Everything I say below is my <i>opinion</i> only.
<!--QuoteBegin-Pandyan+Sep 3 2007, 08:06 AM-->QUOTE(Pandyan @ Sep 3 2007, 08:06 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->So, a question to all the Hindu vegetarians here. What is <b>your view of Hindus that eat meat (excluding beef)</b>, but are still staunch hindus, because I've been called non-hindu by these militant veggie fascists since I'm a meat eater.[right][snapback]72753[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->My view: that they're Hindu of course. Where does it say that we need to be vegetarian to be a Hindu? What little our dharma prescribes in the way of duty does not include a mandate on vegetarianism (note this is different with the cow in Hinduism) and unreasonably threatening with expulsion or exclusion otherwise. Instead, vegetarianism is seriously advised for the welfare of our fellow animals, also for progressing in our spiritual evolution (to cultivate a closeness to all creatures so that we may be more like our Gods who feel no less affection for animals than they do for us), and for various other reasons related to spirituality (progress in yoga lifestyle, and the like). And in this way, Hinduism guides us: tells us why it would be for the good of all if we were vegetarian and also good for us.
IMO, vegetarianism (as many another thing) must be an entirely personal, considered choice. I hold this opinion for two reasons:
(1) If we do it because our parents brought us up that way/because it's the done thing in our household, then we do it only out of inertia: just living on with the way things are. Our 'choice' in this case says nothing about our own thoughts on this matter, if at all we thought about it. This reason may be enough to keep 5 year-olds vegetarian, but it will not be enough to make people (Hindus or otherwise) who've been raised vegetarian to remain so when they move to say some foreign country where it may not always have been the done thing.
Hence you see some 'brahmins' previously raised as vegetarian start eating meat when they move to the US or elsewhere. It's because it was never their conscious choice. It never became a personal principle for them.
(2) People who don't make up their own minds to be vegetarian but do so thoughtlessly will not be vegetarian in their next life (unless they happen to be born with parents who are vegetarian again). It is our conscious choices in this life that affect where we start off in the next. Are we actively vegetarian now? Then we'll be actively vegetarian in the next life and don't need to re-ponder that question then.
And - IMO again - I feel there is but one reason and one reason alone to be a vegetarian. It is solely because you consider animals no less than yourself or your fellow human and would not inflict any injury on an animal that you would refrain from doing to a human. In fact, animals - living more by instinct - tend to be innocent of their actions, whereas humans often are not. Hence I might think of retaliating against a human sooner than against an animal. It's like with infants: they're too small to know what they're doing when they bite you, so of course you don't bite them back.
As I said, this is entirely a personal choice, a matter of individual/personal ethics. Every person makes up their own mind. Hence, in my case, as I would not eat a person, I would not eat an animal. Others have different personal values and may value some animals more than others (say horse, dog, cat in the west) and yet again value humans more than any animal. Still others may value all humans + their pets more than other animals.
For this reason, I think that vegetarianism is more than merely a religious - in particular <i>Dharmic</i> religious - matter. It concerns any individual's own choice. But Dharmic religions do consider it important enough to say something on it, as Bodhi had shown with the excerpts from Bhishma's advice.
Having said all that, a Hindu will not eat a cow (by definition).
Everyone draws their lines, and I have drawn mine here. If I have no respect for my religion then I might care less. But the cow represents the infinitely-giving nature of the Mother, of God. It is a symbol of our Gods and our Dharma, a symbol that all our ancestors cherished. If we do not show respect to that symbol - universally recognised by Hindus as such - then we are not showing respect to our Gods, our ancestors, our people's most cherished principles or our way of life.
On another matter, I don't understand how people who consider themselves animal-friendly are untroubled when it comes to eating animals. Stranger still I find to be people with pets who also eat meat. Maybe the phenomenon is just an extension of tribalism? That would be a sad explanation, though.
Creepy to my mind are the people I've come across (non-Indian, non-Hindu) whose favourite animals and pets are horses and yet they eat horse. Don't they find a severe disparity between their favourite hobby of weekly horse-riding and looking forward to horse-on-a-plate? They've obviously thought little on it, or else - if they were to be consistent - they could just as well be cannibals too (if they ever decided to take it that far). Such people actually scare me.
<!--QuoteBegin-Pandyan+Sep 3 2007, 08:06 AM-->QUOTE(Pandyan @ Sep 3 2007, 08:06 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->So, a question to all the Hindu vegetarians here. What is <b>your view of Hindus that eat meat (excluding beef)</b>, but are still staunch hindus, because I've been called non-hindu by these militant veggie fascists since I'm a meat eater.[right][snapback]72753[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->My view: that they're Hindu of course. Where does it say that we need to be vegetarian to be a Hindu? What little our dharma prescribes in the way of duty does not include a mandate on vegetarianism (note this is different with the cow in Hinduism) and unreasonably threatening with expulsion or exclusion otherwise. Instead, vegetarianism is seriously advised for the welfare of our fellow animals, also for progressing in our spiritual evolution (to cultivate a closeness to all creatures so that we may be more like our Gods who feel no less affection for animals than they do for us), and for various other reasons related to spirituality (progress in yoga lifestyle, and the like). And in this way, Hinduism guides us: tells us why it would be for the good of all if we were vegetarian and also good for us.
IMO, vegetarianism (as many another thing) must be an entirely personal, considered choice. I hold this opinion for two reasons:
(1) If we do it because our parents brought us up that way/because it's the done thing in our household, then we do it only out of inertia: just living on with the way things are. Our 'choice' in this case says nothing about our own thoughts on this matter, if at all we thought about it. This reason may be enough to keep 5 year-olds vegetarian, but it will not be enough to make people (Hindus or otherwise) who've been raised vegetarian to remain so when they move to say some foreign country where it may not always have been the done thing.
Hence you see some 'brahmins' previously raised as vegetarian start eating meat when they move to the US or elsewhere. It's because it was never their conscious choice. It never became a personal principle for them.
(2) People who don't make up their own minds to be vegetarian but do so thoughtlessly will not be vegetarian in their next life (unless they happen to be born with parents who are vegetarian again). It is our conscious choices in this life that affect where we start off in the next. Are we actively vegetarian now? Then we'll be actively vegetarian in the next life and don't need to re-ponder that question then.
And - IMO again - I feel there is but one reason and one reason alone to be a vegetarian. It is solely because you consider animals no less than yourself or your fellow human and would not inflict any injury on an animal that you would refrain from doing to a human. In fact, animals - living more by instinct - tend to be innocent of their actions, whereas humans often are not. Hence I might think of retaliating against a human sooner than against an animal. It's like with infants: they're too small to know what they're doing when they bite you, so of course you don't bite them back.
As I said, this is entirely a personal choice, a matter of individual/personal ethics. Every person makes up their own mind. Hence, in my case, as I would not eat a person, I would not eat an animal. Others have different personal values and may value some animals more than others (say horse, dog, cat in the west) and yet again value humans more than any animal. Still others may value all humans + their pets more than other animals.
For this reason, I think that vegetarianism is more than merely a religious - in particular <i>Dharmic</i> religious - matter. It concerns any individual's own choice. But Dharmic religions do consider it important enough to say something on it, as Bodhi had shown with the excerpts from Bhishma's advice.
Having said all that, a Hindu will not eat a cow (by definition).
Everyone draws their lines, and I have drawn mine here. If I have no respect for my religion then I might care less. But the cow represents the infinitely-giving nature of the Mother, of God. It is a symbol of our Gods and our Dharma, a symbol that all our ancestors cherished. If we do not show respect to that symbol - universally recognised by Hindus as such - then we are not showing respect to our Gods, our ancestors, our people's most cherished principles or our way of life.
On another matter, I don't understand how people who consider themselves animal-friendly are untroubled when it comes to eating animals. Stranger still I find to be people with pets who also eat meat. Maybe the phenomenon is just an extension of tribalism? That would be a sad explanation, though.
Creepy to my mind are the people I've come across (non-Indian, non-Hindu) whose favourite animals and pets are horses and yet they eat horse. Don't they find a severe disparity between their favourite hobby of weekly horse-riding and looking forward to horse-on-a-plate? They've obviously thought little on it, or else - if they were to be consistent - they could just as well be cannibals too (if they ever decided to take it that far). Such people actually scare me.