Uma Bharati's Cow Agenda
By Ram Puniyani
www.countercurrents.org
25 February, 2004It is generally believed that BJP victory in the three
assembly elections was on the plank of Bijali, Sadak,
Pani (BSP). Whatever be the truth of that, the
so-called Hindutva agenda is starkly visible in these
states with the BJP Governments firmly in power. MP
has a unique distinction of having a 'World
Renouncer', Sadhvi Uma Bharati as the chief commissar of the
state. And true to the Sadhvi spirit, she has been
bringing in the clerical presence in the matters of
state. Right from the word go, i.e. her swearing in
ceremony, she has brought in Hindutva into her style
of functioning and polices. Not only that her Sadhu
brethren were the guests of honor at the swearing
ceremony, she also lost no time in banning liquor and
non vegetarian food in the three "holy" cities and to
back it up she is now giving a 'cow tilt' to MPs
economy by giving primacy to establishing Goshala (Cow
sheds)(Feb 2004) Many a previous RSS-VHP campaigns
around giving the status of mother to cow went un
responded so far. With Sadhvi Uma finally the 'Cow
mother' is getting a new place in Indian society. In a
society where the young mothers are facing increasing
deprivations 'Cow mother' will be given the place of
honor in the second Laboratory of Hindu Rashtra,
Madhya Pradesh.Why is cow a holy animal, why has she to be given a
place above other animals which are equally if not
more useful is a long story. Overall cow is the major
emotional symbol of the upper caste Hindutva politics,
next only to Lord Ram. Lord Ram has been milked
heavily for electoral purposes, Ram Janmbhumi campaign
was acknowledged even by Advani as having given a
fillip in the politics, and now its cow's turn to
swell the quantum of the electoral milk for this
politics.One recalls, just a couple of years ago Prof. D.N. Jha
a historian from Delhi university had been
experiencing the nightmares of 'threats to life' from
anonymous callers who were trying to prevail upon him
not to go ahead with the publication of his well
researched work, 'Holy Cow: Beef in Indian Dietary
traditions'. It is a work of serious scholarship based
on authentic sources in tune with methods of
scientific research in History. The book demonstrates
that contrary to the popular beliefs even today large
number of Indians, the indigenous people in particular
and many other communities in general consume beef
unmindful of the dictates of the Hindutva forces who
confer the status of mother to her. Currently 72
communities in Kerala-not all of them untouchable
perhaps-prefer beef to the expensive mutton and the
Hindutva forces are trying to prevail upon them also
to stop eating the same.Jha breaks the myth that Muslim rulers introduced beef
eating in India. Much before the advent of Islam in
India beef had been associated with Indian dietary
practices. Also that it is not tenable to hold that
dietary habits are a mark of community identity.A survey of ancient Indian scriptures, especially
Vedas shows that amongst the nomadic, pastoral Aryans,
who settled here, animal sacrifice was a dominant
feature of theirs' till the emergence of settled
agriculture. Cattle were the major property during
this phase and they offered the same to propitiate the
gods. Wealth was equated with ownership of the cattle.
Many a gods like Indra and Agni are described to be
having especial preferences for different types of
flesh-Indra had weakness for bull's meat and Agni for
bulls' and cows'. It is recorded that the Maruts and
the Asvins were also offered cows. In Vedas there is a
mention of around 250 animals out of which at least 50
were supposed to be fit for sacrifice. In Mahabharata
there is a mention of a king named Rantideva who
achieved great fame by distributing food grains and
beef to Brahmins. Taittiriya Brahman categorically
tells us: 'Verily the cow is food' (atho annam via
gauh) and Yajnavalkya's insistence on eating the
tender (amsala) flesh of the cow is well known. Even
later Brahminical texts provide the evidence for
eating beef.In therapeutic section of Charak Samhita (pages 86-87)
flesh of cow is prescribed as a medicine for various
diseases. It is also prescribed for making soup. It is
emphatically advised as a cure for irregular fever,
consumption, and emaciation. The fat of the cow is
recommended for debility and rheumatism.With the rise of agricultural economy the massive
changes occurring in the society changed the
perceptions of people at large. At the time there were
ritualistic practices, with which Brahmins were
identified. Even Manusmirit did not prohibit the
consumption of beef. Buddha attacked these practices,
which involved the sacrifices. There were sacrifices,
which involved 500 Oxen, 500 male calves, 500 female
calves and 500 sheep to be tied to the sacrificial
pole for slaughter. Buddha pointed out that aswamedh,
purusmedha, vajapeya sacrifices did not produce good
results. According to a story in Digha Nikaya, when
Buddha was touring Magadha, a Brahmin called Kutadanta
was preparing for a sacrifice with 700 bulls and 700
goats. Buddha intervened and stopped him. His
rejection of animal sacrifice and emphasis on
non-injury to animals assumed a new significance in
the context of new agriculture, which required cattle.The emphasis on non-violence by Buddha was not blind
or rigid. He did taste beef and it is well known that
he died due to eating pork. Emperor Ashok after
converting to Buddhism did not turn to vegetarianism.
He restricted the number of animals to be killed for
the royal kitchen.
So where do matters change and how did cow become a
symbol of faith, reverence and assumed the status of
'mother hood'. Over a period of time mainly after the
emergence of Buddhism or rather as an accompaniment of
the Brahminical attack on the Buddhism, the practices
started changing. The threat posed by Buddhism to
Brahminical value system was too severe. In response
to low caste slipping away from the grip of
Brahminism, the battle was taken at all the levels. At
philosophical level Shankar reasserted the supremacy
of Brahminical values, at political level King
Pushyamitra Shung ensured the physical attack on
Buddhist monks, at the level of symbols King Shashank
got the Bodhi tree destroyed. One of the arsenals of
rise of Buddhism was the protection of cattle wealth,
which was ideally, needed for the agricultural
economy. In a way while Brahminism 'succeeded' in
banishing Buddhism from India but it had to also to
transform itself from the 'animal sacrifice' state to
the one which could be in tune with the times while
preserving their own interests. It is here that this
ideology took up cow as a symbol of their ideological
march. But unlike Buddha whose pronouncements were
based on reason, the counteraction of Brahminical
ideology took the form of a blind faith based
assertion. So while Buddha's Non-Violence was for the
preservation of animal wealth for the social and
compassionate reasons the counter was based purely on
symbolism. The followers of Brahmincal ideology accuse
Buddha for 'weakening' India due to his doctrine of
non-violence. But he was not a cow worshipper or
vegetarian in the current Brahmincal sense.Despite the gradual rigidification of Brahminical 'cow
as mother' stance, large sections of low castes
continued the practice of beef eating. The followers
of Buddhism continued to eat flesh including beef.
Since Brahmanism is the dominant religious tradition,
Babur the first Mughal emperor in his will to his son
Humayun, in deference to these notions, advised his
son Humayun to respect the Cow and avoid cow
slaughter. The issue came back with the construction
of Hindutva ideology and politics in response to the
rising Indian national movement, and asserted the
demand for ban on cow slaughter. In post independence
India RSS repeatedly raised this issue as a mass
campaign but without any response to its call till
1980s.While one must respect the sentiments of those who
worship cow and regard her as their mother, but to
initiate the state sponsored step to promote these
emotional symbolisms is travesty of democracy. Madhya
Pradesh correctly needs Bijali, Sadak Pani. Cow,
bullocks and buffalos do need a tender caring; the
ecology has to be respected. But can it take
precedence over human problems? As such there is no
tussle between communities as for as dietary habits
and respect for other's tradition and faiths are
concerned. While adhering to one's own faith, one
should be tolerant to others faiths and beliefs. The
measures as being initiated by the Sadhvi do smack of
imposition of her own belief systems on the state as a
whole and that too at the expense of state exchequer.