Communalism

What Mahatma Gandhi Said to Those Who Wanted Beef Banned in India

The following is an excerpt from Gandhi’s prayer discourse of July 25, 1947, from the Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Volume 88, as published online by the Gandhi Heritage Portal.

Today is Gandhi Jayanti and The Wire is publishing it in the light of this week’s shocking incident in Dadri, Uttar Pradesh, where a Muslim family was attacked by a murderous mob and the father of an Indian Air Force staffer lynched on the suspicion that they had some beef in their home.

Gandhi and Malaviya with a cow. Credit: ICAR

Gandhi and Malaviya with a cow. Credit: ICAR

Rajendra Babu tells me that he has received some 50,000 postcards, between 25,000 and 30,000 letters and many thousands of telegrams demanding a ban on cow-slaughter. I spoke to you about this before. Why this flood of telegrams and letters? They have had no effect.

I have another telegram which says that a friend has started a fast for this cause. In India no law can be made to ban cow-slaughter. I do not doubt that Hindus are forbidden the slaughter of cows. I have been long pledged to serve the cow but how can my religion also be the religion of the rest of the Indians? It will mean coercion against those Indians who are not Hindus.

We have been shouting from the house-tops that there will be no coercion in the matter of religion. We have been reciting verses from the Koran at the prayer. But if anyone were to force me to recite these verses I would not like it. How can I force anyone not to slaughter cows unless he is himself so disposed? It is not as if there were only Hindus in the Indian Union. There are Muslims, Parsis, Christians and other religious groups here.

The assumption of the Hindus that India now has become the land of the Hindus is erroneous. India belongs to all who live here. If we stop cow slaughter by law here and the very reverse happens in Pakistan, what will be the result? Supposing they say Hindus would not be allowed to visit temples because it was against Shariat to worship idols? I see God even in a stone but how do I harm others by this belief? If therefore I am stopped from visiting temples I would still visit them. I shall therefore suggest that these telegrams and letters should cease. It is not proper to waste money on them.

I have been long pledged to serve the cow but how can my religion also be the religion of the rest of the Indians? It will mean coercion against those Indians who are not Hindus.

Besides some prosperous Hindus themselves encourage cow-slaughter. True, they do not do it with their own hands. But who sends all the cows to Australia and other countries where they are slaughtered and whence shoes manufactured from cow hide are sent back to India? I know an orthodox Vaishnava Hindu. He used to feed his children on beef soup. On my asking him why he did that he said there was no sin in consuming beef as medicine.

We really do not stop to think what true religion is and merely go about shouting that cow-slaughter should be banned by law. In villages Hindus make bullocks carry huge burdens which almost crush the animals. Is it not cow-slaughter, albeit slowly carried out? I shall therefore suggest that the matter should not be pressed in the Constituent Assembly…

I have been asked, ‘Since in view of the atrocities being perpetuated by Muslims it is difficult to decide which of the Muslims are to be trusted, what should be our attitude towards the Muslims in the Indian Union? What should the non-Muslims in Pakistan do?

I have already answered this question. I again repeat that all the religions of India today are being put to the test. It has to be seen how the various religious groups such as the Sikhs, the Hindus, the Muslims and the Christians conduct themselves and how they carry on the affairs of India. Pakistan may be said to belong to Muslims but the Indian Union belongs to all. If you shake off cowardice and become brave you will not have to consider how you are to behave towards the Muslims. But today there is cowardice in us. For this I have already accepted the blame.

In villages Hindus make bullocks carry huge burdens which almost crush the animals. Is it not cow-slaughter, albeit slowly carried out?

I am still wondering how my 30 years’ teaching has been so ineffective. Why did I assume, to begin with, that non-violence could be a weapon of cowards? Even now if we can really become brave and love the Muslims, the Muslims will have to stop and think what they could gain by practising treachery against us. They will return love for love. Can we keep the crores of Muslims in the Indian Union as slaves? He who makes slaves of others himself becomes a slave. If we answer sword with sword, the lathi with lathi and kick with kick, we cannot expect that things will be different in Pakistan. We shall then lose our freedom as easily as we have gained it…

[Translated from Hindi]

Prarthana Pravachan –I, pp 277-280

Note: The question of banning cow slaughter was debated in the Constituent Assembly and a consensus emerged that there should be no national statute banning the consumption of beef. The goal was instead included in the (non-binding) Directive Principles of State Policy.

Categories: Communalism, Featured, Politics

  • http://u-said-it-right.blogspot.in/ Ajay Angre

    I keep wondering… why this ban on Beef? The great thinker like Mahatma has put it in the right perspective. How can you compel me to follow your religious belief which I dont belong to. It then amount to forcing me to follow your ideology, your faith and your belief against mine. Then how our constitutional freedom of right to every individual is respected? It does not make any sense to me, why this ban? And why not ban slaughter of lamb, goat, and even a bird called Chicken? This banning beef is irrational from the perspective that one community enforces just because one believes in its own faith? This government in the State which is led by NDA and CM Devendra Fadnavis, has still not explained why this law is introduced banning Beef? Like it has also hurt several industries. First the Beef exports which nt just earned foreign exchange for the country but also closed beef exporting industry in the state. And this has resulted in many loosing jobs. Has government offered them any alternative solution for their livelihood? What about leather industry as rightly Gandhijee has pointed out? That too got closed down and got all working in the shoe making industry jobless? How can such decisions be implemented based on religious beliefs? And how can other communities forced not to have a choice of their own who eat Beef can be denied their fundamental right given by our constitution? Even the vegetarian Mahatma known for his vege diet, and his staunch personal belief in nonviolence principles, did not approve such demand in 1947 when many pressurized him to consider passing the law. Because he did not see any rationality in banning it but very rightly thought, it is violation of constitutional rights of an individual or the communities other than Hindus. No government should force its views on others if they do not justify sound reasoning. Maharashtra government has blundered in banning Beef in the state and violated the very freedom of right of other communities.

  • ramprakash

    In villages Hindus make bullocks carry huge burdens which almost crush the animals. Is it not cow-slaughter, albeit slowly carried out?

    wow

    • Facepalming watcher

      I would start by stating your cognitive dissonance, but then I would stop, realising how little you must know of it, as to be able to think of your intellectually void comment as possessing any logic. Then I would state your confirmation bias, but it would just be too much work, and you’re just another one of the lost.

  • Anonymous

    First of all his name is not mahatma His name is Mohandas. Mahatma means great soul which he was not. This law was not created by any hindu ruler. The mughal emperor Babar ruled in 1526 that killing cows was forbidden.

    • adil zareef

      babur was a marauder from central asia…please do not taint gandhi ji’s name….

    • Mohd Ashhar

      We are living in secular country now,…..we are no pakistan…

      • Anonymous

        we are not*

    • Nehas Hassan

      Sad and pity on u. …who are u to degrade a great soul who set aside his entire life so that you and I can live our lives the way we do today. Yes u are right he is not mahatma… He is Mahatma Gandhi.. The father of my nation. Jai Hind

      And yeah beef ban! It sucks big time! ! I feel ashamed of those who feel they can force their ideologies on others… its not just unjust it’s plainly a human rights violation

    • Skanoza

      Names and epithets are not important. His work is. You can call him whatever you like, and think that you are denouncing him but in reality, all you’re doing is making a public show of your low-grade pedigree.
      The whole world respects him and gave him the title. He put India on the world peace map and that’s irrefutable. So one little ‘Anonymous’ ignoramus who uses a ‘V for Vendetta’ icon in the hope of appearing smart is nothing more than a fart in the wind.

      And for your [mis]information, you’re saying it as though Babur INTRODUCED the idea of opposing cow slaughter to humankind. Ha! The idea that animals (especially cows) should not be harmed, existed from the vedic times and in many many cultures. All that Babur did was politicise it and put it on public policy just to win the favour of the Hindu majority at the time. So, let’s not get carried away.

      I oppose the beef ban, too, but only because it is motivated by communal and political ideologies. *Bans will not solve anything*. People need to be inspired and enlightened.
      First, i think meat and dairy, or any ecologically or economically unsustainable activity that exploits animals, causes alarming levels of greenhouse gas emission, health hazards should be taxed heavily.
      More and more people in the world are now realising the value of returning to our true herbivore roots. It’s time, the world is encouraged to go the progressive, compassionate and environmentally-concerned way, which is to go vegan (or at least vegetarian as a starting point).

      Read: http://www.eater.com/2015/2/16/8048069/un-says-veganism-can-save-the-world-from-destruction

  • adil zareef

    being a muslim from pakistan, both gandhi ji and bacha khan are my ideals..they preached love and brotherhood and tolerance…the greatest religion of all rituals that hindus and muslims and other faiths practice but lack empathy and compassion for fellow humans and animals

    • Naresh Jee

      Very true bro – I am a Hindu from India and I salute and agree with you torally on this.

    • Ravisankar

      wonderful.

  • Manohar

    Why only cow? Is eating all other animals fine? I’m a vegetarian but hav no issues if others want to eat what they want. People in India must learn to mind their own business.

    • Jan2

      Agreed. I am a non vegetarian and I do not have issues with you killing hundreds of plants daily as well.

      • A K

        You cannot do anything and everything that is not correct in the name of “freedom”. Remember, freedom comes with responsibility.

        • Jan2

          The real question is ‘freedom from what’ or ‘freedom from whom’. Freedom to think with one’s own brain is something we are all born with. Whether we think logically or decide to follow something blindly is a choice everyone faces in life. If following something blindly when it makes no logical sense is ‘responsibility’, then its a vicious cycle of being stuck because of refusal to use one’s own logical brain and assuming superstition is responsibility, making the logical brain weaker due to misuse.

      • Thinktank555

        Life span of plants which is mostly a day or two, and is very less compared to the life span of animals which lives for years and which you KILL and EAT. Plants do not cry or bleed, and the prime purpose to grow plants is to eat them. There is a lot of science involved in eating plants and vegetables. Want to eat animals? EAT. But stop giving your reasoning to us.

        • Harish

          You do not understand the cry of plants. We are only concerned about animals which have expressions on their faces similar to human beings. Which is why there is this huge hue and cry about cows in India and about dogs in the west. Nobody has much problems with the fish and prawn that are routinely massacred, even the chicken. and also the large number of insects that are killed in the process of agriculture- through pesticides etc. One has to be broad minded to understand that food is influened by culture to a large extent, and several sub cultures exist in India.

          • Jan2

            Agreed. Even by breathing you are killing micro organisms. Stop breathing people. That is the solution to all killings.

        • Mohd Ashhar

          Who said u plant have life span of 2 days…..oldest tree is almost half millenium old…. much more than any animal…..

          Once u cut the plant, then its life span is 3-7 days…. ,same as nin veg…

          Ppl also farm animals , birds to eat…
          And plant screams , its proven…

          And even if any one who cant speak or move , is liable for killing??

          • JRajBali

            Its possible to eat vegetables without killing the plants. You can’t just take an leg off a pig for now and then leave the rest alive in the garden for later.

          • VaM ROiD

            there is difference between plant and trees…and nobody eat trees we only eat excess carbohydrate of it..known as fruits.. and in plant vegetables.! and really proven ? who do you can think ? thoughts are chemical reaction which involves brain or network of neurons… where the hell are these in plants ?

          • Mohd Ashhar

            Yes sir, they have all this…
            Indian scientist Bose discovered this…they react to stimulus and even scream, but just we cant hear it.

            So get some knowledge….
            Leave all, just answer why god made us omnivore??

          • VaM ROiD

            It’s all paranormal, anything is not proven.The LITTLE SOMETIMES POSITIVE results shown by it may be due to small nano animals or due to bacteria: moreover I am not arguing over your eating habits, you can eat whatever you like but vegetarian doesn’t kill plants. That’s it.

        • Arun

          Plants grow fruits that are explicitly meant to be eaten. It is an evolutionary adaptation to help their seed be carried far from the parent plant.

        • Jan2

          ‘Plants do not cry or bleed, and the prime purpose to grow plants is to eat them’

          And animals are ‘not’ grown for meat? Just because plants do not have ‘red’ blood and you cannot see their suffering makes it OK to eat them?

          Specifically for your last comment, at least I have some reasoning to give people which is based on logic. If you do not have an argument, that’s fine, but stop telling others what to say or do.

        • Guru

          Eating Plants destroys environment as it supplies humans with oxygens and no doubt there is depletion, humans now looking for other planets.
          Instead stop/ ban eating only plants and all should have a plant+meat diet as eating chicken never harmed environment.

          Those who refuse to eat meat can eat rocks as an alternative and stop the dramabaazi – STOP destroying Environment

      • JRajBali

        Hindu shastras say that all things bear life and that we build good and bad karma even by breathing, eating and thinking. The goal is to try to mitigate bad karma. If you’re immediate survival requires you to kill an animal then that bad karma is considered acceptable over just killing something for the pleasure of eating it. Also don’t forget that its possible to eat vegetables without killing the plants. You can’t just take an leg off a pig for now and then leave the rest alive in the garden for later.

      • Bhaskar Jain

        I didn’t understand where is the need to end the life of plants for getting food out of them? They give fruits, vegetables and much more naturally. And by just providing water and sun light they keep giving it for decades and keep alive.
        there is no intention to argue but a request to not comparing Veg and Nonveg food by saying vegetarians are killing plants.

        • Jan2

          You think a spinach or coriander plant survive after you pull out their roots?

          • Jai Bharath

            I understand that you do not cook meat, do not add spices and eat it
            just like that coz you want to save plants… Moreover what is the shell
            life of spinach or coriander? hardly a week. If not consumed within a
            week, it will die.

    • Sahil Trehan

      true that bro

  • Vineet Menon

    Truth be told, this letter is full of logical inconsistencies and fallacies.

  • Bevinda Collaco

    Maybe because the consumption of liquor destroys lives and families. A beef eater will not go and beat up his wife and children.

  • jawaid

    Muslims are not bound to eat beef neither not to eat it……very small percentage of Muslims are habitual of beef…..the controversy has been created unnecessarily & the result is before us….our social fabric is endangered now…..courtesy mad & blood hungry elements…..

  • Facepalming watcher

    “In villages Hindus make bullocks carry huge burdens which almost crush the animals. Is it not cow-slaughter, albeit slowly carried out?”

    – You know you have a pathetic, logically baseless excuse of a defense, when you believe that bulls in “HINDU”(because the sikh totally never used bulls) villages, where people literally have no advanced machinery to plow their fields and thus, in order to not die of starvation, must use bulls, and only about ONCE or TWICE a year when it is time to plow the fields, WITH THE FARMER BY THEIR SIDE, to plant seeds, WHICH YOU PEOPLE EAT SO UNGRATEFULLY, and IGNORANTLY. Where they die of mostly natural causes after living a much longer and fulfilling life than the ones you force the ones you love eating into. Gandhi must be more ignorant than I previously believed.

    And find it EQUALLY CRUEL AND MORALLY VILE(If not MORE) as Enslaving a sentient animal in a concentration camp, keeping it there all its life, until you, the entitled ones, feel like putting pieces of them inside your stomach, because you think it’s “culturally cool”, and have become addicted over the course of time, so to fill your vice, you throw paper at another ape to do your killing for you. Denying it its natural life, just so you can have it stuffed up, and conveniently beheaded (the thing that ISIS loves to do) and then devoured by you, just so the void in your existence is filled by the delusion of you being a natural predator. Also, I’m not even going into the psychological trauma to the killed, and their family, of which again, the great herd of beef lovers, remains so willfully(or desperately) ignorant to. If I had 50 slaves, I too would be as reluctant as you are, to see them as sentient creatures capable of feeling pain and joy, I would most probably hide behind something like the bible.

    • Raymont Cherian

      You really don’t get it do you. The use of Hindu is not to blame a Hindu but to make him aware that he too is party to such acts. Of you think you are going to justify that with a slightly longer life then you are the one with twisted logic, my friend. Your argument reeks of a sense of superiority and self righteousness. The very sentiments that you seem to vilify. Your hypocrisy is for all to see. Further if you think meat eaters eat meat to fill a void in existence, you are dumber than your diction would suggest. However like all morons you too are entitled to your view.
      Hide behind the BIBLE? Stop communalising everything. It is sad to see you do so. I eat meat because it tastes good. I don’t need the BIBLE to ease my conscience. Does not the Manusmriti task you with torturing a shudra of he tries to read a veda. How then can you claim moral superiority by pointing at another’s religious book? Try to empathise with your fellow humans as much as you do with animals. Not all humans have the same self control or moral compass as you. Today you speak of beef ban. Tomorrow it could be ban on consensual sex or homosexuality. I support neither but I must recognise the right of another to indulge. The aim right now should be to usher India into an age of prosperity. India needs every daughter and son contribute. Wasting time discussing meat ban is pointless at best, especially if done with so much vigour.

      • Kathakar

        Most countries have ban on some meat or other not for maybe religious reason but for love of any b particular animal. So majority india lovea cow so we ban cow.. whats a big deal.. I live abroad nobody has issues in my loving cow n not eating beef.. neither I have in their loving dog or horse or cat n not eating it. Its like I love white color and u love blue color. in inida some sickular politicians are giving it religious color. I know 1000 indian frnds and can say 800 love cow and dont eat her. Love and choice..
        Not that dog meat banned I USa is ok with all.. ppl there live in big numbers from a country where they eat dog meat.. they can visit their country n eat but not in usa.. you can eat many other animals

        Yes why shying in saying majority india loves and wants beef ban.. democracy also means rule of majority. . And to top it up cow among various animal ban is most scientific. .. noone has shown how not eating dog will help.. of course it hurts I agree. . But not killing cow has so many damn benefits… 100 of research paper are published in this regard.

        By the way I am pure veg and as far as plants I eat once a day bare minimum to keep my body n soul together. I work 16bhrs a day sleep 6 hrs.

    • Mohd Ashhar

      I think u should get back to the basics……we all eat living things….
      They were made for it….at one day u all gonna ban on tiger because it is non veg….
      Thats ridiculous,….you should know that humans are Omnivore’s , they are made for it,. If god dont want us to eat meat, it would have made us herbivore.

      And logically, 30% land is not enough to produce tht much crop to feed humans and animals.

      This has to b like this, and u cannot deny this fact..

      • Skanoza

        Get YOUR facts right first. The theory that humans are omnivores is not true. It has been conclusively disproven.

        Humans are 100% herbivores, If you can understand science and data here, read this — http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html

        Next, where the hell did you pull out this idiotic statement that “30% of land is not enough to feed humans and animals”? ~LOL~

        According to GRUMP datasets, only 3% of the land is covered by human settlements. And 40% is used for agriculture. Now, even if your theory that the land we have is not enough to feed us, is true, then we shouldn’t be using that land to feed animals, and then eating the animals and the plants on top of it?

        And nowhere in ANY scripture does it say that you MUST kill an innocent creature.

        It’s true that all living creatures have to eat living things to survive. That’s the natural law but what kind of living things you eat is determined by your biological design. A tiger is designed to eat other animals. A deer is designed to eat live plants. Some monkeys, dogs and bears etc are omnivores. Humans are designed to eat plants, fruits, nuts, seeds and vegetables. The physiological design of your system determines what living thing you can consume. That’s why it’s okay for a tiger to kill a deer and eat it because it is designed for that lifestyle. That’s why they are called ‘Obligate Carnivores’.

        The human body is 100% herbivore by design.

        Do you have claws, and sharp long canines and jaws that can ONLY MOVE up and down? Does your body manufacture Vitamin C or Taurine like carnivores / omnivores? Does your body have a short intestinal tract like carnivores and omnivores? Just admit it, you eat meat because you enjoy the taste and don’t want to give it up. So you justify it with all sorts of logic. Even research has shown that humans do not need any meat to be healthy. One can get all their nutrients from plants.

        Oh, and by the way, true omnivores and carnivores don’t need to cook their meat, and add spices and vegetables to it before consuming it. They will eat it straight from the animal’s body, along with the blood, flesh, tendons, veins cartilage etc etc Do you do any of that? Maybe you should try doing that for a few days and see how you hold up.

        I don’t support the beef ban, because it is motivated by communalism and political deviousness. But to argue that humans are omnivores is just ridiculous! Get your reasons in place!

        • Ram Madhavan

          @skanoza – I am a pure vegetarian and here are my views. It is true that humans are herbivorous by design. But there is a difference – human beings cook and cooking enables us to consume food which would have been impossible otherwise. Humans aren’t designed to eat grains like rice, wheat etc (and many vegetables) either, so why you do consume them? (have you ever consumed these without cooking?). Humans are able to take into only a small fraction of available vegetarian food without cooking. It is widely believed that humans became humans because of cooking – cooking breaks down natural food into a form easily digestible that gives out more energy, thus giving the brain extra nutrition to grow larger, Conclusion – humans are indeed omnivorous because we can cook food. We are unlike animals in this respect. Omnivorous species throughout history have adapted better to changing environmental conditions. The vegetarian animals dies out if plant food becomes scarce. The carnivorous animals die out if enough meat is not available. Omnivorous species have better probability of surviving these challenges because they can survive on any food. I agree killing animals can be avoided to the extent possible, but it may be impracticable. Every person in the world need not stick by your standards of morality either. Vegetarian food is expensive and getting all nutrients from veggie food is a costly business. Poor people are better off consuming cheap alternative food like fish. Unless you can provide cheap and nutritious vegetarian food for all the poor people, don’t preach vegetarianism.

      • LS

        Agreed that Humans are omnivore but saying that Animals are Created to be eaten by humans is wrong. We have over populated this planet and are 7.2 billion of us. The carbon footprint to raise that many animals is too high and environmentally unsustainable. Animals also require lot of space, produce methane and carbon di oxide and consume lots of water.

        https://priceofmeat.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/meatgraphfull1.jpg

        If you see the above it costs much more (Monetary and environmentally) to produce a pound of meet than to produce a pound of vegetables. It has also been suggested that eating red-meat is a also increases the risk of cancer.

        http://www.pcrm.org/health/cancer-resources/diet-cancer/facts/meat-consumption-and-cancer-risk

        Thus, with growing population eating meat would be unsustainable and dangerous for earth.

        • Mohd Ashhar

          Well being muslim we are allowed to very few species….

          But we are made to eat , and animals are made to eat each other….

          One day u guys will say that those animals should b abandoned who eat others???..

          • LS

            Being an Omnivore does not mean you HAVE to eat meat. Humans have lot of options and does NOT have to be centered around Meat. Secondly, carnivores animals eat other animals because that is the only thing they eat. What is human compulsion to eat meat? None.

            Being Vegan is the most cost effective way to survive on this planet followed by Vegetarian.

            What you are failing to understand is that the environmental cost of raising animals is the highest and given that we all have only one planet to live on and population on earth touching 9.7 billion by 2050 and pollution rising to alarming levels eating meat would be a privilege and prohibitive.

            http://inhabitat.com/infographic-the-true-environmental-cost-of-eating-meat/

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population_estimates

            But hey who cares about earth, pollution, cancer as long as I can have ma meat…. is your motto

    • openminded

      Then release the animal and you take the yoke….the animal will be saved the misery….an animal like the bull be pampered and mankind must begin to shoulder their burden right… ..????

      • Facepalming watcher

        If a human has restricted options, and makes the effort to NOT KILL THE ANIMAL, but sustain it, shelter it, care for it, in return for a few days/weeks of work? (part of which also goes to the SAME ANIMAL who worked for it.)

        I still haven’t seen anything substantial as a defense, but humans are masters of selectively cancelling out information, so it doesn’t surprise me.

        Comparing a burden on one’s shoulder, the result of which, is food for the animal, and shelter, TO ENSLAVING IT ITS ENTIRE LIFE, DENYING IT EVEN THE SIGHT OF A FIELD, AND THEN BUTCHERING IT FOR PERSONAL ENJOYMENT.

        It just reeks of immorality. They’re sentient organisms. *END of Argument.*

    • Harish

      If you see the cows are treated in India it is quite inappropriate of a ‘mother’. Even the bull is first converted into a bullock, by a fairly inhuman process- and the veggies have no problem with this. Then if you go to states like Gujarat, we find people eagerly waiting to have their cows to be artificially or naturally inseminated by superior bulls. Then when the cows become dry, they are either let loose to roam on roads, eat paper, plastic, choke on these and sometimes die. And if you have been to villages you would realise that its not true that the bull (I guess you mean bullock) works during the agricultural season and has a nice time afterwards. Most bullocks are made to pull carts or do some work throughout the year.

      • Facepalming watcher

        Just because it is not violently opposed, doesn’t mean people don’t have a problem with it, lol.

        But the sad thing is, when there’s people who don’t care about even downright murdering the animal to consume its flesh out of desire and social/egotistic drive, living in the same society, it kind of becomes difficult to express displeasure at the mistreatment of another animal beside a human, it causes hilarious amounts of cognitive dissonance, and other sad mental states.

        Are you telling me you see no difference in animals just suffering due to other causes( bad waste management, and old farmer equipment), in comparison to people systematically enslaving entire generations of animals, stripping them of a decent life, making them live in their own shit, and then eating the same animals after slicing their throats while they hang upside down? No difference? are you sure? Maybe you want to re-evaluate the factors. and their moral lowness.

        “those bulls have to work hard to be able to be afforded shelter and food, of course they’re not treated like a prince, that’s the ignorance of the society and lack of understanding.”

        “I guess I can have them killed and then eat them, it must be the same.”

        Something sounds wrong.

    • Manas

      well it is commonly known that in order to make bulls work a lot longer and reduce their pain they were administered with pain killers and due to this not only were the bulls harmed but also many vutures died after eating their carcasses. so it is stupid to say all this. i myself am no fan of gandhii but here for once his views are extremely correct and need to be understood.

  • Kapil Khattar

    Iam hindu am also against ban of beef; we can’t enforce our religions belief to others.
    Gandhiji also against RSS nd all others community group. We live in freedom country we all are brothers

    • janardan sarafdar

      he wasnt against them… he criticized few things respect few…

    • Anonymous

      You comments shows you are unaware of history. Recent statement by Digvijaya Singh:

      “I am surprised the BJP does not know that out of the 29 states, cow slaughter is banned in 24 states. And in most of these states, the prohibition was imposed by Congress governments. The Congress Working Committee had passed a resolution in the 1930s seeking a ban on cow slaughter.

      Google it and find out for yourself.

  • Abhi Ghosh

    THIS IS WHY “MAKE INDIA” COMES FIRST, OTHERWISE “MAKE IN INDIA” WILL BE NOTHING BUT A LAUGHING STOCK ………..

    THIS HYPOCRISY OF WORTHLESS POLITICS AND PREPOSTEROUS GIMMICKS SHOULD END …………..

    ABP News investigation: Modi govt’s biggest U-turn on ‘Pink Revolution’

    https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCIQFjABahUKEwiQu9-LpaHIAhXGCo4KHSIWC7c&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abplive.in%2Findia%2F2014%2F12%2F18%2Farticle457679.ece%2FABP-News-investigation-Modi-govt%25E2%2580%2599s-biggest-U-turn-on-%25E2%2580%2598Pink-Revolution%25E2%2580%2599&usg=AFQjCNEptZBRZo7R3yxhi9d1upLx1r6vzg&sig2=kM78TS6NIZVO9Qoqtbl3EQ&bvm=bv.104226188,d.c2E

    During Lok Sabha poll campaign then BJP’s PM candidate Narendra Modi raised issue of rising export of buffalo meat during the then UPA government and termed it as ‘Pink Revolution’.

    Today, after almost 6 months, government said that export of buffalo meat has risen by almost 16 per cent.

    THIS STORY IS FROM “NEW YORK TIMES”, A REPUTED NEWSPAPER OF THE COUNTRY WHERE OUR MODI BABU HAD GONE TO GEB FOR “MAKE IN INDIA” ………

    ASIA PACIFIC
    Mob in India Kills Muslim Man Over Rumors of Cow Slaughter

    https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBwQqQIwAGoVChMIie6aybCfyAIVkXGOCh1kog5A&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2015%2F10%2F01%2Fworld%2Fasia%2Findia-mob-kills-muslim-man-cow-slaughter.html&usg=AFQjCNE2xQmCEMbUajMBRBch_erVvkd-pQ&sig2=_ymaArboz1b3LvwMtgbzHQ&bvm=bv.103627116,d.c2E

    WHAT MESSAGE ARE THEY GETTING ????

    THIS HEINOUS CRIME OF “MAKE IN INDIA” IS ONLY POSSIBLE UNDER MODI REGIME FROM HINDU FANATICS !!!!!!!

    THE WORLD WILL BE SEEING US AS SAME AS PAKISTHAN OR ANY OTHER TERRORIST COUNTRY !!!!!!!!

    SHAME ON US !!!!!!!!!!!

    PLEASE DO WATCH AND SHARE TO UNDERSTAND “MAKE INDIA” STARTS FROM PROPER EDUCATION AND HEALTH …………

    UNLESS AND UNTIL OUR HUMAN RESOURCES WILL HAVE PROPER VALUED EDUCATION AND HEALTH TO STRIVE WITH INTERNATIONAL MERKER, INCLUSIVE GROWTH IS NOT POSSIBLE …………

    THE IDEOLOGY SHOULD BE, WE WILL HAVE TO EARN RESPECT, MONEY WILL COME AUTOMATICALLY. SAME AS WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE PROPER EDUCATION AND HEALTH AS WELL, INVESTMENTS WILL POUR IN AUTOMATICALLY , WE WON’T HAVE TO GO ABROAD TO BEG FOR “MAKE IN INDIA” ……..

    • Ign

      we will never make an India for Indians because those Indians themselves contradict each other on many issues. Sorry to burst your kejriwal revolution but we are not a homogeneous people.

  • Sebastian J

    If the real concern is about conserving the planet, then beef ban is definitely not the first thing to do there are a thousand other things that have sudden and drastic effect on the ecosystem…..Please don’t tell me banning beef is for conserving the planet.

  • Sharon Felix

    Life evolved through eating and being eaten, be it plants or animals. Its called food chain. Yours, mine and every vegan’s great old grandparents ate raw meat of cows, buffalos, bison, deer, rabbit, horse, goat, sheep, birds, mammoth etc.. so please stop!

    • Skanoza

      Recognise your own misinformed position before you ask others to stop!

      The only thing that’s correct in your remark is the suggestion that it’s natural for life to feed on life. However, it is not ANY life that becomes your food. It is only that which your physiological design dictates. Humans have far deviated from this principle and we’re brazenly justifying all of our planet-devastating behaviours just because we’ve devised sophisticated ways to commit those atrocities.

      Firstly, just because life ‘went about’ despite (not because of) our “opportunistically omnivore” habits, which probably occurred only to tide over tough spells, doesn’t make those practices right or even physiologically rational, or morally okay. We also lived in ignorance about the universe for centuries. So, your argument is: because ignorance was a part of our evolution, we can continue to wallow in it?

      And you seem to mention food chain with a rather cursory understanding of the concept. Perhaps you need to inform yourself: http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html

      And there are many more informed research papers, conclusively declaring with stats and sound info, the fact that we’re 100% herbivores. So there’s your food chain.

      And that’s where the morality question in meat-eating comes from. We’re technically consuming *lives* we’re not ordained or designed to be consuming, and in doing so have created a whole livestock industry that’s upsetting the natural balance of the planet’s environment (Read the UN Report on the impact of diet on the environment).

      • Sharon Felix

        You know what?, you talk like a genius but you aren’t one. If my body can digest and derive energy out of meat and plants then that’s my food. The basic idea in evolution is there is no such thing called ‘Morally Okay, Physiologically rational or right’. There goes your knowledge about evolution. Whatever you do or eat if that helps you survive better than others, you survive, which we did eating meat and plants. After digestion final end point being hydrocarbons doesn’t mean we are vegans or 100% vegetarians!! Because evolution has introduced mechanisms to reach that end point even if we take meat we are omnivores. If you are talking of some endangered species okay, that may cause extinction of that species which I’m saying nothing about, but rearing the beef yielding animals to consume, why should that be banned because we do the same for chickens, raise them and eat. And seriously I don’t think you have the basics to understand a research paper (What was that third para about??). You are misinformed from some vegan sites, attend an evolution course at least one, if you have did already (very extreme possibility) redo it.

  • NARAYAN RAO

    So are our vehicles , our power plants , almost every manufacturing unit ,… the list goes on.

    The issue should be whether a beef ban is to be enforced :

    1. without any public discourse , when the livelihood of thousands depends on it

    2. without ensuring that the livelihood of the thousands who depended on it , is taken care of by any reasonable alternative ; are cows more important than people ?

    Isn’t this akin to the Narmada dam , where the rights and lives of thousands have been impacted by a decision which has been made in the interest of others , without either discussion or management ?

    • Skanoza

      True, you make some good points.
      In fact, what’s wrong with this beef ban news is that the ban seems to be motivated more by communal politics than by a genuine concern for the environment or an understanding of the core of the problem (which is that Animal Livestock industries in their entirety cause irreversible devastation to the planet and our environment and therefore, we’re handing down to our children a thoroughly imbalanced ecosystem along with a bunch of ecologically and economically unsustainable practices that are proven to be perilous to the planet.

      However, to your question “Are cows more important than people?’ the answer should be YES. The irony is that even if you consider human beings to be more important, then we should massively scale down if not eliminate altogether, animal agriculture, because it is precisely THAT – raising cattle, for meat and dairy, leather etc etc – which is bringing about the planet’s swift degradation. So, funnily enough, even if selfishness is the agenda i.e. you consider humans to be more important than animals we should begin by respecting the animals and the ecosystem.

      Of course, you might want to delve into an understanding of the term ‘Speciesism’ so you truly understand if human being are indeed that important to the planet. We may like to think so, but, i can assure you, nature or the universe doesn’t care an iota about the egos of ONE species on it. If we destroy the world around us, it will simply decimate us and move on. So, we’re only causing our own demise as a species.

      • NARAYAN RAO

        So if you genuinely feel that cows are more important than people , would you rather engage in public discourse , put forth your views , and convince those who are not like minded , or do you go ahead with a ban , since :
        1. You know it all
        2. Others don’t matter.
        You are in a position to discuss all this rationally because you yourself are in no way affected by the ban !
        Will you be equally objective and dispassionate when it comes to an issue where you are affected ?

  • inderjeet

    mahatma gandhi was great..jai ho. according to the excerpts, Gandhi was worried about Pakistan. Moreover about Hindus, who had decided to stay in Pakistan after the partition. He was scared if cow slaughtering would be banned in India, then there would be negative effect on Hindus staying at pakistan.

  • Skanoza

    You contradict yourself, mate. If everything is to be treated equally why should meat ban on some days be an issue? After all, by your own admission, you said dry days are fine.

    Anyway, some points of yours are alright but there seems to be a great deal of confusion with some bits.

    The reason Mahatma Gandhiji treated alcohol and meat differently was because, with alcohol, it was a social nuisance and usually resulted in broken families, needless domestic violence, family financial troubles etc regardless of which community did it. However, ahimsa as a principle was only a tenet of Hinduism, not other religions. Sure, Hinduism is not a religion. It is only a geo-cultural identity but still since politicians routinely use it as a tool to divide and rule, he decided it’s better not to impose any ban on meat-eating as it will give rise to unnecessary communal differences because he was trying to unify the country against the British, not divide us.
    And that’s the reason the left liberals won’t say anything about liquor. And it’s not a logical comparison either. SO i don’t blame them. Also, many are directly connected with kickbacks from the liquor lobbies. So, why would they shoot themselves in the foot, right?

    This beef ban reeks of hypocrisy on all fronts. Left, right and centre! It is a politicised issue.

    • NCFIND

      Alcohol and Meat can be treated differently and it is fine with Left Liberals – is the starting point of hypocrisy. Alcohol is a health hazard? So is Beef or any red meat as per some studies. And there are also some studies which tell mild alcohol consumption is good. But your argument is My Ban is Good, your ban is bad wont work. BTW, banning Oral tobacco (aka pan masala) while having tobacco smoking legal is also a very good example of Left Liberal hypocrisy. It is illegal to harm oneself with tobacco but legal to smoke it and cause health hazard to others through passive smoking? YOur Liberal hypocrisy is exposed and all that you have is a claim that “MY BAN IS GOOD, YOUR BAN IS BAD”

  • openminded

    We really have a penchant for making an issue out of a non issue. If we r really broadminded enough we dont need to discuss such issues at length! There are so many things that need our attention then making an issue of such petty issues. I think secularism in real sense in our country is lacking because we always manage to bring in the hindu-muslim, etc. etc. into every discussion of ours. These particular words must be banned for use in the parliament, assemblies, discussions and other parleys and just use the term INDIAN….I think only then we will become truly secular..

    • Ign

      without those words there wouldn’t be an India…

  • NCFIND

    Making accusations at right wingers without offering alternatives, is just abuse and you are doing it here well. Serves no one.

    Point is Left Liberals are okay with Gandhi’s views on Beef but silent on His views on prohibition even as they would not miss an opportunity to booze in finest clubs or bars (with few exceptions like Guha et al), and this hypocrisy is the problem and your accusing me of Right wing makes no difference here !

    • Navneet

      “Making accusations at right wingers without offering alternatives, is just abuse and you are doing it here well. Serves no one.”
      Says the person who started this discussion talks about hypocrisy of the left.

      Anyway, you do make a valid point that accusing anyone without solutions doesn’t solve anything and I approve of that.
      However, all this clubbing of things under right and left leaves one with a lack of nuance. I consider myself a left-leaning person and I do not approve of any bans. However the state does have a responsibility towards its citizens (but not towards a specific religion). I don’t want it to regulate beef or pork based on religious beliefs. If however it were to ban beef and/or pork based on environmental/sustainability concerns (or if there were an epidemic of Mad-cow disease), I’d be all in support. Similarly, I am not in favour of Gandhi or anyone else’s intent to prohibit alcohol because it offends a certain religious sentiment. I do however find it reasonable that the state should work to prevent alcoholism in society (wherever it might come from).

      The nuance is extremely important for our debates and all those who accuse the ‘left-liberals’ of hypocrisy ultimately tend to overlook (knowingly or unknowingly) this nuance.

  • Ign

    that indicated a ‘goat’s mental temperament’ if you say ‘I wall call him a ‘mahatma’ because others do so’.

  • Ravisankar

    True

  • Bharath M

    If you check evolution, that will give you precise reason why our eating habit is diverse. We are adapted to both vegan and non vegan due to various geographical conditions under which we evolved, try asking a Siberian Russian or a desert nomad to just eat vegan ??? its not possible !!! Similarly the vegans dialogue of ” are at least causing lesser harm ” has no validity as veg or non veg both involve life, its not like vegans are eating rock or sand !! The circle of life revolves around the principle of a food chain, we humans are right at top of the food chain, it is just left to the individual to take a step to eat healthy food, you eat beef or you eat goat or you eat soya bean,ultimately it all provides nutrition, attaching sentiment and baseless conviction on food is baseless. Its time we accept the fact we are omnivores and move on !!!!

    • Anupama S

      Bharath, I agree with you that our eating habits are influenced by our geographic locations.

      BUT :

      – When a dog is fried alive, a new born calf pleads to be with his mother but instead is slaughtered .. pigs shiver and have tears in their eyes, you want to tell me it’s all food and don’t attach sentiments with them? Then what is the difference between you and a frog who cannot judge the difference?

      – Meat eating has been on a rise and has caused substantial damage to our planet. Animal farming is one of the biggest reasons for global warming. UN just advised all to vegan to save the world. Google it.

      – if the food given to the animals raised for meat were given to people instead, there would be less food hunger in the world.

      If you don’t have a heart that can love and respect all living being (as you sadly only see them as food) at least think for the welfare of the home of that you live in and how your eating habits are affecting it.

      P.S: We were never meant to be on the top of the food chain, it was a lion there. And by selfishly placing us on the top … guess where all the damage has been done? Oh, well I asked too much from a person .. who can’t even tell the difference between a soy and a dog.

    • Jan2

      Agreed. Food is food. Just because a human can ‘see’ a cow crying and cannot ‘see’ a microorganism in pain while breathing does not make it ok to kill the microorganism but not the cow.

  • Anupama S

    Really? eat raw lion/elephant meat first and then say that.

    And I guess you have really sharp claws too? And your canines are longer than the street dog’s?

  • Anupama S

    Thank you Skanoza! At least one well educated person here.

    • Sharon Felix

      ha ha..! I like you innocent!

  • Romit Machado

    Choice of food is entirely personal. No one has the right to enforce on anyone what to and what not to eat. There will be no difference between you and ISIS or Taliban.

    The whole world going veg wont solve anything, an argument on this can also be the whole world going Non veg- giving Go green a totally new meaning. BUT this argument from any side is stupid.

    First thing that most religions teach is Kindness and Peace. Yet we misinterpret religious quotes “out of context” and try to incite a fury in society. Most of the time these acts are deliberate having ulterior motives.

    Nature has made us humans and many animals omnivores. There are animals that are carnivores and herbivores too. If we remember the food chain that we were taught in school you will know that any disruption in the food chain causes imbalance in nature.
    If any animal,human changes from what nature created it to be, it is interfering with nature.
    Example:If all animals go veg the number of herbivores will grow uncontrollably. This could lead to famines.
    A more specific example would be that the increased level of methane released by bovines will lead to increased Global Warming.

    In the end we have to live not by ourselves but with others. No one is forcing anyone to eat what you dont want. Why worry what others eat.
    I recommend a new subject for school syllabii, its called “Mind your own business” which will teach kids early on that it is right to help an accident victim and wrong to dictate what your neighbour eats.

    • Facepalming watcher

      Proud as they come. The very first sentence said with such a feeling of conviction, sad. “No one has the right to enforce on anyone what to and what not to eat.” Why are your forcing the enslaved animals to eat food forcibly then? Or do you have some magical explanation as to how humans are somehow “more deserving” and “more sentient”, please do add.

      Can I eat humans then? You better respect my desires, too. If not, what is the reason?

      It’s like you folk just speak in this echo dome, where the consideration of any other sentient animal, doesn’t exist. But the immorality of your actions will persist, and will forever remain a stain on your existence, as you have become used to considering it as a ‘great thing to uphold’, where it is just sheepery. Just two parties deciding on what to do with the third, and following, with 0 consideration.

      You use no facts. Because there are none in defense of your beliefs.

      “The whole world going veg wont solve anything, an argument on this can also be the whole world going Non veg- giving Go green a totally new meaning. BUT this argument from any side is stupid.”

      You make another fancy statement, yet give nothing factual to support it. lol.

      Then you go to using Naturallistic fallacy as your support, which is pitiful again. As you might not even know what that means.

      “Example:If all animals go veg the number of herbivores will grow uncontrollably. This could lead to famines.
      A more specific example would be that the increased level of methane released by bovines will lead to increased Global Warming.” Lol. You have clearly never spent even 2 minutes of your existence to fact check yourself. More Grain is spent on feeding non human animals and then killing them for a fraction of the input in form of “meat”, do you know how much forest land was destroyed just so your meat could be fed? Do you know how many people go hungry, who could be fed the food you pay people to feed the animals you want to have killed and then consumed? No. You clearly do not.

      (At this point in me typing, I am getting the feeling that I might just have ticked the mod reading this, off, which I don’t want to happen, but it might, because me quoting you, and then telling you that you ‘argument’ has no factual basis, might appear to be a “personal attack on you from my side”, as it has happened before, which is shortsighted, and not on my part. Just gonna put it here, to give the mod something to think about. I’m sure if they’re professional, they’ll not misinterpret it.)

      Back on track –

      “Mind your own business, which will teach kids early on that it is right to help an accident victim and wrong to dictate what your neighbour eats.”
      Yeah, including humans.
      Or do you just pretend that the massive gaps in your ‘argument’ don’t exist, and go on admiring how perfect it is?

  • amitkrm

    I like human flesh.. am I allowed to eat.. The point here is emotional values attached to what you eat or slaughter.. If one community worship any animal/plant/creature and other wants to eat/kill/slaughter communal violence is the destiny.. In history muslims in india where robbers/envaders. But still they are now one of us.. Whats wrong in appreciating values above taste.. This is all propaganda created by few.. I have friend from all religion..no body wants to do a single thing which hurts other sentiment.. why everyone is stuck on cow.. Its a matter of emotional/religious attachment violating which will definitely cause violence nothing else.. because other part which is bound to protect and respect cows will not be quite, and they should not. If somebody is fighting for a taste, then fighting for cultural/religious/respect is much more high cause..

    • amitkrm

      You are right but if you violate my values same I can also do.. hence religion will become and issue for world war.. Human values are to respect values of other human.. as far as eating choice is concern still many are left… Specific response to you.. If you try to challenge and abuse a thousands year old values which are followed by majority you are inviting violence..

      • Jan2

        Thanks for the ‘specific response’. Fortunately, I live in a place where people do not act on animalistic violence and believe in discussion, so I do not need to worry about voicing my opinions (while still respecting other people’s opinions of course).

        Violating values can also have a different interpretation. If I go to a society that worships ‘Sun God’ and ask them why they choose to worship the Sun and not other forms of energy (e.g. a tubelight), then depending on how evolved the society is, they will either try to explain to me based on their opinions, or try to kill me if they are a backward society.

        I cannot change their maturity levels, but I can try to make myself safer by living in a ‘not so backward’ place.

  • Sharon Felix

    Understand I’m talking about survival! And btw who banned it? That’s what some others have been talking about. Why ban beef when liquor and tobacco is still very much available (which I’m not against). Accept my request. Please stop.

  • Azad

    I have been long pledged to serve the cow but how can my religion also be the religion of the rest of the Indians? It will mean coercion against those Indians who are not Hindus. Gandhi

  • Azad

    In villages Hindus make bullocks carry huge burdens which almost crush the animals. Is it not cow-slaughter, albeit slowly carried out? Gandhi

  • Sambit Mishra

    Couldn’t have said it better.

  • Skanoza

    Wow, at least when you’re talking to a qualified Biologist like me, take it easy!

    By the way, almost all herbivores have canines but these are not true canines. These are used to crush hard fruits and food.
    True canines are at least 3 to 6 times the length of your other teeth. I hope you don’t have such teeth.
    🙂
    Here, read all you need to know about canines: freefromharm.org/photo-galleries/9-reasons-your-canine-teeth-dont-make-you-a-meat-eater/

    When biologists talk about omnivore and carnivore traits as compared with those of a herbivore, they take into account a huge list of traits and factors. Which you can find here: michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html

  • Sharon Felix

    Ahh.. Now I get it. You are primarily that orthodox vegan person, hence a bit slow towards understanding evolution the right way. Omnivores are that animals that are not specifically designed to consume veg (like a cow or you!) or meat (like a lion). So dont try to be rhetoric. Our length of intestine is half way between herbivores and carnivores, our canines are too the same fitting to the criteria. You started a para with oh lord and then said something stupid. (read it before going further here) Because that itself proves we aren’t disturbing nature, we create what we consume so why ban it, was my point in the first place. Using a Lords name in stupid context is blasphemy (Kidding I’m not religious).
    See I did not want to be impolite to anyone and I’m not such a person but when I see orthodox vegans like you dictating about others food habits giving very bizarre ‘pseudoscience’ like we aren’t omnivores and stuff, I cant help it. And with such people there is no reasoning, which I knew at the first go and that’s why I just pleaded to stop. Because all it takes is a just compassionate mind (not fairly-qualified with life science degree) to understand that shoving plants to a persons mouth (with pseudoscience) is same as shoving beef in a vegans mouth, which you seemingly lacked. So as long as we don’t cause extinction of species, let me eat what I can digest and derive energy from and you do the same. Bon appetit my friend!!

    • Skanoza

      I acknowledge my mistake in engaging with you.

      I am not interested in changing anyone’s mind, and in fact, i don’t even support banning beef because it is being done for politically-motivated reasons, but when people like yourself post incorrect things, i will fight with facts.

  • Rajeev Jain

    In the Vedas it is stated that those creatures who use their lips to drink water are meant to be herbivores by nature and those who use their tongues to drink water are carnivores. Think about how various animals drink water and you will realise its true. Guess which category this theory puts us human beings in?

    • Husain R

      Mr rajiv jain…. then why do humans have canine teeth…? Plz stop bringing ones religious beliefs on others…. india is supposed to be a democracy. … i dont see it happing the democratic way…

  • Skanoza

    Disqus / The Wire and its terrible comment gatekeeping! They’re the worst moderators ever. I will point this out on other sites as well, so people know this, because i am sure this comment will be *edited* too!
    Either have the open-mindedness and journalistic integrity to let people express themselves completely on issues, no matter what, and take up specific instances of comment moderation separately when it reaches fever pitch, or don’t allow commenting at all. This uninformed and monkey-censoring of comments is ridiculous.

    • The Wire

      Comments are edited/moderated with a heavy hand when they are full of personal attack and invective, as your LAST comment was. All your other comments have run as is.

  • http://journeys2remember.blogspot.in/ Poornapragna Gudibande

    What a man!! Sad the mainstream media never publish this kind of stuff. Shame on them.

  • Athul Attingal Athul

    Reading the comments here .. it is evident that wisdom is not extinct in our land.

  • JRajBali

    But Pakistan did go that way to not outright banning temple worship but sanctioning the destruction of them. That being said, not eating beef is my choice, if others want to they deal with that karma. Also isn’t banning cow-slaughter a clause to be enacted in the constitution?

  • Facepalming watcher

    There is no place for ignorance and accommodation of vanity and self indulgence by cost of others’ suffering in an advancing society. These are primitive actions, sadly the apes didn’t leave them behind when they left the caves. If an animal(a jain homo sapien for this instance), is REPULSED by the very sight of animal slaughter, if not you, then another, all the people who eat meat, are NOT ALL CAPABLE of killing their animals themselves. This is proof that humans aren’t made to naturally eat meat.

    It is an immoral action regardless, and all the people who, in their lack of understanding, are enjoying the gratification, will be Judged by the future, by those less ignorant than them, by those who have SEVERAL DEGREES MORE knowledge of reality than us. And then they will forever be remembered in history, as “those who could change and stop, but didn’t, because it was more convenient to just continue as their unwilling existence demanded, and just because they weren’t alone, they continued.”

  • Facepalming watcher

    It’s almost like saying, “since we can’t stop infanticide, let’s just scientifically manage infanticide to minimise the hardship of newborns.” Remember, to someone who is not biased and logically flawed, there is NO difference between the life of an infant, and that of an animal who has experienced more life. Humanity reeks of delusion and vanity.

    • Harish

      No Sir, everyone has a different stand on ethics and it is difficult for a person from one standpoint to agree with another who is looking at it from another standpoint. The degree and extent of slaughter that one is willing to inflict is largely a function of one’s birth- which culture, which religion. If you are born in a particular family it is very rare that one changes the stance. Had the same person been born in a different family, there is a very large probability that the person would have been adopting the beliefs of that family (statistically the number of people changing their birth beliefs are insignificant). Hence the claim of anyone that they are ‘right’ has to be seen from that perspective.

  • Mohd Ashhar

    Did u realised what u said??
    If they will live , they will need more on land….

    As i said , we all are omnivore…
    And that no one can change…
    Although , muslims are allowed to eat only some species…

    I dnt hv any problm if u are pure veg, i just need that no one should have prblm if i eat non veg…
    I also eat veg…much more than non veg…

  • mksharma62

    The largest beef exporters from India are Hindus! So this hypocrisy has to be exposed and countered. You can’t say killing the best of cows and bullocks in modern mechanized abattoirs and sending their meat (beef) to other countries is OK but not letting others kill the old and decrepit or not so well built cattle here terming it as a criminal offence and cruelty to animals especially cattle – If you want to really implement the constitutional directive suggesting prohibiting slaughter of milch cattle and even draught cattle first provide ample facilities for their existence, nourishment and due care even in their old age and conduct intense propaganda among masses of all religions against cruelty to animals, especially cattle. But abrupt bans and arbitrary laws which affect the lives of lakhs of people adversely are no good. As Gandhi said it may not be possible in India to make and enforce a complete anti-cattle slaughter law. People by their own will and pleasure should gradually change to alternative – non-non-veg foods and this alternative should be really good, copious and attractive. Till then no particular sort of meat can or should be banned.

  • Facepalming watcher

    Don’t “FORCE” the children in your homes to stay inside when it’s dark, or when there’s a riot going on outside. Or if you live in a forest area with wild predators roaming around.

    Let them be FREEE!.

    it is not forced. there are times when it doesn’t want to be milked, and it expresses itself.

    It’s about regulating the treatment and husbandry of animals who depend on us for protection. Not “untying them like a 70’s hippie”, and watch 20 cows run free into the forests, to be instantly killed and devoured, because of being in an improper environment.

  • Arun

    Of course, the Constitution originally also did not mandate free universal primary education, but made it a directive principle. Only with the 86th amendment in 2002 did it become a fundamental right. So cow-slaughter can also be debated. Nothing Gandhi said or the Constitution said settles that debate.

  • Arun

    The English world (Great Britain, USA) has a taboo on eating horse meat. In the US, there is no federal law banning human consumption of horse meat. The states do not prohibit a person growing a horse on his own property, slaughtering it and eating it. But the states do have laws that forbid the transportation of horses or horse meat for human consumption. I.e., while not outlawing horse meat for human consumption, they outlaw being able to create a market for horse meat for human consumption.

    If this is acceptable from the point of view of “individual freedom” in the USA, it might also be acceptable in India. Of course, what works in India may be different from what works in the USA. But this might be an avenue to legally and consistent with freedom to get the effect Hindus want with respect to beef.

  • Saji

    life in earth is all about survival of the fittest. plants are not meant for humans..they are just another living thing in earth. we eat them because it is easy for us to kill them, how many organisams gets killed when we standup on our foot.Many of them gets crushed under our feet..no body even things about them…

  • Venkatesh Pastay

    Bimal Chandra Sinha, COMEBACK is the word I like most !
    7.3k Views
    Yes, beef should be banned in India not only on religious grounds but also on scientific, environmental, constitutional and sentimental grounds. Here is how:
    1. Environmental, scientific and Economic reasons:

    Production of beef consumes more water than any other farm and there is an imminent water crisis in India.

    Water crisis in India:

    Beef cattle requires 28 times more land for rearing than any other meat group mentioned earlier. This is intensive on land resources which would otherwise be used for farming or for rearing more efficient meat groups. Once a given grazing ground starts going barren, new grazing grounds have to be created which leads to cutting down of rain forests. This is a considerable environmental damage.
    Importance of cow-dung:
    The cow dung is the only dung on which the dung beetles “geotrupes stercorarius” breed. These beetles make small tunnels under the dung and carry the dung into the earth and stores it.

    These tunnels made by them, house earthworms, wherever there is high beetle activity there is an increase in earthworm breeding ,this increases the water infiltration on an average of 129% each extra inch. (25mm) of water absorbed 27225 gallons/ per acre (254530, 1/hc) of water to the soilreducing both flooding and drought . All this apart from increasing the fertility of the soil.

    In any typical Indian village it not uncommon to find the entire floor of the house coated with some fresh cow dung paste. Cow dung mixed with lime is also used to coat the walls of cob houses. Recent research findings from independent groups in University of Bristol and Sage college in Troy, NY, show cow dung to be an excellent mood enhancing agent. Cow dung contains a bacteria Mycobacterium vaccae, which activates a group of neurons in the brain that produce serotonin – a neurotransmitter that contributes to feelings of well being and happiness.
    2. Constitutional reason:
    As per article 48 of Indian constitution, slaughtering of cow is prohibited in India not on religious grounds but on agriculture and animal farming prospective:

    Article 48.
    Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry:
    The State shall endeavour to organise 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.

    3. Sentimental reasons:

    Many countries have banned different animal meats on sentimental grounds:
    i. Horse meat is banned in California.
    ii. It is illegal to sell cat or dog meat in any Australian State or Territory because Cats and dogs hold a specific place in Australian society as companion animals.
    iii. Similarly, Hong Kong prohibits the slaughter of any dog or cat for use as food, whether for mankind or otherwise, on pain of fine and imprisonment.
    iv. France has banned ketchup in schools on pretext of saving their culinary culture.
    We didn’t hear any hue and cry from them. India is a Hindu-majority nation. If slaughtering of cows hurts their cultural sentiments, why can’t the minority groups respect them? Instead, why tolerance is expected from majority group only?

    Cow is the source of milk and all other dairy products. She is a relentless giver. That’s why she is worshipped as “Gow Mata” by Hindus. Even after she becomes incapable to produce milk, her cow-dungs can be used as the most useful manure. This cow-dung is scientifically very useful as stated above. This is why the old and milkless cows were/are kept in “Gow-sallas”.
    Should we leave our old and weak parents who nurture us? Similarly, how can we even think of slaughtering such a useful and relentless giver?I know that there are many stranded cows on Indian roads who are seen eating plastics and garbages everywhere. The govt. must take steps to construct “gow-shalas” (shelter for cows) for these stranded cows whose dungs can still be utilised for agricultural purposes!

    Sources:
    Ten scientific reasons to avoid Beef
    Article 48 in The Constitution Of India 1949
    RSPCA Australia knowledgebase
    Benefits of Cow dung

  • Abhinav Jain

    Why put the question of cow slaughter on a religious ground.. Every human whether a hindu, muslim and christian etc consumes milk and dairy products from his childhood. After the mothers milk cow is the largest supplement of milk. Is it not our duty to protect an animal that gives so much to us in her life. That gives us the strength to stand tall. Shouldn’t we all stand tall for that animal.

    Also you all know the problem of milk adulteration has increased many folds in recent years. The reason is simply the gap between demand and supply. Dont you think one of the reasons for this increasing gap is slaughtering of milk giving animals, most of which is contributed by cows alone.

    Does preventing this adultering, and giving safe and healthy food to our coming generations not the duty of all humans.

  • Jan2

    ‘At least Hindus have a long, traditional reason for banning beef’

    What exactly is the logical reason for banning beef?

    I am not supporting either of the bans (cow or horse), but finding it extremely difficult to understand why eating chicken/fish/pig/goat/sheep is fine and the argument is about a specific animal while others are ok to eat.

  • Jan2

    Brilliant.

  • Advocate Danish ahmad

    We respect and understand the sentiments of other communities, but that does not mean we can resort to violence to settle scores… Alcohol is prohibited in my religion. Consumption of pork isprohibited in my religion, but that does not mean I should attack everyone who consumes alcohol or pork,”

  • Ashish Jha

    Mahatma Gandhi was a wise great man, but that doesn’t mean everything he said is absolutely correct in every perspective. He had advised Jews from Germany to peacefully accept Hitler’s atrocities and die willingly. Accepting this as their destiny. how many of you would agree with it? There are people who even do not take care of their parents in old age but that does not mean everyone should abandon their parents. I am not saying if it is right of wrong but you can not co-exist without respecting each others faith. And you wont die if you do not eat cow meat. my POV. http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/gandhi-on-jews-part-2-nazis-and-cowardice/

  • Guru

    Eating Plants destroys environment as it supplies humans with oxygens and no doubt there is depletion, humans now looking for other planets.
    Instead stop/ ban eating only plants and all should have a plant+meat diet as eating chicken never harmed environment.

    Those who refuse to eat meat can eat rocks as an alternative and stop the dramabaazi – STOP destroying Environment to suit interests of some and eat beef, chicken, fish to save earth.

  • Narottam Swami

    It is true that Gandhiji was of the view that cow slaughter should not be banned by law.It did not mean that he was of the view that cow slaughter should continue in the country and every otherday New slaughter houses should be opened and established.He once said when the throat of cow is cut Ifeel as if the sword has cut my head.Gandhi was the votary of nonviolence.He considered all sort of coersion violent.Hence he had said those who so ever eat beef specially Musalims must be approached and asked not to slaughter cows and eat cow meet.Gandhiji is not amidst us and the circumstances and situation since than have changed.Had Gandhiji been to day !what measure he would have taken and adopted to control incessant cow slaghter could not be predicted and safely and neutrally said.

  • CA Darvesh Swami

    Sorry Sir m not agree….
    We want to ban Cow slaughtering… do u know it mean. It mean that Ek Jeev Ko hatya se bachana. Hum kisi muslim ko masjid me jane se mana nahi kar rahe. Hum ban karwwna chahte h Janwaro ka khoon bahana aur us janwar ka jise hindu apni maa kahte hai. Agar koi kisi ki maa manta hai aur use uski aankho k samne kata jaye to wo kya sirf islye sah le k wo ek secular country me hai. It is related with Feelings sir. Jo maa ni manta wo aapki baato se agree kar sakta hai. Aur ye awaj beef ban k liye hai.. to ye agar muslims k liye hai to un hinduo k liye bhi hai jo is paap me shamil hai. Islye only muslim ka mudda to aap bna rahe ho.. humne to kaha hi ni ki muslim beef ban kar de humne to kaha ki poore hindustan me beef ban ho jaye… so dont play politics sir.

  • Mr. F

    Eating any food is a personal choice and should remain one.

    http://www.reveringthoughts.com/2015/10/06/im-not-sorry-that-i-eat-beef/

  • amitkrm

    Why only humankind// Is this planet is meant for human/// if its for humankind.. wich human.. the powerful one, richer one, poor one or no one.. these things are much complex than pretend to words/// As per my belive and my cultural and religious belive I am bound to do good not only for human kind but for all.. including rocks and rivers as well.. harming anyone by leaving alternate option is choosing violance// Now one can name it taste but for sure not hunger… For a hugry law of forest get applies, means whatever you get to eat, eat..

    • Jan2

      Well, not really sure I get your exact point, but mainly there are 2 types of violence, one that you can see and the other that happens but you cant see it. If a cow or goat bleats loudly in pain, we think, oh my God its violence. If a plant silently lets out its life, we dont think that. If an ant dies while you are walking, then you cannot hear its screams. My only point is, why is it ok to kill something we cannot hear the screams of, while protecting only those things whose screams we can hear. Are we so naive or selfish to think we are doing a favour on screaming animals while silent beheading is absolutely fine for us?

  • Hakim Shabir

    Every word speaks wisdom

  • R Joseph

    Let us assume,for argument’s sake, that there is no difference between a human being and an animal and that those who practice this philosophy are more enlightened than others. I tell you there are many people who feed and nurture dogs and ants but would not hesitate to drive other human beings to their death. Are you not aware of the Securities stock scam of 1992 where several hundreds of people lost all their life savings and many committed suicide?

    • Darpan Adhlakha

      Unfortunately I am not aware of that scam, My heart goes out to those who would have suffered. But what I am saying is that there are exceptions every where, but it is completely inhumane that we don’t term wrong as wrong. I am here not advocating that animal lovers are good or anything else, neither I am saying that there is no difference between animal and us. The fact that we are human, that gives us some responsibility that we don’t misuse our power. For people who say that we are on top of food chain, because we can eat them, animals were meant to be eaten because they can’t defend. Will you say same thing if some powerful guy says that he is above you in foodchain? I am not also saying that you quit what you are doing, because it is impossible for you, because this is also kind of addiction. I am just saying that you must acknowledge that what is being done is wrong and not encourage others with the same argument. Because people will try to do same like you are doing, you are unintentionally justifying the whole act. I would compare it to analogy, If you can’t stop taking drugs then please atleast let other know that this is not god for them. Don’t say that it is completely fine and their choice. This thinking in turn ruins coming future. Only difference between drugs and meat consumption is that in meat consumption, humans are not harmed, instead animals are killed because of our satisfaction of taste buds. No man is perfect, atleast one should realize what they are doing wrong, doesn’t matter if they can stop it or not.

  • Ghulam Nabi Malik

    {I have been long pledged to serve the cow but how can my religion also be the religion of the rest of the Indians? It will mean coercion against those Indians who are not Hindus.}
    Who had said all this, it was Mahatma Gandhi the spiritual and political leader of India who struggled for freedom of India was to be admitted as the constitution framed for all of those living in India. There is no doubt for any one crying for ban of cows slaughtering, he had given the example of the product of cows, the blocks used for bearing hardship, ploughing field and with heavy force driving carts travelling hundreds of mile. Why con’t Hindu respect that animal.

  • Jan2

    If the only argument is that they dont see something as food, thats fine. I have a green pea plant and I dont want to eat its peas because the plant is dear to me. So in a way, I dont see it as food. But I would never tell someone else not to eat peas. Its my personal choice.

  • Jai Bharath

    Hope some day some one will kill and eat you for his hunger. how would u feel? Like humans animals do have feeling where as plants do not have.

    “As long as there are slaughter houses there will always be battlefields.” – Leo Tolstoy

  • Shayar Kamaljagruti

    All the people here I believe are trying to come to a logical conclusion to this human moral dilemma. I do not promote neither discourage vegetarianism or carnivorism. To the ones who say vegetarianism reduces suffering, pls understand that we do not pluck from the trees and from wilderness, we indulge in agricultural activity on a massive scale which involves not only ploughing the fields but also using insecticides and pesticides which kill millions of living creatures with sensation(having a central nervous system). To the ones who feel its ok to eat meat, maybe it is but only if u hunted it where the animal had a 50 percent chance of survival. The way they are manufactured and bred to be slaughtered makes it an extremely fascist activity. Anyways to believe that a group of us have a moral high ground over others just bcoz we eat vegetarian food is very naive.