By Ram Puniyani,
Can the dietary practices – the animal which is worshipped as a mother by section of a population – be brought in on the political arena? While all this sounds surreal, it is true as far as the role a cow occupies in the Indian political firmament.
Recently, Maharashtra government got the President’s assent to the bill ‘Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment) Bill 1995’ which will now ban the slaughter of bulls and bullocks as well. The defaulters will face a prison term of five years and a fine of Rs 10,000.
(Courtesy: akamaihd.net)
When I first read ‘Animal Preservation’ part of the title of the bill, I thought this is some bill related to all the animals which are used for human consumption or deals with the use of animals for different purposes by the society. Contrary to that, it turned out that this applies only to cow and its progeny. A decade ago, I was shocked to read that one of the outstanding scholars of ancient Indian history Professor Dwijendra Nath Jha received regular threats on phone telling him not to publish his book, ‘Holy Cow Beef in Indian Dietary tradition’. This scholarly work traces the place of beef in Indian diet from centuries.
The idea is to target the minorities for beef eating and cow slaughter. One recalls that one of the slogans which rent the air in the run up to the 2014 general elections was ‘Modi ko matdaan, gai ko jeevadaan (vote for Modi, give life to the cow), BJP ka sandesh, bachegi gai, bachega desh (BJP’s message, the cow will be saved, the country will be saved)”. This slogan was propped up by ‘Cow Development Cell’ of the BJP.
As such emotive-identity issues are the hall mark of the politics in the name of religion. BJP built itself up on another identity issue, that of Ram Temple. The cow has always been accompanying and a parallel issue for political mobilisation by the RSS-BJP. It has also been the point of triggering violence in many cases all through. With the formation of VHP by RSS in 1964, the cow issue has been systematically propped up time and again.
Many a misconceptions about cow, beef eating have been constructed. Building of misconceptions has also been extended to the dietary habits of the ‘Muslim’ community in particular. The profession of section of Muslims, kasai (butcher), those in the trade of beef selling has been brought in to the ‘hate other’, ‘social common sense’ in particular. The result being that it is perceived at broad layers of society as if beef eating is compulsory for Muslims. The notion which has been popularized is that cow is Holy for Hindus: Muslims kill her! The perception is that the Muslim invaders brought beef eating into India. These misconceptions are by now the part of ‘social common sense’ of the large number of people in the society.
All the components of this are myths and stereotypes have been constructed over a period of time. Time and again, one hears about some small communal violence, killing of dalits and traders of cows leading to communal polarisation. Many a dalits dealing with cow hide have been killed in places such as Gohana in Haryana and the VHP leaders had justified such acts.
Contrary to this, beef eating and cow sacrifice was prevalent here from Vedic period. The sacrifice of cows in the Yagnas (ritual around fire) is extensively mentioned in the scriptures. There is mention about beef eating in various books. There is a phrase in Taitreya Brahmin which states ‘Atho Annam Via Gau’ (cow is in veritably food). Different gods are mentioned to be having their choices for particular type of cow flesh. Professor D N Jha quotes innumerable examples of this in his masterpiece.
The preaching of non-violence in India came with the rise of agricultural society. Jainism called for total non-violence, while Buddhism talked non-violence; preventing of wasteful animal sacrifice in particular. It was much later that Brahmanism picked up cow as a symbol for Brahmanism in response and as a reaction to non-violence of these religions. Since Brahmanism has asserted itself to be the Hinduism, it projects as if cow is holy for Hindus overall. The matter of fact is that many sections of the society, more particularly dalits and tribal, have been eating beef all through. It is another matter that lately with the rising assertion of Hindutva, many a communities which are dependent on beef as a rich and cheap source of protein are gradually being forced to either give it up or do a rethink.
In contrast to what is being asserted by the BJP and company, Swami Vivekanand had a different take on the issue. While speaking to a large gathering in the USA, he had pointed out: “You will be astonished if I tell you that, according to old ceremonials, he is not a good Hindu who does not eat beef. On certain occasions he must sacrifice a bull and eat it.”
[Vivekananda speaking at the Shakespeare Club, Pasadena, California, USA (February 2, 1900) on the theme of ‘Buddhistic India’, cited in Swami Vivekananda, The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol 3 (Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, 1997), p. 536].
This is corroborated by other research works sponsored by the Ramakrishna Mission established by Swami Vivekananda himself. One of these reads: “The Vedic Aryans, including the Brahmanas, ate fish, meat and even beef. A distinguished guest was honoured with beef served at a meal. Although the Vedic Aryans ate beef, milch cows were not killed. One of the words that designated cow was aghnya (what shall not be killed). But a guest was a goghna (one for whom a cow is killed). It is only bulls, barren cows and calves that were killed.” [C Kunhan Raja, ‘Vedic Culture’, cited in the series, Suniti Kumar Chatterji and others (eds.), The Cultural Heritage of India, Vol 1 (Calcutta: The Ramakrishna Mission, 1993), 217].
In response to this bill, thousands of workers of Devnar abattoir (Mumbai), who will be losing their jobs, came on the streets to protest this move of the government (March 11). Many traders, from different religions also came to Azad Maidan in Mumbai to protest this communal act of the Maharashtra government. In a PIL filed in the Bombay High Court, the petitioner argues that this ban on beef infringes on the fundamental right of citizens to choose meat as their choice is fundamental.
The hope is that the society overcomes such abuse of ‘identity issues’ for political goals and lets the people have their own choices in matters of food habits, and let those who are making their living from this trade do so peacefully.
—–
(Issues in Secular Politics. The author can be reached at [email protected])