Nasheman

India's largest selling Urdu weekly, now also in English

You are here: Home / Archives for Beef

I eat beef, can somebody stop me? BJP leader Kiren Rijiju gives it back to Naqvi

by

Kiren Rijiju

New Delhi: In yet another blow to Sangh Parivar and Union Minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, who had stated that those who eat beef should go to Pakistan, his colleague in the Narendra Modi-led government has now slammed him for his “unpalatable” comment.

“I eat beef, I’m from Arunachal Pradesh, can somebody stop me? So let us not be touchy about somebody’s practices,” said Minister of State for Home Kiren Rijiju during a visit to Aizawl on Tuesday. “This is a democratic country. Sometimes, some statements are made which are not palatable.”

“If a Mizo Christian says that this is the land of Jesus, why should someone have a problem in Punjab or Haryana? We have to honour the sentiments of each place and each location,” said Rijiju, who is considered as the most influential BJP leader in North East India.

“If Maharashtra is Hindu majority, or if Gujarat is Hindu majority, Madhya Pradesh is Hindu majority, if they are to make laws which are conducive to the Hindu faith, let them be. But in our place, in our state where we are majority, where we feel whatever steps we take, you know, laws which are conducive to our beliefs, it should be. So they also should not have a problem with the way we live, and we also should not have a problem with the way they live,” he added.

“This country is a multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-communal country. We must respect each other’s practices. There cannot be any force on anybody about your practices, your faith. So if anybody makes a statement which is forcing or imposing your belief, your faith, your practices on another community, another believer, it is not good,” Rijiju said.

Rijiju also spoke on the issue of illegal immigration from Bangladesh to some North-Eastern states.

“I am not going to make a political point here but since it has been happening for a long time, it is a problem, a challenge for us. It’s an issue for us and we are giving a lot of emphasis to deal with that,” Rijiju said. “But I think that with the land boundary agreement, Bangladesh will come close to us in understanding and ensuring that our border forces and their forces, both sides must cooperate.”

“People who flee their homeland are broadly put in two categories, One is they come out deliberately to disturb people of other regions by taking away their jobs, by way of involvement in criminal activities. Illegal migration, this is a menace,” he said.
“Then the other group are refugees who are religiously persecuted, who are forced out. There is a humanitarian angle. If we are forced out of our homeland, it is a human issue,” the MoS said in response to a question about migration of Chakmas, a community from Bangladesh’s Chittagong Hill Tracts, to parts of Mizoram, Tripura, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh.

“For me, for the government, religious background is not a consideration. It is basically under what circumstances they have been either driven out or they have deliberately come over. So we have to categorise on that part. Having said that, if they are not our citizens, our efforts will always be to push them back into their country,” Rijiju said.

Beef eaters can go to Pakistan says Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi.

by

Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi

New Delhi: Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi on Thursday justified ban on cow slaughter and asked all those who want to eat beef to go to Pakistan.

“It is not about loss or profit… it is an issue of faith and belief. It is a sensitive issue for the Hindus,” Naqvi said at ‘Manthan’ conclave organised by TV channel Aaj Tak.

“Those who are dying without eating beef, can go to Pakistan or Arab countries or any other part of world where it is available,” he said.

“Even Muslims are against it…” he contended.

Naqvi was countered by AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi who asked whether the central government would impose blanket ban on beef across India, especially in states like Goa, Jammu and Kashmir and Kerala where a large number of people eat this kind of meat.

On the issue of backwardness among Muslims, Naqvi said the Narendra Modi government was taking steps to eradicate poverty among the minorities.

“It is a fact that Muslims have remained away from development. Various social security schemes started by our government would help Muslims in a big way,” he added.

(IANS)

Mumbai HC upholds Maharashtra government's ban on beef

by

beef-ban

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court today declined to stay provisions of a recent Maharashtra law which prohibits possession, transportation and consumption of meat of cow, bulls and bullocks even if the animals have been slaughtered outside Maharashtra.

A division bench headed by Justice V M Kanade was of the view that no stay can be given until the final hearing of a bunch of petitions challenging the beef ban which was fixed on June 25.

The court asked the state government to file a detailed affidavit on the issue within four weeks and allowed the petitioners and intervenors to file rejoinders two weeks thereafter.

The Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment) Act, enforced last month by the state government, bans slaughter of cows, bulls and bullocks and also consumption and possession of their meat.

Three petitions were filed challenging Sections 5(d) and 9(a) of the Act which prohibits possession, transportation and consumption of meat of cow, bulls and bullocks even if the animals have been slaughtered outside Maharashtra.

According to the petitions, this puts a ban on import of meat. The petitions sought a stay on these sections.

In another development, the court directed the state not to take any coercive action till pendency of petitions or three months against traders who have been found in possession or transportation of beef.

“This is because the Act had been introduced suddenly and reasonable time was not given to the traders to dispose of their products,” said the Judges.

However, FIRs can be registered against such traders but no further action can be taken until the petitions are decided finally or three months whichever is earlier, the court said.

The court also clarified that since ban on beef continues in the State under the Act, FIRs can be registered against slaughter of cows, bulls and bullocks.

As a note of caution, the Court also said that the state shall not intrude on the privacy of citizens to find out if they are in possession of beef or any other form of meat.

The court clarified that no blanket stay can be imposed on the provisions of the Act which ban transportation or possession of beef, though FIR can be registered against the offenders under the Act.

The judges said they were of the view that the traders had not been given reasonable time to dispose of the beef products as the Act was brought in all of a sudden. Hence they directed the State not to take coercive steps against them though FIR can be registered.

“There can be no compelling reason for the State to impose ban without giving a reasonable opportunity to traders provided they abided by the rules on food hygiene and safety,” said the division bench in their brief order.

Senior counsel Aspi Chinoy, appearing for one of the petitioners, had argued that such a ban on consumption was violative of the fundamental right of a person to have his choice of food.

“Section 5 (d) is extremely invasive, drastic and intrusive. There is no real justification behind making possession and consumption of beef a cognisable offence.

The government should not arbitrarily invade the rights of citizens,” Chinoy argued.

He said that the state has not even contemplated regulation of import of meat.

“Five states in India, including Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Haryana, have permitted import of beef despite a ban on slaughter of those animals. And in these states passion go high in such matters but it is still allowed,” Chinoy said.

Advocate General Sunil Manohar had, however, argued that consumption of beef is not a fundamental right of a citizen and the state government can regulate a person’s fundamental right to have his choice of food.

“It is not a fundamental right of a citizen to eat beef. It cannot be said that the government cannot take away these rights. The state legislation can regulate consumption of flesh of any animal the source of which is reprehensible. Under the Animal Protection Act, there is a prohibition on consumption of wild boar, deer and other animals,” he argued.

Manohar further argued that if section 5(d) of the Act, which prohibits possession of meat, is struck down then the Act would remain only on paper and it would frustrate the purpose and object of the Act which is to protect cow progeny.

(PTI)

Cow slaughter ban for scientific animal husbandry or for cultural nationalist state?

by

REUTERS/Shailesh Andrade

REUTERS/Shailesh Andrade

by Irfan Engineer

In the previous articles we saw that the campaign by the Hindu nationalist organizations for cow protection is merely instrumental to achieve their political objective, establish cultural hegemony of the upper caste and declare the hierarchical and feudal culture privileging the upper caste as the national culture. The amendments passed by the Maharashtra Assembly in 1995 to the Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976, and which received Presidential assent in 2015 (hereafter referred to as “the 2015 Act”), too are not to protect the cow and its progeny despite the stated objectives couched language of scientific organization of agriculture and animal husbandry. The political objective of the 2015 Act is instrumental – to impose the hegemony of upper caste culture and empower extremist, anarchic and fringe Hindu nationalist groups to intimidate the marginalized sections, in particular, the Muslims on one hand, and to construct a hegemonic and authoritarian culture monitoring state.

While the 1976 Animal preservation Act, as amended in 1988 prohibited only cow (including male and female calves) slaughter, with Section 4 providing, “Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or any usage or custom to the contrary, no person shall slaughter cause to be slaughtered or offer for slaughter any cow, in any place in the State of Maharashtra” and provided for punishment which may extend to six months with or without fine upto Rs.1,000/-. The other provisions of the 1976 Act provided for regulation of slaughter of scheduled animal by appointing competent authority.

The 2015 Act transforms a democratic constitutional state into an authoritarian cultural state with immense powers and a machinery to peep into the kitchens, refrigerator and dining tables of the citizens of the country. To include bulls and bullocks along with the cow in the animals that cannot be slaughtered is only a side objective. What has been missed is that the 2015 Act is as draconian as say the UAPA or TADA or POTA and the recent GujCOCA. The 2015 Act will encourage the vigilante actions of the fringe and mainstream Hindu nationalist organizations in stopping vehicles transporting cattle (not necessarily for slaughter), wherein either the owner/deliverer/seller of the cattle or receiver/buyer of the consignment of the cattle or the driver or the owner of the vehicle is a Muslim. The vigilante group, mostly consisting of 4-6 men, then pull out the driver if he is a Muslim, demand the documents, tear them into pieces, loot the cattle (even if not cow or progeny), beat up the Muslim driver, call the police, get a false case registered and the vehicle confiscated and finally get the media to cover that Muslims were taking cow to slaughter house. This writer was told about such cases in Gujarat, Rajasthan, MP and Maharashtra by the victims of the vigilante action. The vigilante action increases around Eid-uz-Zuha (bakri Eid). That is how media regularly “reports” which feeds into the stereo-typical relation between Muslims and cow slaughter. The 2015 Act will encourage this vigilantism.

The state and the holy cow:

The state relies on Article 48 of the Constitution of India in support of the 2015 Act. Article 48 is in Part IV of Constitution which is on Directive Principles of State Policy and non-justiciable. Art. 48 states – “The State shall endeavour to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds and prohibiting the slaughter of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.” The state submitted to the Bombay High Court that it brought in the 2015 Act to protect the cow and its progeny due to their many benefits like milk, dung and urine in making pest repellents and medicinal products. (Thomas, 2015) However, despite the claim of the state, there are no credible studies and research to back its claim. As far as use of bullock as draught animal is concerned, and milk and dung are cited as useful product, then, on that ground slaughter of most mammals should be banned, including buffaloes, goats, horses, camels, etc. Reliance is placed on ancient Vedic texts. Even the Report of the National Commission on Cattle heavily quotes from Vedic texts and Smrities to “prove” that cow is a useful animal (Justice Lodha, 2015)! It is very difficult, if not impossible, to justify ban cow slaughter without bringing in religious traditions followed by the upper-caste elite.

If the only objective of the 2015 Act is to preserve the cattle wealth of Maharashtra for its milk, dung and urine products, and utility of bullocks as a draught animal, why penalize even possession of meat of cow and progeny imported from outside the state (Sec. 5D)? Surely importing meat from outside Maharashtra does not deplete the cattle wealth or the milk, dung and urine within Maharashtra! On the other hand, why the export of cow and its progeny outside Maharashtra should be permitted for all other purposes except for slaughter (sec. 5A)? Whether the cow and its progeny are exported for slaughter or for any other purpose, Maharashtra would lose its cattle wealth along with its milk, dung and urine.

The objective of the 2015 Act goes beyond preservation of cow, its progeny and the milk, dung and urine. The real objective of the 2015 Act is to become an instrument of oppression in the hands of police and the executive objective. Consider some of provisions of the Act, e.g., sections 5A, 5B, and 5C of the 2015 Act which outlaws transportation of cow and progeny for purpose of slaughter, trading cow and progeny for the purpose of slaughter and being in possession of flesh of cow, bull or bullock. After outlawing the aforesaid activities, the 2015 Act authorizes any police officer not below the rank of sub-inspector, or any person authorized in this behalf by the State Government to enter, stop and search or authorize any person to enter, stop and search any vehicle used or even intended to be used for the export of cow and progeny; seize or authorize seizure of cow and progeny in respect of which it is suspected that they are in contravention of Sec. 5A, 5B or 5C; and in order to effect search and seizure operations, can even break open any premises as per Sec. 100 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The vigilante groups functioning illegally but with impunity could now be legally authorized by a compliant police officer. As the police officer can effect seizure or authorize seizure of even those cows and progeny which were intended to be sold or purchased or transported for slaughter. The allegation of “intention” can be freely made but is difficult to defend.

The quantum of punishment for contravention of the provisions has also been increased 10 times – from six months to five years, with a minimum punishment of six months and fine has been increased by ten times too – from one thousand to ten thousand with minimum fine to be rupees one thousand. The maximum punishment in the law before amendment would now be the minimum punishment. If you are in possession of small quantity of narcotic or psychotropic drugs, the chances are that you may be send to a rehabilitation centre and let off. However, if you are in possession of flesh of cow or progeny, chances are that you may be sentenced to a jail term upto one year! To be in possession of flesh of cow and progeny is no less serious offence than being in possession of contraband drugs, and perhaps more serious! The Hindu Nationalist vigilante groups are less concerned about Hindus getting addicted to drugs and concerned more with citizens of Maharashtra being in possession of flesh of cow and progeny. Their flesh would now be considered contraband substance! The offence is non-bailable.

The most draconian provision of the Act is that the burden of proving that the slaughter, transport, export outside the State, sale, purchase or possession of flesh of cow, bull or bullock was not in contravention of the provisions of the 2015Act, would be on the accused! In Indian criminal jurisprudence, the accused is always presumed to be innocent till proved guilty. The exception to this rule is only in very serious offences and under special laws or exceptional circumstances, e.g. in UAPA or in counter-terrorism legislations. Even in cases of murder or defending oneself against the charge of sedition, there would be presumption of innocence and it would be for the prosecution to prove the guilt. How would an accused from very poor background and who is accused of slaughtering, transporting, exporting out of state or selling or purchasing or possessing flesh of cow and progeny prove his/her innocence? The state or vigilantes so authorized can break open your house, enter your kitchen, dining table (or floor in most cases) peep inside your refrigerator and seize “contraband” substance – flesh/meat and put you behind bars and for the prime of the accused life s/he would be fighting from within the prison walls to prove her/his innocence! The draconian legislation is a powerful tool in the hands of vigilante groups and state to target any individual, group or community.

As soon as the 2015 Act came into force, Hindu nationalist vigilante groups became even more active. The vigilante groups having little respect for rule of law and the Constitution of India, immediately tested the law by launching complaints targeting Muslims in Malegaon, a Muslim majority town in North Maharashtra. Police acted upon the complaint and arrested the accused. Malegaon police told Tabassum Barnagarwala (2015) (Cows Say Cheese) “After the ban came into force, Hindu groups were after us to investigate Muslim households… Also, people may try to settle their personal battles by registering false complaints. A Hindu can come and say that a Muslim is keeping cows for slaughter. What do we do in such a case?” Malegaon police directed the Muslims of the town who kept cows as their pets to register their animals with a photograph of the owner and all the cows. The police started maintaining an additional register titled – Gaay, Bail, Bachhara (cow, bull and calf) Register. The police in Malegaon are busy carrying out a census of Muslims possessing cows and monitoring trade and movement. Hindus owning cows are not required to register as the presumption is the only Muslim sell cows and progeny for slaughter – Hindus do not!

Police in Maharashtra despite their extremely limited numbers and challenging task of fighting anti-dalit violence, terrorism, drug proliferation, land mafia, increasing sexual assaults on women, domestic violence, communal violence, and other organized crimes, will be busy securing the ministers, Hindu nationalist instigators and the cows. The victims of the 2015 Act, we are given to understand, would be primarily Muslims. The victims of the 2015 Act is foremost our criminal jurisprudence, democracy, and our Constitutional values. The 2015 Act in the hands of police and vigilante groups can become instrument of oppression of not only Muslims, but also dalits and other marginalized sections of society. Dalits will not only be affected as they will lose their cheap source of proteins or suffer economically as they are involved in manufacturing of leather goods. Police or vigilante groups may enter any house having meat of lamb or any other animal or in a shop of meat vendor, seize the flesh and produce the person before court. Then it would be on the accused to prove her/his innocence. Let us watch whether the police use the 2015 Act to renegotiate their hafta!

Secular movement has also opposed the 2015 Act on the terrain of defending the rights of minorities, particularly Muslims. The 2015 Act is more than that. The state ruled by followers of Hindutva ideology are today prescribing and monitoring the food we eat. What next? Prescribing and monitoring clothes we wear? Films we see? Performing and fine arts we are allowed to watch? Occupation we are allowed to be in? Areas we can inhabit and reside in? Muslims are being targeted initially so that opposition comes primarily from Muslims and not from larger society. Every citizen of India who has a stake in democracy should see herself as a potential victim and stand up to resist.

Barnagarwala, T. (2015, April 19). Cows Say Cheese. Indian Express , pp. 12-13.

Amit Shah arrives in Meghalaya to a 'beef party' and a bandh

by

Amit-Shah

Shillong: A ‘beef party’ and a bandh greeted BJP president Amit Shah who visited the state today as part of his north-east tour seeking to strengthen party base and urging workers to make public the alleged corruption by ruling Congress party in Meghalaya.

While the beef party was organised by the Thma U Rangli Juki (TUR), a pressure group, the bandh was imposed by the proscribed militant group, the Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council.

Leaders of the TUR and the Hynniewtrep National People’s Front (HNPF), Khasi National Union (KNU) organised the beef party near the party’s office in the city as the BJP president arrived to address party workers and to hold meeting with regional political parties.

Security personnel were seen having a tough time trying to stop the members of the NGOs who attempted to take out a protest march to the state’s Conventional Hall, where Shah was convening a party meeting.

The activists had intended to hold a beef party in front of the convention hall as a mark of protest against BJP promotion of ban on beef but for the timely intervention of the administration.

Speaking on the sideline of the protest, TUR leader Angela Rngad said, “We are here to protest the coming of Amit Shah to our peaceful and loving town as he symbolises the BJP and all of their anti-people policies is something which we will not tolerate.”

Terming the BJP and its functionaries as “ambassadors of hate”, Rngad also said, “the protest is also to show that we are against all of their hate campaigns whether it is their ‘Ghar Wapsi’ and other policies like the grabbing of farmers land, ‘Make in India’ campaign, which intends to make all of us slaves.”

(Agencies)

No plans to ban beef in state: Siddaramaiah

by

Photo: The New Indian Express

Photo: The New Indian Express

Bengaluru: Chief Minister Siddaramaiah has made it clear that there will not be any ban on beef in the state.

When he was asked a question by scribes on the beef ban in light of a protest held in Bengaluru on Thursday April 9 against the beef ban in Maharashtra, Siddaramaiah said “Let the people decide what they want to eat. We do not have the right to question their choices”

“Pork, chicken, mutton and let them eat what they want. Who am I to tell them? “Siddaramaiah added.

The protestors on Thursday at town hall premises had cooked beef biryani on the spot and had eaten it in public to register their opposition to the ban in Maharashtra.

Some prominent faces were also seen in the protest including writers Girish Karnad and K Marulusiddappa. The protest was organized by the activists of the Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI).

BJP unhappy

Meanwhile BJP has strongly criticized the participation of Girish Karnad and K Marulusiddappa in the protest by terming the act as ‘A shameful act which a civilised society cannot accept.’

Leader of the opposition in the legislative council K S Eshwarappa has demanded apologies from both the writers for participating in the protest.

“I know they are famous. Whatever they say will get some publicity. But they should have used their popularity for good causes. They should not use their talents for anti social propaganda. If they do not know to promote good causes, they should shut up. Hindus have been watching them patiently. But nobody knows when their anger will explode.” Eshwarappa said.

No knowledge of law?

Veteran freedom fighter H S Doreswamy has said that Girish Karnad and K Marulusiddappa should have had the basic knowledge of prevailing laws which prohibit the slaughter of cows.

He said that even Jammu and Kashmir where the Muslims are in majority has some laws against the killing of cows. He asked not to compare cow to other animals.

Girish Karnad had said during the protest, “The act of banning beef eating is provocative. I may or may not eat beef but I will stand by the right of others for whom the meat is a crucial source of affordable nutrition. It is about people’s right to food and their right to life.”

(Agencies)

Girish Karnad turns up for Bengaluru beef fest, but cops take away food

by

Girish Karnad (sitting, second from right) expressing solidarity with Left activists protesting the beef ban in Maharashtra. (HT Photo)

Girish Karnad (sitting, second from right) expressing solidarity with activists protesting the beef ban in Maharashtra. (HT Photo)

Bengaluru: Calling ban on beef as an act that was against the diverse food culture of our society, Left wing body Democratic Youth Federation of India and Dalit outfits today held a beef eating programme here that was attended by Jnanpith awardee Girish Karnad.

The event was organised in protest against the ban on beef in different parts of the country and also supported and attended another famous Kannada writer Dr K Marulasiddappa.

Protesters criticised the beef ban as an attempt to encroach upon the choice of food and against the diverse food culture of Indian society.

Both Karnad and Marulasiddappa did not eat beef,but said they support the event and stand against such ban.

“I don’t want people to say that because I eat beef therefore I opposed the law. No, everyone has the right to practice….” Karnad said.

To a question he said “Who said large part our population doesn’t eat beef? This nonsense is created by Brahmins;this is created by Hindutva protagonists. Vokkaligas, Muslims, Christians, Dalits and many other communities eat….then how is it against the practice of large population of this
country?”

Marulasiddappa said “I have not eaten beef here because I don’t follow that food habit, I have that right, but at the same time I don’t have right to scorn at those who eat it. I have respect towards them.”

Anticipating trouble as the event had invited a lot of opposition, police intervened and took away the eatables made of beef from the organisers.

Criticising the police action as undemocratic, organisers said, “this is against the law, we criticise this act by the police, ours was a peaceful programme, we have in no way affected the law and order situation.”

(PTI)

Haryana Assembly Passes Bill Banning Cow Slaughter, Sale of Beef

by

REUTERS/Shailesh Andrade

REUTERS/Shailesh Andrade

Chandigarh: The Haryana Assembly on Monday evening unanimously passed a bill under which cow slaughter and the sale of beef have been banned in the state. The new law will also promote conservation and development of indigenous breeds of cows and establish institutions to keep, maintain and take care of the infirm, injured, stray and uneconomic cows.

As per the Haryana ‘Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan’ Bill, 2015, which was passed with two amendments, a person found guilty of cow slaughter can get rigorous imprisonment not less than three years, which may extend upto 10 years along with a fine ranging from Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 1 lakh.

Any person who exports cows for slaughter either directly or through somebody can get rigorous imprisonment not less than three years which may extend upto seven years, along with a fine from Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 70,000.

However, the killing of a cow in an accident or self-defense will not be considered as slaughter under the Act.

The sale of beef will be completely banned in the state; the offence will be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for not less than three years and upto five years with fine of upto Rs. 50,000.

The government will also establish laboratories for differentiation of beef from that of the meat of other species of animals, and testing and identification of various constituents of milk.

Haryana Chief Minister ML Khattar told mediapersons that the previous law was weak and had several loopholes.

“We have come up with a more stringent law… this will enable cow protection and development at the same time,” Mr Khattar said.

The opposition Indian National Lok Dal’s legislator Zakir Hussain said he had suggested a couple of amendments but the government has accepted only one.

“There should have been a provision for transport of cows within the state to avoid harassment of transporters, also similar punishment should be in place for corrupt officials who are found involved in beef trade. Government has accepted the latter suggestion,” Mr Hussain said.

(IANS)

Holy cow-beef and Indian political games

by

A group of lawyers in Chennai staging a ‘beef eating’ protest in the Madras High Court campus, in the wake of ban on cow slaughter by Maharashtra Government.

A group of lawyers in Chennai staging a ‘beef eating’ protest in the Madras High Court campus, in the wake of ban on cow slaughter by Maharashtra Government.

Can the dietary practices, the animal which is worshipped as a mother by section of population, be brought in on the political arena? While all this sounds surreal, its true as far as the role of cow is there in Indian political firmament. Recently Maharashtra Government got the Presidents 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. 10000. 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 the 2014 General elections was “Modi ko matdan, gai ko jeevadan [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 ‘Cow Development Cell’ of 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 mobilization by 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, cow issue has been systematically propped up time and over 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 over again one hears about some small communal violence, killing of dalits and traders of cows leading to communal polarization. Many a dalits dealing with cow hide have been killed in places like Gohana in Hariyana and the VHP leaders had justified such acts.

Contrary to this the beef eating and sacrifice of cows 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. Prof 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 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 on that.

In contrast to what is being asserted by BJP and company, Swami Vivekanand had a different take on the issue. He points out speaking to a large gathering in USA said: “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 (2 February 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 against this move of the government (March 11). Many traders, from different religion 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 of 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.

 

In Kerala, a beef fest to protest against beef ban

by

beef-fest-kerala

Thiruvananthapuram: Beef cooked in the open and Hindus and Muslims sitting together for a meal – this was how a section of people in Kerala protested today against the recent ban on the meat in Maharashtra.

Beef in Kerala means both cows and buffaloes and its consumption has no religious overtones. Not only do some Hindus here eat beef, going by sales figures, it is also the most-favoured meat in the state.

The annual sale of beef is estimated at 2.3 lakh metric tonnes against the corresponding figure for poultry — 1.51 lakh metric tonnes.

“I am a Hindu. I should be given the freedom to eat whatever I want, even when I am eating this,” said Ajith P from Kannur, who was at the protest of DYFI, the state CPM’s youth wing, at Thiruvananthapuram on Tuesday.

Sharing the dish with him was Ajeeth Muhammad. Though a supporter of Muslim League, he said he didn’t mind backing a cause. “None of us here have issues with beef consumption. It is part of Kerala’s culture. How can we be stopped from eating something we want to?” he said.

Heading the protest, DYFI’s B Biju said, “This is a token protest against the ban of beef in Maharashtra and a warning for anyone who would want to implement the same in Kerala. Any ban our food will not be acceptable.”

A state panchayat law lays clear guidelines for slaughterhouses – that an animal can’t be slaughtered unless it is over 10 years old, or has been made unfit for work or breeding due to injury or deformity.

Digging into the beef curry before returning to the Assembly, CPM legislator P Sreeramakrishnan said, “I eat my beef. And so do many others in Kerala. Nothing will change.”

Last week, President Pranab Mukherjee ratified the Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment) Bill which bans the slaughter of calves and bullocks.

Anyone found selling or eating beef can be jailed for five years and fined Rs. 10,000. Only the consumption of buffaloes, which give inferior quality beef, will be allowed.

Beef traders – thousands of whom will be jobless – and a section of people in social media have protested against the ban, with hashtag #BeefBan trending for a while on Twitter.

(Agencies)

KNOW US

GET INVOLVED

PROMOTE

Archives