The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c17.9

c17.9

Let us look into it more closely. One should, of course, conform to the ways and habits of one's caste, for it is better to perform the duties of one's own caste, one's *svadharma*, indifferently than those of others with outstanding distinction. But what if these customs and duties, such as meat eating and impure occupations, are contrary to the precepts of dharma? For instance, to refuse to eat meat or, say, to participate in pig hunting if one happens to be a royal rājput would cause a scandal in one's community. Such refusal is therefore stated to be reprehensible. Conversely, one can not be blamed for following the code of conduct that is particular to one's community, even if it would constitute *adharma*.¹⁷ In a similar vein, the authoritative *Mānava Dharmaśāstra* concludes its exposition of nonviolence (*ahiṃsā*) and the consequent prohibition of meat by saying that, after all, there is no sin in eating meat, this being simply the way of the world (*pravṛttir eṣā bhūtānām*), but that abstention (*nivṛtti*) is rich in religious reward.¹⁸