Vegetarian by choice, not religion!

A lot of 'Veg vs Non-Veg' has been happening in the country. The objective of this article is not to establish the supremacy of Vegetarianism over Non-Vegetarianism, or vice-versa. The reason I chose this topic is to just present my views on it. Though I feel after reading it, you'll blame me for favouring Vegetarianism.

I was born in a Hindu Brahman family and as a result inherited Vegetarianism. My father avoids going inside a restaurant which has even a single non-veg item in its menu. He argues that the cooks use the same utensils and oil (and other stuff) to prepare both veg and non-veg delicacies, and therefore he doesn't feel like eating there. Don't worry I don't hold the same opinion. Yes, I am a vegetarian but not because my parents are or my religion asks me to be. My parents have never forced their opinion on me. They have left it on me to choose between the two. The only thing they want is that a non-veg item should not be brought at home.

Contrary to father's reason of not eating non-veg, mine doesn't lie in religious beliefs. I am vegetarian because I cannot ruthlessly have another living organism slaughtered just to satisfy my palate. Every time I pass by a butcher shop and hear the writhe of a moribund animal, my belief in vegetarianism is corroborated. At the same time I don't mind eating in a non-veg restaurant, as long as, my dish doesn't smell of another living being's flesh or blood.

There are a lot of pros and cons about both these isms but I find hard to fathom- the religious cons of non-vegetarianism or the religious pros of vegetarianism. I don't understand why people, especially in India, try to find answers of such questions in religious books. People don't understand that the de facto religion of this world is Economics. When it was necessary to prevent cattle, as it had a lot of benefits, the con-man of religion, citing the curses that may befall on one by killing an animal asked not to kill it. When the same con-man found that fish, in the coastal regions, is a cheap way filling the stomach, he allowed Bengalis to worship, kill and eat it. It is economics, which in the guise of religion, permits the Brahmans of South India and East India to have fish (and other non-veg items).

'Jeev Jeevasya Bhojanam' (जीवः जीवस्य भोजनम्)- one creature is another creature's sustenance. I quote this from the Vedas. So does Hinduism permits to eat another living being? If that is so then why are people ready to kill each other in the name of religion? See why I don't understand religion? The modern man also is not so modern. According to him eating chicken, fish, beef etc. is okay but when Chinese kill dog and eat, it becomes the highest order of perpetration. If you like the taste of some creature, you should also respect others who like the taste of some other creature. How are you even different from that con-man? 

I believe if one day the Non-Vegetarians are made to kill the animals by their own hands, instead of just cooking and eating it, at least 70% of them will turn Vegetarians like me, the very same day. The rest will argue that even all the Vegetarians are not good, they also don’t climb the tree themselves to bring down the fruit. Also, just because the trees can’t shout doesn’t mean that they don’t feel the pain. So this debate will never culminate as there can never be a consensus on this topic. Vegetarians will continue to persuade Non-Veggies to give it up. Non-Vegetarians won’t eschew it simply because Veggies are asking them to.

The only way ahead is to wait and watch, and let Economics play its role!