Vegetarianism in Hinduism is the practice of adhering to a vegetarian diet, a custom which arose in the later stages of the development of Hinduism and gained popularity among the priestly and upper castes due to the influence of Jainism and Buddhism. While religious texts from the Vedic period make numerous references to animal slaughter and consumption in sacrificial contexts, multiple Hindu scriptures composed during the post-Vedic period display a gradual shift towards the promotion of a vegetarian dietary ideal based on the concept of ahimsa—non-violence and compassion towards all beings. According to a Pew Research Center survey, 44% of Hindus self-identify as vegetarian. Within India, the prevalence of vegetarianism among Hindus varies significantly by region and caste, and is often subject to inflation in estimations due to cultural and political pressures.
The Vedic people, whose religion formed the nominal and ideological backbone of Brahmanism, followed a varied diet that included the consumption of meat. Due to the influence of Buddhism and Jainism, the principle of ahimsa evolved and gained importance in the late Vedic era, and was an important factor in the Hindu synthesis that led to the de-emphasis of animal sacrifice in religious rituals (outside of Shakti and Tantric traditions where such practices persist), and the emergence of vegetarian offerings as the preferred alternative.: "Compared with puja in which the food offering must be vegetarian, animal sacrifice is an improper way to worship the deities, for it inevitably produces pollution and is therefore only appropriate for inferior deities worshiped by inferior people. Animal sacrifice, in short, is ideologically devalued in relation to vegetarian worship." The association of ritual purity with vegetarianism led to the adoption of vegetarian diets by a significant percentage of upper-caste groups.
In modern times, the majority of vegetarian Hindus follow lacto-vegetarian diets, although members of certain Vaishnava sampradayas choose to abstain from onions and garlic as well.
History
Marvin Harris notes the Vedic literature to be contradictory, with some stanzas suggesting ritual slaughter and meat consumption, while others suggesting a taboo on meat eating; however, Hindu literature relating to cow veneration became extremely common in the first millennium CE, and by about 1000 CE, vegetarianism had become a well accepted Hindu tenet.Marvin Harris (1990), India's sacred cow , Anthropology: contemporary perspectives, 6th edition, Editors: Phillip Whitten & David Hunter, Scott Foresman, , pages 201–204 Scholars such as D. N. Jha, Romila Thapar, Juli Gittinger et al. assert that cows were neither inviolable nor revered in the ancient times; the contemporary sacredness was a result of multiple factors including the development of Ahimsa philosophy during the Upanishad spans, opposition to animal killing by Buddhism ans Jainism, and increasing influence of Brahminism.
As a result of influence of Jainism and Buddhism, the nascent Hindu-traditions embraced the ideals of non-violence and vegetarianism. By about 200 CE, food and feasting on animal slaughter were widely considered as a form of violence against life forms, and became a religious and social taboo.Marvin Harris (1990), India's sacred cow , Anthropology: contemporary perspectives, 6th edition, Editors: Phillip Whitten & David Hunter, Scott Foresman, , pages 201–204
Vegetarianism in Hindu scriptures and texts
The Vedas Evidence from the Vedas suggests the diet of the Vedic people consisted of cereals, initially barley but later dominated by rice, pulses such as māsha (urad), mudga (moong), and masūra (masoor), vegetables such as lotus roots, lotus stem, bottle gourd and milk products, mainly of cows, but also of buffaloes and goats. The Vedas describe animals including bulls, horses, rams and goats being sacrificed and eaten. Although cows held an elevated position in the Vedas, barren cows were also sacrificed. Even then, the word aghnyā ('not to be eaten', 'inviolable') is used for cows multiple times, with some Rigvedic composers considering the whole bovine species, both cows and bulls, inviolable.
Steven J. Rosen suggests that flesh might have been eaten only as part of ritual sacrifices and not otherwise. Acts of animal sacrifice were not fully accepted since there were signs of unease and tension owing to the 'gory brutality of sacrificial butchery' dating back to as early as the older Vedas. The earliest reference to the idea of ahimsa or non-violence to animals (pashu-ahimsa) in any literature, apparently in a moral sense, is found in the Kapisthala Katha Samhita of the Yajurveda (KapS 31.11), written about the 8th century BCE. The Shatapatha Brahmana contains one of the earliest statements against eating flesh, and the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, has an injunction against killing 'all living entities'. Injunctions against flesh-eating also appear in the Dharmasutras.
Dharmaśāstras According to P. V. Kane, one who is about to eat food should greet the food when it is served to him, should honour it, never speak ill, and never find fault in it.Kane, History of the Dharmaśāstras Vol. 2, p. 762
The Dharmasastra literature, states Patrick Olivelle, admonishes "people not to cook for themselves alone", offer it to the gods, to forefathers, to fellow human beings as hospitality and as alms to the monks and needy. Olivelle claims all living beings are interdependent in matters of food and thus food must be respected, worshipped and taken with care. Olivelle states that the Shastras recommend that when a person sees food, he should fold his hands, bow to it, and say a prayer of thanks.
The reverence for food reaches a state of extreme in the renouncer or monk traditions in Hinduism. The Hindu tradition views procurement and preparation of food as necessarily a violent process, where other life forms and nature are disturbed, in part destroyed, changed and reformulated into something edible and palatable. The mendicants (sannyasin, ascetics) avoid being the initiator of this process, and therefore depend entirely on begging for food that is left over of householders. In pursuit of their spiritual beliefs, states Olivelle, the "mendicants eat other people's left overs". If they cannot find left overs, they seek fallen fruit or seeds left in field after harvest.
The forest hermits of Hinduism, on the other hand, do not beg for left overs. Their food is wild and uncultivated. Their diet would consist mainly of fruits, roots, leaves, and anything that grows naturally in the forest. They avoided stepping on plowed land, lest they hurt a seedling. They attempted to live a life that minimizes, preferably eliminates, the possibility of harm to any life form.
Manusmriti
The Manusmriti's discussion on flesh-eating contains 25 verses condemning the consumption of flesh, bracketed by 3 verses defending the practice in the context of Vedic sacrifices. Commentators starting with Medhātithi interpret the verses to mean that flesh-eating is prohibited generally, and only permitted in the presence of mitigating circumstances, such as danger to life.
Mahabharata The Mahabharata contains numerous stories glorifying non-violence towards animals and has some of the strongest statements against slaughter of animals—three chapters of the epic are dedicated to the evils of flesh-eating. Bhishma declares compassion to be the highest religious principle, and compares eating of animal flesh to eating the flesh of one's son. Nominally acknowledging Manu's authorisation of flesh-eating in sacrificial context, Bhisma explains to Yudhishthira that "one who abstains from doing so acquires the same merit as that accrued from the performance of even a horse sacrifice" and that "those desirous of heaven perform sacrifice with seeds instead of animals". It is stated in Mahabharata that animal sacrifices were introduced only when people began to resort to violence in the treta yuga, a less pure and compassionate age, and were not present in the satya yuga, 'the golden age'.
Tirukkuṛaḷ The Tirukkuṛaḷ, a Tamil text of Hindu or Jain origin from ca. 500 CE, emphasizes ahimsa and insists on moral vegetarianism or veganism. Originally written in the South Indian language of Tamil, the text states moderate diet as a virtuous lifestyle and criticizes "non-vegetarianism" in its Pulaan Maruthal (abstinence from flesh or meat) chapter, through verses 251 through 260. Verse 251, for instance, questions "how can one be possessed of kindness, who, to increase his own flesh, eats the flesh of other creatures." It also says that "the wise, who are devoid of mental delusions, do not eat the severed body of other creatures" (verse 258), suggesting that "flesh is nothing but the despicable wound of a mangled body" (verse 257). It continues to say that not eating flesh is a practice more sacred than the most sacred religious practices ever known (verse 259) and that only those who refrain from killing and eating the kill are worthy of veneration (verse 260). This text, written before 400 CE, and sometimes called the Tamil Veda, discusses eating habits and its role in a healthy life (Mitahara), dedicating Chapter 95 of Book II to it. The Tirukkuṛaḷ states in verses 943 through 945, "eat in moderation, when you feel hungry, foods that are agreeable to your body, refraining from foods that your body finds disagreeable". Valluvar also emphasizes overeating has ill effects on health, in verse 946, as "the pleasures of health abide in the man who eats moderately. The pains of disease dwell with him who eats excessively."
Puranas The Puranic texts fiercely oppose violence against animals in many places "despite following the pattern of being constrained by the Vedic imperative to nominally accept it in sacrificial contexts". The most important Puranic text, the Bhagavata Purana goes farthest in repudiating animal sacrifice—refraining from harming all living beings is considered the highest dharma. The text states that the sin of harming animals cannot be washed away by performing "sham sacrifices", just as "mud cannot be washed away by mud". It graphically presents the horrific karmic reactions accrued from the performance of animal sacrifices—those who mercilessly cook animals and birds go to kumbhipaka and are fried in boiling oil and those who perform sham sacrifices are themselves cut to pieces in viśasana hell. The Skanda Purana states that the sages were dismayed by animal sacrifice and considered it against dharma, claiming that sacrifice is supposed to be performed with grains and milk. It narrates that animal sacrifice was only permitted to feed the population during a famine, yet the sages did not slaughter animals even as they died of starvation. The Matsya Purana contains a dialogue between sages who disapprove of violence against animals, preferring rites involving oblations of fruits and vegetables. The text states that the negative karma accrued from violence against animals far outweighs any benefits.
Vegetarianism and caste Among Hindus, the norms with regards to what a person may consume and with whom should they gather for a meal depends on their caste. A distinction traditionally exists between vegetarian and non-vegetarian castes. Most Brahmin and merchant castes were usually vegetarian, and a vegetarian diet was considered ritually purer. Dominant castes that held a monopoly on power, such as Rajputs, tended to be non-vegetarian, and a non-vegetarian diet was seen as necessary for the exercise of power through force.