In my view “vegetarian” unqualified by default means dairy is okay but eggs and fish aren’t. That’s the norm for Indian vegetarians. “Pure vegetarian” means dairy is in, but garlic and onions are out.
Aren’t most Indians lactose intolerant? If so, that doesn’t really make much sense.
This topic reminds me of the time I was looking for a way to add blueberries to my diet. I checked out one product (a blueberry muffin, IIRC) which claimed to have blueberry bits in it. However, on reading the ingredients, I found that no blueberries were harmed in the making of that muffin.
I was about to ask if you were Indian, but you covered that. So “pure vegetarian” – is that basically like Jain meals? I do a lot of work with Gujaratis, and their events are typically veg (though they usually still have a chicken dish or two like chicken 65 and butter chicken), but their often is also a Jain station for the Jains, and their food is how you describe “pure vegetarian.” I just hadn’t heard that term before. Or is there some difference?
Literally.
More for meeeeeeeeeee!
Seriously/ those are fightin’ words /not seriously /s
This is actually the Roman Catholic stance for “meatless” for Lent - “essence” from the meat is OK, but no flesh. Got this directly from a Deacon for a Lenten soup dinner.
Ya lost me here. Why would garlic and onions not be part of a vegetarian diet?
That’s correct. I actually was going to bring up that this definition of “meatless” and conflation with mainstream “vegetarian” makes some sense in the Catholic countries, at least, as not only does meat-based broth satisfy the “meatless” requirement, but the Friday abstinence would also allow for fish and seafood, which often also get lopped into “acceptable for vegetarians” by many.
One can be a vegetarian plus, or indeed because of, avoiding certain foods following religious principles. So, following rigorous minimization of violence, food that contains or might injure insects or other small organisms, or even plant life, is avoided. Root vegetables may then be out for those reasons, not because they are not real vegetables or not nutritious.
With Jains, at least, and I believe Hare Krishnas, as well (who don’t eat onions & garlic, either), the foods are considered “tamasic,” which are associated with darkness, laziness, ignorance, stir the passions, etc. Oh, looks like Brahmins, too, looking this up.
A majority, yes, although a smaller percentage than among East Asians such as Chinese and Japanese. However, AIUI South Asians are more likely to consume lower-lactose dairy products like yogurt, buttermilk and paneer rather than swigging straight milk on the regular.
I don’t know the exact proportion. However, pretty much all major Indian sociology-cultural groups—vegetarian and non-vegetarian alike—include in their diet milk, yogurt (curds), butter (ghi), cheese (panir), milk-based desserts, and other dairy products.
Vegetarian Indians tend to consume a higher proportion of dairy products than non-vegetarian Indians.
I was surprised, as I always associated lactose intolerance with East Asians, but while Googling yesterday, I found this in the Times of India:
So far as I know the Jain diet and the “pure vegetarian” are similar but not identical. Strict Jains won’t eat any root vegetables at all. I believe “pure vegetarian” diets generally include root vegetables except for garlic and onions.
Oh, so another question: I do know the typical Indian vegetarianism to be lacto-vegetarian, but while in Mumbai I came across a reasonable number of egg dishes like egg bhurji, for example. And an Indian roommate in college would make egg curry with hard boiled eggs. Is this a regional/religious thing or are ovo-lacto vegetarian Indians somehow otherwise distinguished? And, yes, I know plenty of Indians are non-vegetarian, I’m just wondering where that paricular split of ovo-lacto vs just lacto comes from.
As noted above, it’s complicated. Suffice to say, If you’re in India and someone offers or requests “pure vegetarian” food, it won’t have garlic or onions.
I really don’t know enough to give tremendous detail. Did your roommate otherwise identify as a vegetarian?
I have known Indian vegetarians who do eat eggs but they admit to not being “good vegetarians.”
Me, I couldn’t say as I don’t come from a vegetarian group myself.
That’s a good question. As far as I know, no. She was from Hong Kong; I don’t know what region in India her family comes from. Certainly in the States she ate meat, as do most of the desis I’ve met here (mostly Gujarati, as I mentioned before, who are culturally vegetarian. I photographed a wedding in Ahmedabad, and, while officially a vegetarian state, chicken in the form of chicken tikka and chicken malai were served at all the wedding events. Gujarat is also supposed to be dry, but there was no shortage of Johnnie Walker Gold around, so these are perhaps not the most traditional Indian subgroup.)
I think I see what you’re saying – that the egg-eating Indians I encountered are perhaps not vegetarian at all, and not simply ovo-lactovegetarian, as I had assumed. I think the reason for my assumption was the cafe I was at in Mumbai didn’t serve anything with animal meat in it; just eggs and milk products, but I may very well be misremembering that.
Yeah, just because you don’t see meat around in a particular place or occasion doesn’t mean that there is a vegetarian rule in place. In a lot of situations in India, meat might still be considered expensive or otherwise too indulgent for the occasion. That doesn’t mean that everyone present is vegetarian.
Or, like, you wouldn’t expect necessarily to see Korean food on the menu at a pizzeria or taqueria.
Also. Onions and garlic have become culturally associated with Mughlai (muslim) cuisine and so a lot of Hindus will avoid them.
Just to note that my failure to capitalise “Muslim” above was inadvertent and not intentional.