans saw it as a adverse health condition as well. "I don't eat meat" was always answered with "Well this isn't [cow] meat, this is goat/chicken/guinea fowl/fish, so come have some!"

That was a great read Nayha, thank you. I am an atheist and a vegetarian and do not associate a meatless diet with faith, but I certainly would never criticize anyone who does.

My problem with meat is the vast amount of energy required to produce it. Every 1 calorie of meat you eat takes 54 calories of fossil fuel energy to produce. On a planet of nearly 7 billion, we are wasting precious resources (land, water, energy) to raise 40 billion head of livestock.

Personally I don't care what other people eat, but if we are going to prosper as the energy emergency becomes increasingly severe, we will have to cut down meat production.

I grew up in India in a vegetarian family which told me that this is the way they were but that I was free to eat what I wanted. However, I realized that not only was I not tempted to eat non-vegetarian but I did not want to. In India, most people see vegearianism not as a "sacrifice" to preserve one's faith as you have said but more as a healthier, purer and more eco friendly option which is culturally and socially very prevalent in India. There are plenty of Hindus who eat non-vegetarian food without compromising their faith. The point is that vegetarianism is not perceived as a "sacrifice" in Hinduism but part of a way of a life which is healthier, purer and more compassionate.

I've been a vegetarian for some decades, and I don't miss meat. In fact, I find it rather disgusting when I walk by the meat counter in the grocery store. I became a vegetarian because since early childhood I've loved animals. Our fellow mammals have similar nervous systems to our own, and I think, similar feelings, because emotions are a necessary bond in mammal life; mothers and young must bond with one another. Carnivores always assume I'm giving something up. I regard it as no more of a personal sacrifice than not smoking cigarettes.

In a high altitude climate, fresh greens are the luxury, not the meat-reliant diet of the local people.

One can get by on potatoes, (And Peru is where they came from, when they had the Irish subsist on them while having them raise meat for other tables.)

But you can't make your nice juicy tomatoes and 'tasty' veggie foods grow in mountain soils just cause you don't like the idea of some people depending on our animal friends to survive.

You're lucky to *get* edible roots out of climate and soil like that, and animal fat is how you survive the cold.

In Tibet, they eat meat, cause that's how you live.

I do tend to resent the notion there's moral superiority in eating 'soulless plants' without a thought while looking down on those of us who eat meat with respect for those creatures that keep us alive.

Simple fact is, some folks do not thrive on yer vegan diet.' They aren't adapted for it.

Just like you don't get fresh zucchini in the Andes.

Gods.

Very interesting, Nayha. Thank you for relating this, and congratulations on examining and then reaffirming your beliefs. I, too, am a vegetarian and first rejected meat by giving it up for Lent. The purpose of Lent is to abstain from something you like, usually a vice, to display self-discipline and hopefully become a better person. I realized how easy vegetarianism was and ultimately became a vegan. A loving God would not want his/her(?) creatures to be harmed and killed unnecessarily for food. I consider myself blessed to be a vegan as it is better for the animals, for my own health, and for the planet. For more info, see:
http://tinyurl.com/djodu
http://www.tryveg.com
and: http://www.vrg.org

Really interesting and well written Nayha! I too have found true strength in struggling and eventually appreciating dietary restrictions.

Great vegetarian recipes are available for free from the Humane Society of the United States at:

www.HumaneSociety.org/recipes