Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of Brahmin diet


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Consensus is that there are too many WP:OR concerns with this content. I suggest adding any such content first to higher-level articles (Brahmin, Diet in Hinduism) to see if there is consensus for an OR-cmpliant treatment before spinning it out to its own article (WP:SS).  Sandstein  08:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

History of Brahmin diet

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Synthesised topic, material for which does not actually exist. Sources invariably talk about diet in Hinduism, diet in Vedas etc. talk of "Brahmin diet" or "diet of the Brahmins" is not present in any sources given in the article and other academic sources I've checked. TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 13:03, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:48, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep may be rename to Brahmin diet Passes WP:GNG. Dont agree at all with the nominator. Brahmin diet is a much debated and talked about topic in India as far as I know. Brahmin diet of the Brahmin is not the same as diet in Hinduism. I consider this a valid WP:CFORK of Brahmin and Hindu Diet to cover a specific topic. The diet of Brahmins also vary significantly according to geography, with massive differences in Bahmin diet of Kashmir vs Goa vs Kerala vs Tamil Nadu vs Assam. The Brahmin diet has also changed over the years. If you want to look for sources, check "Brahmin Diet" "Brahmin food habits" etc. Listing 2 below. --Venkat TL (talk) 14:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The sources do not discuss what is purported to be the scope this article. In the first source, a single mention of "Brahmin diet" is used to be refer simply to a vegetarian diet, also often called the "Vaishnav diet", adopted by many Hindus, not just Brahmins, for ethical-religious or social reasons, as the source itself points out. The source calls it so because it is discussing Sanskritisation—the prevalence of vegetarianism might be higher in some savarna castes for social reasons, and non-savarna castes may adopt vegetarianism to increase their social status. This points to the exact opposite of the existence of any so called "Brahmin diet". The second source as far as I can see does not uses the word "diet" only 7 times, non appearing near any "Brahmin". from the very little I know of Ambedkar's work, it is talking about the historical thesis that Brahminical Hinduism adopted vegetarianism and specially cattle reverence as an attack on Buddhism and avarna castes. This again does not point to any "Brahmin diet", but rather a transformation of all of Hinduism under Buddhist influence. a more sophisticated version of this thesis seems to have some acceptance among historians. regards, TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 14:59, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Trykid you are now resorting to nitpicking. You do understand that "diet" is not the only synonym used in the English Language to discuss food habits. If you know this then why do you think that lack of the word "diet" means the source is not discussing the topic? For example "Karnataka Brahmin cuisine" is actually commonly known as the "Udupi cuisine", note the lack of the word Brahmin or diet, yet it is the same topic that this article under AfD is about. You do understand that There are tonnes of source in Hindi, Tamil, etc that discuss this topic. I have posted some more them below. The book by BR Ambedkar may not be accessible to you, I am linking 2 book reviews with excerpts to help you understand that this book is very much on the topic. --Venkat TL (talk) 18:01, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The sources do not discuss what is purported to be the scope this article. In the first source, a single mention of "Brahmin diet" is used to be refer simply to a vegetarian diet, also often called the "Vaishnav diet", adopted by many Hindus, not just Brahmins, for ethical-religious or social reasons, as the source itself points out. The source calls it so because it is discussing Sanskritisation—the prevalence of vegetarianism might be higher in some savarna castes for social reasons, and non-savarna castes may adopt vegetarianism to increase their social status. This points to the exact opposite of the existence of any so called "Brahmin diet". The second source as far as I can see does not uses the word "diet" only 7 times, non appearing near any "Brahmin". from the very little I know of Ambedkar's work, it is talking about the historical thesis that Brahminical Hinduism adopted vegetarianism and specially cattle reverence as an attack on Buddhism and avarna castes. This again does not point to any "Brahmin diet", but rather a transformation of all of Hinduism under Buddhist influence. a more sophisticated version of this thesis seems to have some acceptance among historians. regards, TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 14:59, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Trykid you are now resorting to nitpicking. You do understand that "diet" is not the only synonym used in the English Language to discuss food habits. If you know this then why do you think that lack of the word "diet" means the source is not discussing the topic? For example "Karnataka Brahmin cuisine" is actually commonly known as the "Udupi cuisine", note the lack of the word Brahmin or diet, yet it is the same topic that this article under AfD is about. You do understand that There are tonnes of source in Hindi, Tamil, etc that discuss this topic. I have posted some more them below. The book by BR Ambedkar may not be accessible to you, I am linking 2 book reviews with excerpts to help you understand that this book is very much on the topic. --Venkat TL (talk) 18:01, 16 July 2022 (UTC)


 * There are two main of types of sources here, one dealing with the historical Ambedkarite argument that Brahmins were beef-eaters in the past, and only became vegetarian as part of an attack on Buddhism. This appropriately belongs in article covering the historical development of Hindu vegetarianism, perhaps as a part of Diet in Hinduism. Shepherd quotes Sathyamala in the introduction of the selections from the Untouchables—[i]t was left to Ambedkar, born of this ‘untouchable’ caste group, to show how it was that the food hierarchy among the Hindus, specifically beef consumption, provided the material basis of the unjust caste system. When we talk about the role of diet in justifying/solidifying the caste system as such, forking to Brahmin or Dalit diets does not help, we necessarily need to provide a holistic view, as Ambedkar's argument does. At best it's an unhelpful CFORK and at worst it's a POVFORK that presents only one side of the argument. Whether these arguments are WP:DUE and in what detail they ought to be covered in any given article (obviously they need to be fully covered in the article on book, but how much of it should go in diet in Hinduism?) would be a different question, but certainly they do not justify a "diet of the Brahmins" article based on this theory alone.
 * The second line is of caste cuisines. Any geographical of cultural group separated from others will develop a distinctive cuisine and other cultural elements. There are individual Brahmin groups with distinctive practices and cuisines—but as you point out, practices of Brahmins differ wildly across India. any distinctiveness, cuisines etc are better covered in the main article of these specific castes, or perhaps in something like "Cuisine of [specific caste group]" if it gets too large—unlike say, Tamil Brahmins specifically, Brahmins generally do not have a commonality acorss India to warrant such a "cuisine of Brahmins" article, perhaps some type of vegetarianism might be common, or not even that, since many Brahmins do eat non-vegetarian food, as you point out, and vegetarianism is followed by non-Brahmin Hindus in vast numbers.
 * As such, neither the sources that discuss Ambedkar's arguments and the role of diet in the caste system, and the sources that discuss specific food habits of some specific Brahmin groups do not justify the existence of this article. TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 19:55, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Trykid, I disagree with your overly broad (mis) categorization of these sources. I consider it a poor attempt at a straw man. I suggest others to check the sources and make their own conclusion. Brahmin diet is not the same as diet in Hinduism. Brahmins like to conflate the two, but it is not true, one is predominantly vegan while the latter is non vegan. Both are notable topics and deserve to be given due attention in separate articles.
 * You are free to create "Cuisine of [specific caste group]" but a page is needed to discuss the evolution of Brahmin diet and its variations across the geos, and this article History of Brahmin diet is the right place for it. It seems our opinions are vastly different so I will stop this discussion and let the sources speak for themselves. --Venkat TL (talk) 13:18, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * There are two main of types of sources here, one dealing with the historical Ambedkarite argument that Brahmins were beef-eaters in the past, and only became vegetarian as part of an attack on Buddhism. This appropriately belongs in article covering the historical development of Hindu vegetarianism, perhaps as a part of Diet in Hinduism. Shepherd quotes Sathyamala in the introduction of the selections from the Untouchables—[i]t was left to Ambedkar, born of this ‘untouchable’ caste group, to show how it was that the food hierarchy among the Hindus, specifically beef consumption, provided the material basis of the unjust caste system. When we talk about the role of diet in justifying/solidifying the caste system as such, forking to Brahmin or Dalit diets does not help, we necessarily need to provide a holistic view, as Ambedkar's argument does. At best it's an unhelpful CFORK and at worst it's a POVFORK that presents only one side of the argument. Whether these arguments are WP:DUE and in what detail they ought to be covered in any given article (obviously they need to be fully covered in the article on book, but how much of it should go in diet in Hinduism?) would be a different question, but certainly they do not justify a "diet of the Brahmins" article based on this theory alone.
 * The second line is of caste cuisines. Any geographical of cultural group separated from others will develop a distinctive cuisine and other cultural elements. There are individual Brahmin groups with distinctive practices and cuisines—but as you point out, practices of Brahmins differ wildly across India. any distinctiveness, cuisines etc are better covered in the main article of these specific castes, or perhaps in something like "Cuisine of [specific caste group]" if it gets too large—unlike say, Tamil Brahmins specifically, Brahmins generally do not have a commonality acorss India to warrant such a "cuisine of Brahmins" article, perhaps some type of vegetarianism might be common, or not even that, since many Brahmins do eat non-vegetarian food, as you point out, and vegetarianism is followed by non-Brahmin Hindus in vast numbers.
 * As such, neither the sources that discuss Ambedkar's arguments and the role of diet in the caste system, and the sources that discuss specific food habits of some specific Brahmin groups do not justify the existence of this article. TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 19:55, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Trykid, I disagree with your overly broad (mis) categorization of these sources. I consider it a poor attempt at a straw man. I suggest others to check the sources and make their own conclusion. Brahmin diet is not the same as diet in Hinduism. Brahmins like to conflate the two, but it is not true, one is predominantly vegan while the latter is non vegan. Both are notable topics and deserve to be given due attention in separate articles.
 * You are free to create "Cuisine of [specific caste group]" but a page is needed to discuss the evolution of Brahmin diet and its variations across the geos, and this article History of Brahmin diet is the right place for it. It seems our opinions are vastly different so I will stop this discussion and let the sources speak for themselves. --Venkat TL (talk) 13:18, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * There are two main of types of sources here, one dealing with the historical Ambedkarite argument that Brahmins were beef-eaters in the past, and only became vegetarian as part of an attack on Buddhism. This appropriately belongs in article covering the historical development of Hindu vegetarianism, perhaps as a part of Diet in Hinduism. Shepherd quotes Sathyamala in the introduction of the selections from the Untouchables—[i]t was left to Ambedkar, born of this ‘untouchable’ caste group, to show how it was that the food hierarchy among the Hindus, specifically beef consumption, provided the material basis of the unjust caste system. When we talk about the role of diet in justifying/solidifying the caste system as such, forking to Brahmin or Dalit diets does not help, we necessarily need to provide a holistic view, as Ambedkar's argument does. At best it's an unhelpful CFORK and at worst it's a POVFORK that presents only one side of the argument. Whether these arguments are WP:DUE and in what detail they ought to be covered in any given article (obviously they need to be fully covered in the article on book, but how much of it should go in diet in Hinduism?) would be a different question, but certainly they do not justify a "diet of the Brahmins" article based on this theory alone.
 * The second line is of caste cuisines. Any geographical of cultural group separated from others will develop a distinctive cuisine and other cultural elements. There are individual Brahmin groups with distinctive practices and cuisines—but as you point out, practices of Brahmins differ wildly across India. any distinctiveness, cuisines etc are better covered in the main article of these specific castes, or perhaps in something like "Cuisine of [specific caste group]" if it gets too large—unlike say, Tamil Brahmins specifically, Brahmins generally do not have a commonality acorss India to warrant such a "cuisine of Brahmins" article, perhaps some type of vegetarianism might be common, or not even that, since many Brahmins do eat non-vegetarian food, as you point out, and vegetarianism is followed by non-Brahmin Hindus in vast numbers.
 * As such, neither the sources that discuss Ambedkar's arguments and the role of diet in the caste system, and the sources that discuss specific food habits of some specific Brahmin groups do not justify the existence of this article. TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 19:55, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Trykid, I disagree with your overly broad (mis) categorization of these sources. I consider it a poor attempt at a straw man. I suggest others to check the sources and make their own conclusion. Brahmin diet is not the same as diet in Hinduism. Brahmins like to conflate the two, but it is not true, one is predominantly vegan while the latter is non vegan. Both are notable topics and deserve to be given due attention in separate articles.
 * You are free to create "Cuisine of [specific caste group]" but a page is needed to discuss the evolution of Brahmin diet and its variations across the geos, and this article History of Brahmin diet is the right place for it. It seems our opinions are vastly different so I will stop this discussion and let the sources speak for themselves. --Venkat TL (talk) 13:18, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * As such, neither the sources that discuss Ambedkar's arguments and the role of diet in the caste system, and the sources that discuss specific food habits of some specific Brahmin groups do not justify the existence of this article. TryKid&thinsp;[dubious – discuss] 19:55, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Trykid, I disagree with your overly broad (mis) categorization of these sources. I consider it a poor attempt at a straw man. I suggest others to check the sources and make their own conclusion. Brahmin diet is not the same as diet in Hinduism. Brahmins like to conflate the two, but it is not true, one is predominantly vegan while the latter is non vegan. Both are notable topics and deserve to be given due attention in separate articles.
 * You are free to create "Cuisine of [specific caste group]" but a page is needed to discuss the evolution of Brahmin diet and its variations across the geos, and this article History of Brahmin diet is the right place for it. It seems our opinions are vastly different so I will stop this discussion and let the sources speak for themselves. --Venkat TL (talk) 13:18, 17 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, History, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, India, Kerala, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu,  and West Bengal. Venkat TL (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 23:30, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. This article violates WP:OR and appears to be mixing up unrelated concepts or misrepresenting them in a wrong context per WP:SYNTH and if we properly represent the source then it would barely touch anything called "Brahmin diet". Therefore deletion is the best choice here. Pranesh Ravikumar (talk) 05:47, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * delete this article is OR, and per WP:SYNTH. If there is a dire need, any content can be added appropriately in Diet in Hinduism. Also per nomination. —usernamekiran (talk) 21:51, 26 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.