# Ask the (atheist) Hindu **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 13, 2005, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071 "2005-06-13T13:00:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![litost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c4cdca/32.png) [@litost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/litost)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/61 "2005-06-14T03:59:50Z")
> [@aankh](#): > > No. I am confused by the [Wiki quote](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita) below and seek clarification on the point. > > Why are _Brahman_ and _brahman_ identified as two separate states of consciousness? If you follow the links, you will see that brahman and Brahman link to the same definition. Dvaitic philosophy recognizes two entities: Atman (individual soul) and Brahman (cosmic soul) and when they merge into the One, the Supreme, God, whatever-you-want-to-call-it, that’s when you attain salvation. Now, the One is also referred to as Brahman, especially in the Upanishads, from which Advaitic philosphy takes its belief that there is no distinction between the individual and the universe and that everything is Brahman, the Supreme Being, the Infinite. This could be the reason for the somewhat confusing presentation. Just a guess. **DocCathode:** You are entirely correct in listing the three “main” gods. But, Brahma, the creator is but only one manifestation of Brahman, the Supreme Being. It’s a common mistake to mix up Brahma and Brahman since the names are very similar and I believe they even share the same root in Sanskrit. Here’s a snip from wikipedia: \*Philosopher mystics of the Upanishads identify Brahman, the world soul, with atman, the inner essence of the human being, or the human soul. In the Hindu pantheon, Brahman should not be confused with the first of the Hindu Trimurti (= trinity) of Brahma (the Creator), Vishnu (the Preserver) and Shiva (the Destroyer). Brahma is, like the other gods, Ishwar, or manifested Brahman, fundamentally ego-conscious, whereas Brahman is without ego, without existence and beyond. \* ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/62 "2005-06-14T04:02:29Z")
Two silly philosophical/automotive bumper stickers: My karma needs new chakras. Your karma ran over my dogma. ---
**Author:** ![litost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c4cdca/32.png) [@litost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/litost)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/63 "2005-06-14T04:04:27Z")
Regarding states of consciousness, the Upanishads are fond of talking of multiple states of consciousness and only of them is salvation. I can dig into my copy later tomorrow. ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/64 "2005-06-14T07:45:15Z")
A thread on atheist Hinduism would not be complete without mentioning the Carvaka school of thought. It’s a historical curiosity whose existence is cited to show the scope of diversity that is Hinduism. It’s a curiosity since most Hindus are some of the most theistically devout people in the world. Even masters of Vedanta like Adi Shankaracarya, who taught the metaphysics of formless absolute reality, nevertheless composed many hymns in devotion to various deities. Carvaka is not only atheist, it’s atheist _materialism_. It taught that matter is the only reality. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan wrote about Carvaka doctrine: “The ultimate principles are the four elements: earth, water, fire, and air. Consciousness is a material and transitory modification of these elements and will disappear when these elements, from which it is produced, are dissolved.” Carvaka is old. Its main text (no longer extant) was called the _Brhaspati Sutra_ and according to Radhakrishnan dates back to 600 BC. Carvaka was mentioned in the _Bhagavadgita_, XVI:8. Unlike the other two non-Vedic systems, Jainism and Buddhism, Carvaka did not survive. Much of what we know about it today comes from refutations by its opponents. Also on the subject of atheist Hinduism, we should mention the Samkhya school of thought. Samkhya is considered one of the six orthodox Hindu _darshana_s, although it does not deal with God. It could be called nontheist rather than atheist because, like Buddhism, it does not concern itself with the question of God’s existence. It is about analyzing phenomena in terms of the 25 elements, both material and mental, that make up existence (_prakrti_). **Anaamika** , I spent all 4 of my undergraduate years away at college as a vegetarian, and did not consider it a hardship. It helped that I got out of the dorms and into my own apartment as soon as I could, where I could fix my own delicious vegetarian meals from fresh ingredients. It also helped that the ISKCON temple was literally around the corner from my campus, and they fed my belly even though my head refused their sect. My belly was happy with them anyway. I’m vegetarian again today, and quite happy this way. > [@Bippy the Beardless](#): > > What (if anything) does this mean to you “Acintya bheda abheda Tattva” (Please correct my Sanskrit if wrong). You spelled it right, congratulations. I got out my Sanskrit dictionary and would translate as ‘unthinkable dualistic nondualist principle’. A school of philosophy founded by the 15th-century Vaishnava saint Sri Caitanya. It says there is both difference and non-difference between all individual souls (_jiva_) and _Brahman_, but that this dualistic relation of both difference and non-difference is logically unthinkable. (I didn’t know that offhand, I looked it up in _A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy_.) Does it mean anything to you? Incidentally, one of the meanings of _bheda_, besides dualism, is the female _yoni_. ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 8:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/65 "2005-06-14T08:06:25Z")
> [@Noone Special](#): > > Something I’ve never fully understood about Eastern “Religions” (and I’ve heard this claimed about many of them) – how can one be an Atheist yet consider oneself as part of a **religion** as well? Or, conversely, In what way is, eg. in your case, Hinduism a “religion” rather than a philosophy? > > I just fail to see how it is possible to disbelieve in a supreme deity while believing in a religion in the Abrahamic sense; so I guess the question really is: How does a Hindu define “religion”, if not as “a system of behavior stemming from the belief in a Supreme Being that has mandated this behavior”? > > Also, as a Culturally Jewish Atheist, I’m not certain I understand your analogy here Again, I just don’t see it – I separate Cultural Judaism from Religious Judaism completely. I am one but emphatically not the other. And I disagree that Judaism as a religion canbe followed without a belief in God. Maybe, like I’ve already suggested, I just don’t (and maybe can’t) understand what it means to “belong” to Hinduism as a “religion”. > > Dani I believe that a deity or deities (as is the case with Hinduism, as well as some forms of Buddhism) can be assimilated and recognized in a practical way without necessarily believing in them as actual corporal, mystical, entities. Instead of believing in the literal godhead one might recognize his/her animus incorporate of humanity and the universe in its various facets. Merely, recognizing the mythology as parable and translate. As a matter of fact I believe this is a very mature and important mystical revelation. It is very much like recognizing all of God’s work outside you as well as within you. The only difference is in the attribution and name. We must assign an identity to the Spirits within and around us. Ultimately the wholeness we seek is sublimated by its parts. ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/66 "2005-06-14T08:08:37Z")
Heck, even Judaism gave us angels! ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 8:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/67 "2005-06-14T08:17:42Z")
> [@devilsknew](#): > > As a matter of fact I believe this is a very mature and important mystical revelation. It is very much like recognizing all of God’s work outside you as well as within you. The only difference is in the attribution and name. We must assign an identity to the Spirits within and around us. Ultimately the wholeness we seek is sublimated by its parts. Sorry for the triple post but I want to be clear. When I speak of Spirits I mean that in a general way and not to connote a mystical entity. The spirit of a situation, for example to the Greeks or Romans we might be seen as patrons and particularly blessed by Mars…the spirit of war and victory. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/68 "2005-06-14T10:04:53Z")
**Anaamika** , in the beliefs of the majority of educated, devout Hindus, what role do the gods and the myths about them play? Are they believed to be actual spiritual (or even physical) beings who did what the myths describe? Would an educated, devout Hindu find it plausible that somewhere on the planet are the bones (or at least the dispersed elements of the bones) of the elephant whose head became that of Ganesh? Whatever the answer to those questions, how important would that understanding (whatever it may be) of the mythology and theology be? You seem to have indicated that your (non-)beliefs about the gods and their stories are not mainstream. How do devout Hindus react to learning this about you? How do Hindu priests react? How does your family react? ---
**Author:** ![Anaamika](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Anaamika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anaamika)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/69 "2005-06-14T13:24:28Z")
_sob_ I’m so proud! My GD thread is all grown up and teaching people! Sorry I haven’t been around, but you know, work and all. Here goes with the requested answers: > [@hawkeyejo](#): > > Personally speaking, I do not believe in God. I am scientifially trained and hence consider all doctrinal and ritualistic religions (which are pretty much all religions, including Hinduism) a complete waste of time. On the other hand I do not believe that what we see and hear is all there is to this universe. Hinduism gives me a way to define the intangible aspects of the cosmos and the urge to further understand the essence of life. It enables me to investigate avenues of finding those other planes. Very well put! This is what I was trying to say. > [@DocCathode](#): > > Which reminds me, how did Hanuman come to be an aspect of the Godhead? I’m not sure if you’re asking more than I can answer here, but I can give you the simple answer: he assisted Rama and is faithful to him beyond death. > [@DocCathode](#): > > How can you tell who’s who? Presumably Brahmins and (The warrior/noble caste I can’t remember the name of. Udishtira was in it) have little reason to dress as a lower caste. Brahmin, Kshytria, Vaishya, Shudra, Untouchable. And again, I have never lived in India, but from what I gather, it’s the jobs they’re in. And you’re not really supposed to dress/act out of your caste. I think the top 4 mix with no problem in at least some places, though. > [@Bippy the Beardless](#): > > What (if anything) does this mean to you “Acintya bheda abheda Tattva” (Please correct my Sanskrit if wrong). I’m afraid I don’t understand Sanskrit! > [@DocCathode](#): > > What is this thing? Flower vase? A vessel for offering milk to the godhead? A cremation urn? A chamberpot? I’ve got one just like it. I put flowers in it. It’s probably a vessel for offering milk, though. > [@Leviosaurus](#): > > On the subject of the beef thing - are non-beef eating Hindus disgusted by those of us who do eat beef? My cousins have professed disgust… > [@Leviosaurus](#): > > Have I inadvertantly offended my Hindi friends when I go to lunch with them an order a burger? But they still love me, so I doubt they’re offended too much. > [@Leviosaurus](#): > > Thanks much for starting this interesting thread. You’re so welcome! I’m glad you find it so. > [@devilsknew](#): > > Aanamika, it seems as if you have a very practical view of Hinduism. I find that admirable and good. > > What exactly is your personal understanding of the bindi and its personal significance to you? Also, what is your understanding and beliefs in the more mystical parts of Hinduism. i.e.- Yoga, Chakras, Ayurvedic, etc. The bindi to me is completely aesthetic, i.e., decoration. I have chosen not to attribute any deeper meaning to it. As for the other things you mention, I don’t hold much stock in anything I can’t see, hear, feel, and touch. I’m quite practical, perhaps more so than I should be and still consider myself Hindu! I think Yoga is good for the body, but not necesarily the elusive thing called the soul. And most things are good & useful in moderation, I’d say. > [@Johanna](#): > > Anaamika, I spent all 4 of my undergraduate years away at college as a vegetarian, and did not consider it a hardship. It helped that I got out of the dorms and into my own apartment as soon as I could, where I could fix my own delicious vegetarian meals from fresh ingredients. It also helped that the ISKCON temple was literally around the corner from my campus, and they fed my belly even though my head refused their sect. My belly was happy with them anyway. I’m vegetarian again today, and quite happy this way. I don’t think I will ever go back to vegetarianism. I’ve lost that particular ideal and no longer think it’s immoral to eat animals. That’s a debate for another thread, though. > [@Alan Smithee](#): > > Anaamika, in the beliefs of the majority of educated, devout Hindus, what role do the gods and the myths about them play? Are they believed to be actual spiritual (or even physical) beings who did what the myths describe? Would an educated, devout Hindu find it plausible that somewhere on the planet are the bones (or at least the dispersed elements of the bones) of the elephant whose head became that of Ganesh? Whatever the answer to those questions, how important would that understanding (whatever it may be) of the mythology and theology be? You seem to have indicated that your (non-)beliefs about the gods and their stories are not mainstream. How do devout Hindus react to learning this about you? How do Hindu priests react? How does your family react? Starting with your last question first, I told my mom recently. I was dreading it, because she’s very devout, but she took it so casually I was shocked. I can’t speak for the majority of educated, devout Hindus, but I would say they feel the gods & myths are simply representations & lessons for the way to live. Krishna, supposedly, did live, but not Ganesh. That understanding isn’t that important. It’s more important to look at the “whys” rather than the “whats” in Hinduism. Everything has a why behind it. I haven’t told many devout Hindus I’m atheist. Most of them just look at me like I’m weird, but never try to convert me. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/70 "2005-06-14T15:11:24Z")
I don’t know very much about Hinduism, but I’ve met atheist Jews and Communist Christians, so I don’t see why **Anaamika** can’t be an atheist Hindu. I don’t see any difference between her version of Hinduism and plain old humanism (aside from terminology), but maybe that’s where the cultural part comes in? ---
**Author:** ![Anaamika](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Anaamika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anaamika)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/71 "2005-06-14T15:15:31Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t know very much about Hinduism, but I’ve met atheist Jews and Communist Christians, so I don’t see why **Anaamika** can’t be an atheist Hindu. > > I don’t see any difference between her version of Hinduism and plain old humanism (aside from terminology), but maybe that’s where the cultural part comes in? No I think there isn’t a difference. I just find it convenient because not only is it what I was raised in and thus familiar…I think we have a deep and varied and most of all \*beautiful \* culture and I don’t wish to leave it. ---
**Author:** ![Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ac8455/32.png) [@Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bippy_the_Beardless)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/72 "2005-06-14T16:37:26Z")
> [@Johanna](#): > > I got out my Sanskrit dictionary and would translate as ‘unthinkable dualistic nondualist principle’. A school of philosophy founded by the 15th-century Vaishnava saint Sri Caitanya. It says there is both difference and non-difference between all individual souls (_jiva_) and _Brahman_, but that this dualistic relation of both difference and non-difference is logically unthinkable. (I didn’t know that offhand, I looked it up in _A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy_.) Does it mean anything to you? > > Incidentally, one of the meanings of _bheda_, besides dualism, is the female _yoni_. Does this philosophy then consider that some thing can be both true and false? So undermining the Greek philosophy/logic requirement that some thing cannot be both true and false. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/73 "2005-06-14T18:04:37Z")
Just for the record, there are lots of logic systems that are not bivalent. ---
**Author:** ![Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ac8455/32.png) [@Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bippy_the_Beardless)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/74 "2005-06-14T20:35:22Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Just for the record, there are lots of logic systems that are not bivalent. I heard of versions where something can be in an unknown state neither true or false, but not where something can be both true and false. Please list a few words I can google for to find out more without further hyjacking this excellent thread. To the OP do you beleive in the existance of Chakras within the body, and the energy that is meant to flow through them. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2005, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/75 "2005-06-14T22:53:42Z")
> [@Bippy the Beardless](#): > > I heard of versions where something can be in an unknown state neither true or false, but not where something can be both true and false. Please list a few words I can google for to find out more without further hyjacking this excellent thread. Search for paraconsistent logics. Some are non-adjunctive, some are non-truth-value, some are many-valued, and some are truth-relevant. Asenjo’s many-valued logic, for example, allows the designation of both a formula and its negative — i.e., it can be true, or false, or both true and false, or neither true nor false. ---
**Author:** ![Saranga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Saranga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saranga)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/76 "2005-06-15T02:11:16Z")
“Devout” Hindu checking in. I don’t really want to mess with the atheist quality of this thread because it’s a unique perspective, but I do want to address a couple of topics. I have **never** heard of vows of vegetarianism. I am a Brahmin and vegetarian, but I nor anyone in my family ever took vows to that effect. We just have lived that way all our lives. My grandmother made a pilgrimage to a famous temple in India and swore never to eat guavas for the rest of her life (it was her favorite fruit) out of devotion, but such things happen rarely. I would be very interested to hear about these vows from **Anaamika** and **litost** about who takes them and where. I would also disagree with the idea that people dress according to caste or wear caste marks. There are special dresses that people wear during funerals or marriages, but other than that there is no identifying mark. The only way to guess someone’s caste is to make a general guess at their level of wealth. There are taboos against lower castes wearing extravagant clothing, but that’s about it. ---
**Author:** ![comrade33](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e99b99/32.png) [@comrade33](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/comrade33)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/77 "2005-06-15T06:04:23Z")
Anaamika , correct me if i am wrong, but i think you are looking at hinduism the way it was meant to be looked at (have you read the tao of physics? if not, i think you should. it takes eastern thought and shows how it is manifest (i.e. it shows how the cosmic dance of shiva (or whatever the devil it is called) is made manifest through quantum theory) through physics). i always thought that the “gods” and “goddesses” were only representations of actual things that you experience and observe in everyday life. i think that those that practice the philosophy (i’ve always found the whole thing to be completely symbolic, not mystical or mythical), instead of believing in gods/goddesses that i thought were never meant to be believed in in the first place, are on the right track. ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/78 "2005-06-15T12:59:35Z")
> [@Bippy the Beardless](#): > > Does this philosophy then consider that some thing can be both true and false? So undermining the Greek philosophy/logic requirement that some thing cannot be both true and false. **Bippy** , I know nothing about that particular tendency in Hindu philosophy. Even though I took a course in Indian philosophy, I don’t think that was ever mentioned. (It was a late development and we covered the ancient stuff.) I hadn’t paid much attention to Sri Caitanya because after all he was the founder of the Hare Krsna movement, those guys who used to chant and play percussion in the street wearing orange robes and hit up people in airports for money. I did not like that sect much (although my tummy loved their vegetarian cooking; me and my stoned beatnik friends used to show up there every Sunday, ignore the preaching, and devour their food with much gusto.) Anything concerning Caitanya is out of place in an atheism thread, since his movement was probably the most aggressively theist in the whole long history of Hinduism. To me, the most interesting thing about Caitanya was his participation in the Vaishnava Sahaja tendency, which is sacred sex re-enacting the amours of Krsna and his girlfriend Radha. The modern Hare Krsnas are very uptight and puritanical about sex, and deny that their founder ever did such a thing. But it has been documented; see _The Place of the Hidden Moon: Erotic Mysticism in the Vaisnava-sahajiya Cult of Bengal_, by Edward C. Dimock. I should ask you, **Bippy** , what was your interest in _acintya bheda abheda tattva_ that made you ask about it in the first place? And what does it have to do with atheism? ---
**Author:** ![Anaamika](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Anaamika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anaamika)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/79 "2005-06-15T14:36:20Z")
> [@Saranga](#): > > I have **never** heard of vows of vegetarianism. I am a Brahmin and vegetarian, but I nor anyone in my family ever took vows to that effect. I would be very interested to hear about these vows from **Anaamika** and **litost** about who takes them and where. They weren’t just vows of vegetarianism. Vegetarianism was only part of it. I was part of the Arya Samaj Temple, which is based out of NYC. It’s the most progressive Hindu temple I’ve ever seen. I found out from another poster for the first time that sometimes women are not allowed to go to temple when having their period (sorry for the smiley in GD but :eek:) mine was totally the opposite. Women were welcomed and encouraged to be something more than they were. I was the most religious amongst the children in my community, more even than some adults. The “vow” of Brahminism was simply a formal way to affirm the life I would be living. It consisted of a \*havan \* (sacred fire), some walks around it, etc. > [@comrade33](#): > > Anaamika , correct me if i am wrong, but i think you are looking at hinduism the way it was meant to be looked at I think so, too…except the god part, of course. But Hinduism has been seriously misintrepeted in nearly every field. Just take the case of womens’ rights: women are supposed to have the birthright of choosing their own hsubands even against their parents’ will. When Krishna’s sister Subadhra was supposed to marry Shishupal, she told her brother she was in love with Arjun. Krishna himself arranged the \*kanya haran \* (winning of the damsel) and told him where to meet her, at the temple, and take her away. ---
**Author:** ![Anne\_Neville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Anne\_Neville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anne_Neville)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2005, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071/80 "2005-06-15T21:28:06Z")
When you were a vegetarian, did you eat eggs? Why do some Hindu vegetarians avoid onions and garlic (or do they all?)? I’ve heard two reasons given: onions and garlic serve the purpose of enhancing the flavor of meat, or onions and garlic inflame the passions. Is one of these the “official” reason, or is it like the kosher laws, where there is no “official” reason (except that the Torah says so), but people come up with various possible reasons? What do orthodox (and vegetarian, or at the very least non-beef-eating) Hindus think of Indian restaurants in the US that serve beef? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-atheist-hindu/308071.md?page=5)