Among religions like Jainism and Buddhism, vegetarian food habits are always given preference. In fact for Jains, vegetarianism is a way of life as it the way of life teaches moral conduct. Buddhists do not prohibit meat-eating, however, many sects and forms of this ancient religion do encourage and practice vegetarianism. Other religious denominations that advocate a fully vegetarian diet include the Seventh-day Adventists, the Rastafarian Movement, and the Vaishnavs (Hare Krishnas).

At the same time, it has been recently surveyed that in a predominantly Christian country such as the United States of America, almost 20% of the general population are vegetarians by choice, either for health-related or ethical reasons. At one extreme, one can find hard-core vegetarians among the larger group who do not even eat dairy products on the grounds that it contains animal protein.

All said and done, one can also not disregard the fact that the majority of the world's vegetarians are Hindus, who mostly originate in India. In other words, nearly half of the world's second most populated country is comprised of vegetarians.

At the heart of this issue is a discussion that revolves around the question of whether it is mandatory for a Hindu to be a vegetarian. To determine the answer to this question, one has to explore both the religious facets as well as the moral and logical aspects of this topic.

In essence, Hinduism is Sanatan Dharma, and it involves pursuit for Moksha (freedom or salvation). Therefore, one who is seeking for Moksha is a true Hindu, irrespective of the nationality, caste, creed or gender. With that all-embracing understanding, one can see that Hinduism becomes a way of life because the pursuit of the essential purpose of life is the goal of a Hindu's life.

Based on this perspective, it is easier to analyze all other questions including whether Hinduism requires one to be a vegetarian. Since the purpose of life is the journey towards achieving liberation or Moksha, one needs to live fully and spiritually until reaching that point. In other words, keeping the body alive by providing ourselves nourishment is our Dharma. One has to eat to live and not the other way around, which is living for the sake of eating!

At the same time, one of the central tenets of Hindu philosophy is the concept of ahimsa, or non-violence. While many ethical systems espouse some form of non-violent ethic or another, what makes the Hindu practice of ahimsa radically unique from other systems is the universal scope of its concern. For most ethical schools of thought, the concept of ethical concern extends no further than the human race. The criteria for whether or not a being is worthy of being the object of compassion is determined by the species of the being involved. For Hindus, on the other hand, all living creatures are worthy of respect, compassion and ethical concern, regardless of whether they are human or non-human.

For example, in the Christian philosophical perspective, animals are considered to be of an inferior order of being in comparison to humans. Thus, it is perfectly permissible for humans to kill animals for consumption or for any other purpose they deem appropriate. Animals are seen as being the mere means to an end. This idea serves to emphasize the fact that the end is the gratification and satisfaction of human needs. If one examines these opinions with a deeper philosophical scrutiny and from the perspective of the Hindu concept of ahimsa, however, many flaws are quickly revealed. First of all, while it is apparent that God gave us a superior position over animals in the hierarchy of being, this higher status does not automatically give us the right to kill other life-forms simply for our selfish ends. Mere superiority over another conscious being can never be interpreted as a license for abusing a less capable being or a class of such beings. If it were the case that superior beings have the right to exploit supposedly inferior ones, then it would be morally permissible for one human to enslave and victimize another. An intellectually or physically more powerful man could justifiably kill another, weaker man. Physically weaker women and children would be at the mercy of stronger, abusive men. Indeed, the entire moral order, which is based on the premise of ethical means and not merely brute force to achieve ends, would collapse.

For a Sanatan Dharma like Hinduism, to be a proper object of moral concern, all that is required is being sentient. In other words, this means any living being capable of experiencing and feeling (including the feeling of pain). All living beings, regardless of their physical form, are atma or individual units of consciousness, in their innermost essence. The attributes of atma are sat, chit and ananda, or being, knowledge and bliss. The atma experiences all that occurs in the body, whether it is good or bad. That being the case, causing any suffering to any living being is considered to be the greatest offense. If any being is capable of experiencing pain, regardless of what species, it is immoral to needlessly inflict pain on that body. It must be kept in mind that while we abuse it, torture it, or try to kill it, a conscious life is pleading with us to cease its suffering. It is in tune with the understanding of respecting the value of life, regardless of what form that individual life takes, that thoughtful Hindus follow a strict vegetarian diet, a diet which seeks to reduce suffering to its minimal level.

Most major paths of Hinduism hold vegetarianism as the ideal, due to a variety of reasons based on different beliefs. For many Hindus, it is a textually-advocated belief in ahimsa to avoid indulgences (as meat was considered an indulgence) and to reduce bad karmic influences. For others (especially within Vaishnavism and the bhakti movements), it is because their chosen deity does not accept offerings of non-vegetarian foods, which the follower then accepts as prasad.

Generally there is the belief, based on scriptures such as Bhagavad Gita that one's food shapes their personality, mood, and mind. Meat is said to promote sloth and ignorance as well as a mental state known as tamas (negativity) while a vegetarian diet is considered to promote satvic (positive) qualities, calm the mind, and be essential for spiritual progress. The Vedic and Puranic scriptures of Hinduism assert that animals have souls, and the act of killing animals without due course has considerable karmic repercussions (i.e the killer will suffer the pain of the animal he has killed in this life or the next). The principle of ahimsa (non-violence) compels one to refrain from injuring any living creature, physically, mentally or emotionally, without good reason. Most of the secular motivations for vegetarianism, such as ethics and nutrition, apply to Hindu motivations as well.

Again, some adherents of Eastern religions, such as Mahatma Gandhi, claim that spiritual awareness and experiences are greatly enhanced on a vegetarian diet. In the West, this spiritual motivation is regarded by many as a New Age reason for being vegetarian. These people believe that vegetarianism helps an individual to explore deeper levels of consciousness, find inner peace, and establish a connection with the Divine, through such practices as meditation, yoga, or whirling.

There is another dimension of this debatable issue, which encompasses logical and moral aspects. It is a foregone conclusion that life lives on life. That is the law of nature. Whether we eat an animal or a plant we are destroying a life. Among all life forms "man" is different from all the rest in the kingdom of life. He has the capability to discriminate the right from wrong. Unlike plants, who have a body but a rudimentary mind, and animals, who may have body and mind, but elementary intellect, Man has well-developed intellect to discriminate, decide, and choose. He always has three choices, Karthum Sakhyam, Akartum Sakhyam and Anyath Karthum Sakhyam, he can choose to do, not to do, and do it another way.

For animals and plants there is no freedom of choice. They do not commit sins in their actions because there is no will involved in their actions. A tiger's action of killing and eating does not involve any discriminatory moral issue of whether it is right or wrong, because it does not have the power to do so. When it is hungry, to fufil nature's demand, it kills it prey and eats what it needs while leaving the rest once it is full. This last point emphasizes that the tiger is not greedy either because that is its Swadharma (natural practice). It follows a beautiful ecological system.

But for Man, the matter is altogether different as he has a well-developed discriminatory intellect. It is the reason Man often thinks about whether his actions are right or wrong. In case of consuming other life form, this feeling may be very disconcerting, as he does not want to hurt others to fill his appetite. He learns what `hurt' means because he surely does not want others to hurt him. Eating plant forms may also cause damage to life form, but then unlike animals, one is not consciously aware of suffering of the plants. The role of the human being with discriminative intellect should be to do the least damage to nature for keeping him alive.

It is pertinent at this point to bring back the issue of Moksha once again. In Bhagawad Gita, Lord Krishna emphatically says that a Sadhaka (one who is in pursuit of Moksha) should have a compassion for all forms of life, Sarva Bhuta Hiterthaha. The mind has to be pure and at ease for one to see the truth as the truth. During spiritual growth, one develops subtle intellect slowly (Sukshma Bhuddhi in contrast to Teekhna Buddhi, or sharper intellect). In the process, the mind becomes quiet, calm, and self-content. The sensitivity to the suffering of others also grows, as do feelings of compassion and love. It is with a vegetarian diet that such an elevated state of mind is achieved, which is in tune with the true essence of Hindu Dharma.

So, in the end, should a Hindu feel compelled to be a vegetarian? Speaking from the point of view of a practicing Hindu, there are no "do's" and "don'ts." All the scripture and faith asks of you is to pursue a path towards Sanatan Dharma. There are factions among Hindus, like the Shaktas (worshipper of Shakti) who thrive on non-vegetarian food. In the end, Hinduism advises us to determine our own way of life, based on our intellectual values, culture, education, and primary goals in life. Purification of the mind is the means for attaining salvation, and that is the goal of human life. Since by willful actions we get ourselves into earthly tangles, it is by willful Sadhana only we can get out of it. The Lord has given us the intelligence to accomplish this, Krishna declares, and you are better off following your Swadharma than Paradharma. It is our Swadharma that makes us comfortable with ourselves. Swadharma, in the final analysis, is what our intellect or consciousness dictates. Because, after the action is performed, it is our mind that has to settle accounts with our intellect. If our Swadharma allows us to eat non-vegetarian food, then be it. If it produces a feeling of guilt or sin among us, then it is better to do away with it. It is not for others to judge us, it is for us to judge ourselves.

Finally, itcan always be said that in being a vegetarian, we are not only showing compassion towards inferior forms of life, but also preventing our stomach to be a burial ground for a dead animal. It in itself is not a trivial matter. After all, we are doing good to ourselves, as our health matters too!