Dispelling fictitious myths about 'Hindu vegetarianism'

[Vinod2070]

I would like to discuss this issue of whether human beings are "biologically" herbivorous, carnivorous or omnivorous.

I think one can safely say that biologically we are not limited to being herbivorous, as the human body obviously does not reject meat.

To take the argument further, human beings in many cultures have even resorted to cannibalism when pushed to the limits of hunger (in some cultures without even that).

Biologically, we are not even confined to a single (or a fixed number) sexual mate, the biological need is to mate with as many and produce as many progenies as one can. We no longer do that because of how the concept of morality and ethics have developed and evolved.

Same way for robbery, murder, rapes and loot. We dislike them not because we are biologically incapable of that but because our morality rebels against it. The Mongols considered all of these as fair game (life was a struggle on the cold steppes and they were a harsh and cruel people as a result). You would see that Genghis khan actually spoke about there being no greater joy than looting other people and raping their women. The Mongols practiced all of that in their victories, looking forward to ravaging each new city.

To me, it is no longer about biology but about human ethics and civilization. These are obviously specific to culture and there is no one "right" answer.

 

[S.A.T.A]

Primeval instincts,biological or otherwise,is evolutionary by nature.While Humans may have been omnivorous for the better part of his evolutionary cycle,his switch to raising crops from Hunter/gatherer,as the primary means to sustaining life,is part of the the same survival instinct.

If we humans are the most dominant animal specie on this planet today,this paradigm shift in the animal kingdom happened with humans raising seasonal crops.Complex social organization is the very hallmark of our urban civilizations,this kind of social mobilization happened primarily to support agriculture.

We wouldn't be here if we hadn't switched our primary dietary habit.

 

[johnee]

Vinod,
I think the humans have a herbivorous dental set and not a carnivorous or omnivorous ones. So, I would conclude that humans are biologically herbivorous. But humans have bent many rules of nature, so there is nothing surprising to see them eat meat and digest it.

 

[Daredevil]

Here is a nice article which says that Humans are natural plant eaters. A small summary

A fair look at the evidence shows that humans are optimized for eating plant foods, and not meat. Consider:

Human anatomy: We're most similar to other herbivores, and drastically different from carnivores and true omnivores.1,2,3
Longevity & health: The science shows that the more meat we eat, the sicker we get -- heart disease, cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis, and every other major degenerative disease. If eating meat were so natural, it wouldn't destroy our health.
Physical performance: People have much better endurance when they don't eat meat -- whether they're professional athletes or not.
(support for all these statements appears further down)

We'll look at these in more detail later, but for now here's a preview:

Our early ancestors from at least four million years ago were almost exclusively vegetarian.
Our omnivorism means we're capable of eating meat (useful from a survival standpoint if that's all that's available), but our bodies aren't geared for it to be a normal, significant part of our diets.
The animals most similar to us, the other primates, eat an almost exclusively vegetarian diet (and their main non-plant food often isn't meat, it's termites).
Our teeth, saliva, stomach acid, and intestines are most similar to other plant-eaters, and dissimilar to carnivores and true omnivores.
Among animals, plant-eaters have the longest lifespans, and humans are certainly in that category (and yes, this was true even before modern medicine).
We sleep about the same amount of time as other herbivores, and less than carnivores and true omnivores.
The most common cause of choking deaths is eating meat. Real carnivores and omnivores don't have that problem.

Humans are natural plant-eaters -- in-depth article

 

[Vinod2070]

Vinod,
I think the humans have a herbivorous dental set and not a carnivorous or omnivorous ones. So, I would conclude that humans are biologically herbivorous. But humans have bent many rules of nature, so there is nothing surprising to see them eat meat and digest it.

Yes, but the vast majority today is omnivorous and as I said the human body does not reject meat. There are other herbivorous animals who would not touch meat even when they are dying of hunger, humans don't fall in that category.

As I said, I think it is a cultural and ethical decision, not biological.

 

[Known_Unknown]

Generalizing about such a topic is fruitless. Do Hindus eat meat or not? Which Hindus? From which part of the country? Which caste? Which social class? All that matters. You cannot generalize about such a varied group of people. In Gujarat, I daresay that a majority of the people may be vegetarian. I have yet to come across a non-vegetarian Gujarati, and I have many Gujju friends. On the other hand, many Bengali, Oriya or South Indian Brahmins consume meat or fish as part of their diet. Dietary customs vary from state to state and even within regions of states.

It is indisputable though, that ahimsa is a basic principle in Hinduism and although there are no mandatory rules, there is an ideal way of life that every Hindu should aspire to, and one of its aspects is vegetarianism. An ideal Hindu, thus would be a vegetarian. There are many scriptural verses supporting vegetarianism and discouraging meat eating and any Hindu who needs convincing from a spiritual point of view does not have to look very hard.

I myself am a vegetarian, and so is my entire family and extended family, cousins etc. I don't do it for religious reasons, but only as a matter of habit. And taste, as I dislike the smell and taste of non-veg food.

 

[Known_Unknown]

Yes, but the vast majority today is omnivorous and as I said the human body does not reject meat. There are other herbivorous animals who would not touch meat even when they are dying of hunger, humans don't fall in that category.

As I said, I think it is a cultural and ethical decision, not biological.

Feed a dog rotis and his body will not reject it. Nor will cats' bodies. Doesn't make them vegetarian or even omnivorous.

Which herbivorous animals won't eat meat even if they're dying of hunger? I'm curious to know. In most farms in North America, cattle are fed anything that would save cost, right from dead cats and dogs to other dead cows.

From a biological point of view, humans are definitely built as herbivorous beings. We don't have sharp claws, a very good eyesight, strong jaws or muscles to allow us to run very fast. If humans were to start living in the wild due to an apocalypse or something, most would not survive a month. Without the crutches of technology, humans would have been long extinct.

Often, the acid test of what whether an organism is herbivorous or carnivorous is to see what it would choose to eat if offered a choice between raw meat and raw plant products. Most humans, I imagine, would choose the plants. That makes it obvious that unless processed (fried, cooked etc), meat is generally not seen as a suitable food by most humans, automatically making them vegetarian by nature.

 

[dineshchaturvedi]

I like one scentence, Hinduism is not a strict religion and does not force anything,

 

[prahladh]

The rules regarding food are to retain sahanubhuthi bhavana which we possess.