Devdutt Pattanaik’s recent opinion piece talking about vegetarianism in Bharat presents a one- sided narrative linking vegetarianism with the ‘caste realities’ of the subcontinent. Pattanaik claims that vegetarianism establishes caste hegemony and the domination of the mercantile communities and their priests. This is a dangerous narrative that looks at a highly nuanced reality from a very myopic angle and ignores the interplay of a variety of factors that work together beautifully to create the Bharatiya food culture the way we know it today.
The Bharatiya Subcontinent is abundant with diverse food practices which are influenced by culture, religion, climate, topography and many more such known and unknown factors. Every region, caste and community has a rich heritage which is unique to itself. To say that vegetarianism is a practice that is defined by the so called upper caste is a grave injustice to Bharat’s food culture.
To quote an example, the devotees of Bhagwan Vitthal in Maharashtra are referred to as Warkaris or Malkaris. The Warkaris are a largely casteless group of people who are connected by their common devotion to Vithoba. Another common thread defining their spiritual practice is that the majority of them voluntarily chose to give up consuming animal meat irrespective of the caste and community that they belong to. The larger practice of Vaishnavism which holds vegetarianism as a core value and includes several other sub practices including modern day movements such as ISKCON that transcend beyond caste identities and even religion at times.
The reality of food is made more nuanced by concepts such as fasting and abstinence. Many meat eaters consciously refrain from its consumption during the month of Shravan or Sawan as this period is considered to be an auspicious time by many. This tradition is also nature friendly as it aligns with ecological changes as many fish species breed during this season. Thus, actively refraining from their consumption also acts as a practice that promotes conservation effortlessly blending nature, culture and religion.
Therefore, the general belief within the Hindu consciousness is that he who wishes to walk on the path of spirituality or bhakti should refrain from consuming non vegetarian food. This belief extends to other faiths such as Jainism and Buddhism which are also a part of the Indic fold and discourage the consumption of meat for reasons that are central to their practice. Thus, a majority of spiritual traditions born in Bharat, whether traditional or modern, encourage vegetarianism that transcends beyond caste identities.
The author also falsely links vegetarian diet with upward mobility in the caste ladder. The author claims that if a person belonging to a so-called lower caste gives up non vegetarian food, he automatically becomes pure, pious and rises to a higher caste. This statement is a blatant lie and lacks verifiable data. In today’s Bharatiya society which is urbanizing rapidly, consumption of meat or refraining from the same has largely become a matter of choice.
There are individuals with varied dietary preferences within the same household. Some avoid consuming meat because they feel for animals, some avoid it for health reasons. Simultaneously, many who come from conventionally vegetarian communities adopt meat consumption whether due to personal preference or the unavailability of vegetarian options in the countries they migrate to. None of these choices come with the promise of caste mobility in either direction.
The author has ignored these complex realities while presenting his argument. Deliberately linking caste to dietary preference does a disservice to many other significant factors that influence one’s choice. It is a grave injustice to the vibrant food culture of Bharat. Choosing to look at intricate and layered issues such as food and caste from a strictly black and white perspective is a dangerous choice to make.
I read the article by Devdutt Pattanaik https://www.newindianexpress.com/columns/2025/Jul/20/vegetarianism-is-not-about-the-environment-but-about-caste. All his caste and other aspertions are without any basis and without any supporting references to our scriptures and historical data. I have over the years read in prominent newspapers his other articles too. He comes out as extremely shallow, mischievous, anti-Hindu Mohammadan lackey who seems to revel in his motivated anti-Hindu hate writings supported by powerful mainstream media. I think citizen Hindus should protest and boycott these media, but Hindus (Sanatan, Shraman etc.) seems to be paralyzed by their cowardice and beatings.
Devdutt Pattanaik seem to be determined to baselessly attack us with a fictitious demonized and weaponized portraiture of caste as basis for our way of life. So here is a primer for our reasons for avoiding killings for food, because his version is mischievous and misleading:
Shraman dharms, particularly in reference to Jin dharm, aims to have compassion and mercy for living beings, minimize their sorrow and pain and let all creatures live and let live (and humans have advanced capacity to be wanton and devious), thus try to minimize ( not avoid) even killings where it is inevitable. And living life itself has unavoidable violence for all creatures.
Now Shraman dharm says that life exist from most primitive forms – like sensing touch only (एकेंद्रीय) to most sentient – like having touch, taste, smell, sight, and hearing(पचेंद्रीय), encompassing all living beings, from humans and animals to plants and even microscopic organisms (सूक्ष्म जीव), and this gets further complicated by mind (मानस) too. Shraman dharm acknowledges that sorrow and pain dimensions become increasingly more with increasing senses and mind, but it advocates for minimizing harm even to simple beings, acknowledging their capacity to feel sensation etc. It does not mean that one living being’s pain does not matter.
Violence has been broadly classified in four categories:
1. Deliberate violence (संकल्पज हिंसा)
2. Voilence inevitable in day to day non-occupational living (ग्रहारम्भज हिंसा)
3. Voilence inevitable in occupational work (उद्योगज हिंसा)
4. Voilence inevitably resulting from defense to threats and attacks on lives (विरोधज हिंसा)
I will give an example:
In Tirthankar Mahavir’s time King Ajatshatru of Magadh attacked Vaishali ruled by Shraman king Chetak. So the violence was inevitable and if you have to unavoidably kill attackers in the process, it is ethically required to show bravery and do the necessary actions. But here too, the ethics of minimizing pain and sorrow, minimizing unnecessary killings meant that king Chetak aimed at primarily eliminating army commanders as it would spare more lives of soldiers who would surrender.
When we want to feed our hunger, the aim is to do it in a way that does not cause wanton violence, pain and sorrow. So vegetarianism arises out of that. Also it is preferable to avoid root vegetables since it kills the entire plant, and prefer plant offerings that would be discarded by plants or will die off, for example fruit vegetables or even leaves. Killing plants also causes violence to an entire ecosystem of living organisms around it.
There never was/is historically and scripturally any slightest evidence of caste influencing our philosophical basis for avoiding animal killings for food ( cast does not exist in Shraman dharms and nor Jains must be castigated as Banias).
Vaishnav, Brahmins and other Hindu religions too recognize the concept of non-violence and live and let live doctrine, so in varying degrees tend to rely on vegetables more than on meat or even exclusively on vegetables for same reasons, so the way Devdutt Pattanaik talks disparagingly about Sanatan dharm being shamed by Shraman dharms is aimed at flaming violence and discord while pretending to be innocent. This is not a war between some religion gangs, but a civilizational dialog amongst various Hindu systems – all groupings are fluid and dynamic and work and evolve in civil cooperation, not as mutual gangsters. The differences which are chiefly epistemological and ontological in nature still unites us all in our common basic core of live and let live and compassion and empathy for all living. That is why it is so elusive to define Hindu civilization, even though we can clearly differentiate it from toxic and by core intolerant my-way-is-the-only-TRUE-way andh-bhakt Mohammadanism and missionary Christianity and their Hindu sounding sidekicks. But Hindus have degenerated and mostly un-enthused and unwilling to differentiate and defend themselves from these marauding attackers and therein lies our work. And that is why Devdutt Pattanaik can sound like Hindu to other Hindus and be safe, but still act like a rascal and talk baselessly about our civilization in collusion with anti-Hindu haters.