Cow-Protection, Satyagraha and Non-violence Satyagraha
Presentation.
Q.
: How did
Vinobaji take up the question of cattle slaughter? What is the
background? Why did he get the Satyagraha at Deonar initiated?
.
Click here for Answer
Q.
: The
tale just narrated sounds horrifying. One must say that they
are indeed betrayers.
Click
here for Answer
Q.
: What do
you surmise will be the situation if cow-slaughter is not
banned in the near future?
Click
here for Answer
Q.
: How did
Vinobaji take up the question of cattle slaughter? What is the
background? Why did he get the Satyagraha at Deonar initiated?
.
A.
: The
demand for an end to cow-slaughter existed since the days of
the Independence movement. Many top leaders and eminent
individuals had represented to Queen Victoria for prohibition
of slaughter. But the British administration had initiated
slaughter in a concerted manner. As the mood for complete
freedom from British rule grew stronger this demand became an
integral part of the demand for Independence. Leaders of the
movement, which included nationalist Hindus as well as Muslims
and others, pledged this to the nation. Lokmanya Tilak had
declared that on Independence cow-protection would be ensured
by a stroke of the pen. Gandhiji said, "As long as the
cow is slaughtered I consider my own selfbeing
slaughtered." The Congress formed a Committee under Dr.
Rajendra Prasad to study all questions relating to protection
and rearing of cattle. While the Constitution was being
formulated, the ConstituentAssembly that included
representatives from all religions and communities unanimously
agreed to include cow-protection in the Directive Principles.
Within three months of Independence a commit- tee of
government and non-government experts under the
Chairpersonship of Dr. Datar Singh, the head of the Department
of Animal Husbandry, was formed. The committee, after yearlong
deliberations, recommended that slaughter of useful cattle be
stopped forthwith and that a law for a complete ban be
implemented within two years. In the meantime cattle-houses be
set up wherein unproductive cattle would be looked after. The
Committee averred, "The slaughter of cattle is in no way
in the interests of India and must be prohibited by
law. India's prosperity, to a great extent depends on its
cattle, and her soul shall be rested only alter a complete ban
on the slaughter of the cow and the bullock is
implemented." But,
while the expert committee had submitted its reports and the
Constituent Assembly accepted it as a Directive principle of
state policy the central government secretariat sent out a
circular to the provincial governments advising a " go
slow" on its implementation as it would adversely affect
the export of hide. The' hint' was aimed at discouraging a
very stringent legislation and encouraging lax implementation
where it had already been enacted-
The
states of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh had already passed
laws. Almost all princely states that later merged into the
Indian Union had regulations prohibiting cow-slaughter. But,
on the whole, the position was such that after the central
circular steps towards anti-slaughter enactments were frozen.
In the course of Vinobaji's walking tour through Bihar, the
Chief Minister Dr. Shrikrishna Singh on his advice took the
initiative of enforcing a complete ban on slaughter in Bihar.
Those involved in the butcher-trade challenged the law in
Patna High Court. They further went into appeal in the Supreme
Court against the High Court's decision which was in favour of
the Bihar Government- The Supreme Court pronouncement in 1958
is important. It dismissed the appellants ‘ contention that
cow-slaughter is a religious duty according to Islam. The
Coul1 held that no such evidence had been produced. The
arguments in the case were on economic grounds. Clearly, it
said, the issue is economic, not religious- The Supreme Court
affirmed that " cattle in India had three-fold uses,
firstly providing milk for consumption, secondly, for draught
purposes, and finally as provider of manure for agriculture.
Dung is cheaper than chemical fertilisers and extremely
useful. In short the cow and the bullock are the back-bone of
India." The Supreme Court in support of these facts
stated that if cows
yielding less than one-half litre of milk were to be permitted
to be slaughtered, nine-tenths of the milch cows would also
face extinction. It therefore accepted the demand for a
complete ban on the slaughter of cows and calves while
allowing impotent bulls and old bullocks to be slaughtered.
As a sequel
to the Supreme Court ruling UP, MP, Rajasthan, Bihar and other
states which had passed laws enforcing a complete ban had to
amend their laws. Mysore, which had a law against slaughter
passed by the Maharaja with help from his Prime Minister Sir
Mirza Ismail, also had to amend its laws. Only in Jammu and
Kashmir, due to its special status, did the law passed by
SheikhAbdullah remain unchanged. Slaughter of cattle is
prohibited in that state and is punishable with rigorous
imprisonment up to 10 years. A partial ban only made the whole
law redundant and where a law for complete ban on
cow-slaughter existed it was not enforced resulting in strong
and sturdy cows and bullocks being killed, so much so that
most government officials are unaware that any law in this
regard exists.
A movement
for prohibition of cow-slaughter was initiated in 1966-67.
Huge demonstrations took place in Delhi. The government would
not budge. Swami Niranjan Dev Teerth, Shankaracharya of Puri,
and Shri Prabhudutt Brahmachari undertook fasts-unto-death.
Vinobaji, referring to this in a letter to the late Shri
Hanumanprasad Poddar, stated:
"I
am greatly concerned about the great vow taken by the
Shankaracharya and Shri Prabhudutta Brahmachariji for the
cause of total cow-protection. My fullest sympathies lie with
them in this sacred mission. Death comes when it has to. A
man, hale and hearty may meet death. These friends are
inviting death for a sacred cause but death does not cause me
anxiety. I am distressed
about the Government's attitude. I have faith in prayer. I am
praying. Let us see what God wills."
Mr.
Jayprakash Narayan tried his best to find a way out of the
impasse. After 72 days of their fast the Government agreed to
set up a committee and promised to implement its
recommendations through its declaration of 5th January 1967
and thus the fast ended after such torturous penance.
The
thenAgriculture Minister reiterated in parliament on 12th
March 1970 that the government was determined to
implementArticle 48 of the Constitution regarding
cow-protection. The government, in accordance with its
statements of 5th January '67 and 1st February '67,
constituted a cow- protection committee. It was expected to
report its findings in six months. The committee submitted an
interim report after six years, recommending that the
government enact laws regarding the preservation of cows,
bullocks and bulls within the limits prescribed by the Supreme
Court without delay and implement, and enforce implementation
with all care and alertness. The final report was never
submitted and in 1979, after twelve years, the Janata
Government finally dissolved the committee.
Cow-slaughter
continued unabated. A new dimension of beef export has been
added and due to the craze for export of hide the Government
has shelved the implementation of the Constitutional
directive. With these steps it is as if the government has
signed the death warrant of the whole species.
Vinobaji,
time and again, expressed concern on the subject. In 1962 he
drew. the nation's attention to the fact that able cows were
being slaughtered in Calcutta. Prior to this, in 1951, on
Pandit Nehru's invitation he went to Delhi in the course of
his Bhoodan (Land-gift) march and forcefully argued in favour
of a ban on cow-slaughter in his meeting with Planning
Commission. In 1958 during the course of his tour in
Karnataka, in reply to a question about the continuing decline
in cattle-wealth Vinobaji said that the problem would
definitely have to be taken up but suggested waiting for a
while. In March 1959 in Rajasthan, and in Haryana in December,
two meetings were arranged during Vinobaji's foot- march. The
participants included the UnionAgriculture Minister,
officials, experts and activists involved in cow-protection
and animal husbandry. In this way he tried to mobilise support
among all sections, viz. government, people at large, trading
community, social activists etc. That he attached the greatest
importance to the issue is obvious from the fact that he who
always shunned all positions in organisations and
establishments agreed to be the Chairperson of Go Seva Sangh,
a body set up to promote the cause of cow-protection. When the
slaughter of the cattle increased and all the efforts to stop
it immediately did not succeed he decided to fast in 1976.
Though he
never approved of the Supreme Court ruling allowing the
killing of aged and unproductive bulls and bullocks he called
for at least a law in keeping with the said ruling, failing
which, he declared, he would undertake a fast- unto-death from
11th September, 1976 onwards. Until then Assam, Bengal,
Maharashtra, Gujarat, Goa, Andhra Pradesh, Tamilnadu, Kerala
and other states had no laws in this regard. The government of
Mrs. Indira Gandhi undertook to pass laws in all states by the
year end, except West Bengal, Kerala and Goa where a decision
was deferred for until a year. Vinobaji, having faith in the
government's word, agreed to drop his fast. Accordingly, laws
were passed in the remaining states. Goa also followed suit.
The governments of West Bengal and Kerala refused to pass such
laws. As a result the laws of other states have proved
ineffective. All the nation's cattle are led to these two
states and slaughtered. The Union government remained
indifferent towards fulfilling its promise while cow-slaughter
and beef export registered steep increases year after year. It
was then that Vinobaji again declared his resolve to fast unto
death in November 1978. The then government led by Mr. Morarji
Desai did their best to reason with the state governments of
West Bengal and Kerala but they would not budge. Vinobaji
commenced his fast on 22ndAplil '79, giving it up only after
Mr. Desai announced in Parliament five days later on 26th
April that the subject of cow-protection and animal husbandry
would be brought under the Concurrent List and a law would
soon be made on the matter. In accordance with the assurance
the government also introduced a bill in Parliament. But
political events intervened resulting in the dissolution of
Parliament and therefore also in the death of the said bill. A
new Government under Mrs. Indira Gandhi assumed office in
1980. But unfortunately, that Government did not fulfil its
promise made to Vinobaji. On being reminded time and again the
Prime Minister and other Ministers replied that the matter was
under consideration. Vinobaji, with SOITOW exclaimed,
"Indiraji will remain seized of the matter while the
slaughter will not cease." ...And the matter remained
under consideration...
In December
1981 some activists involved in direct action against the
transport of cows and bullocks into West Bengal and Kerala met
Vinobaji in the hope of getting some guidance to make their
campaign more effective. It was then that Vinobaji directed
them to offer satyagraha at Deonar to demand that no cattle of
any age be slaughtered there. Shri Achhyut Deshpande, an old
colleague from the Ashram was selected to co-ordinate the
action. So, the present campaign was initiated on 11th January
1982, and since then it goes on incessantly, all 24 hours of
the day. (It is in its 15th year now.)
Over
200,000 people, from all parts of the country, belonging to
all religions have participated in it. In conjunction with
the campaign, programmes have been conducted in different
states. Shri Gnanchandraji, a respected monk, con- ducted
relay-fasts for two years. Then in 1982, he commenced a
fast-unto-death. The government resorted to force feeding.
Fearing that the force-feeding could consist of non-vegetarian
ingredients, and also on Vinobaji's advice he gave it up after
many weeks. Later he continued a relay fast. In 1983, a weekly
satyagraha campaign was initiated outside Parliament House
under Shri Radhakrishna Bajaj's leadership. The campaign ran
for around three and a half years, most of the participants
coming from surrounding states. The fast-unto-death undertaken
by Shri Badrinarayan Gadodia of Bombay was given up after 69
days on the express assurance given by the government, through
Mr. Keyur Bhushan, MP, that the law would be strictly
enforced. Campaigns to prevent the exit of bullocks at the
state boundaries of Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya
Pradesh, Gujarat and Tamil Nadu were also conducted. Actions
have also been conducted at various slaughter-houses in
Maharashtra. In Jalgaon district Vinobaji 's associates, the
late Shri Vinobaji and Shri Yashwant Joshi survived
near-fatal assaults by butchers. Similar efforts at reaching
out to people have been carried on through women's marches,
vehicle tours, meetings, men's marches and such effol1s
continue.
The two
demands of the Deonar campaign are:
( 1) In a
predominantly agricultural count1)' such as India slaughter of
cows and bullocks of any age be prohibited by law.
(2) Export of
any kind of meat be stopped.
In
initiating this campaign Vinobaji did not accept the Supreme
Court Verdict of 1958 which he had earlier not challenged. The
government was incapable of implementing that limited law. As
a matter of fact, experience shows that a law imposing a
partial ban is wholly ineffective. Vinobaji, though aware
of this, in the context of his fast-unto-death made a minimum
demand in keeping with the principle of non-violence and
accepted the limitation. This is the tragic tale of the pledge
made by our constitution-makers and the repeated assurances of
the governl11ent. It is as if promises are not meant to be
kept in this country. Not even ones made to great saints. The
moral base itself has been corroded.
Top
Q.
: The
tale just narrated sounds horrifying. One must say that they
are indeed betrayers.
A.
: To
say that would be uncharitable. Undoubtedly, the whole story
smacks of breach of faith and reneging on promises but it can
be said that the powers that be have been consistent with
their beliefs and perceptions. And what they consider right
they continue to follow even today. Soon after Independence
poverty removal and development were the top priorities. The
fact that Gandhiji's followers and associates came to assume
power did not mean they all agreed with his economic
programme. The subsequent turn of events showed that those who
adhered to the Western model of development in the hope that
it would bring India prosperity and a place of honour to India
in the world community were in charge of the show. Austerity
and self-dependence, principles that Gandhiji preached, were
considered as holding up progress and were believed to be the
cause of poverty. The former Canadian High Commissioner in
Delhi has quoted an Indian official, very influential, in the
1960s as saying, "it was good that Gandhiji passed away
within a few months of India's Independence,
lest the country would have had to put up with his
eccentricities such as his love for the cow, opposition to
artificial means in family planning, preference to Hindi over
English, prohibition, spinning wheel and cottage industries
that are all obstacles in the path of development”.
Similarly an influential Finance Minister had a spinning wheel
set-up at his bunglaow to demonstrate to the nation its
retrogressive effect. These examples signify the view held by
extreme votaries of the Western model. This school of thought,
very strong even before Independence, is an offshoot of, and
under the deep influence of Western thought.
It might be
pertinent to elaborate "Western Thought". The
British and other Europeans established their colonies all
over the world during the 19th century. In addition to the
motive of avarice, imperialism and exploitation were given an
ideological form. Science is also advanced in the West.
Darwin's theory of evolution appeared around this time, given
this background, Western philosophers and thinkers honestly
held that their civilization and culture being new, were
superior and better developed. As such it was their
responsibility to undertake the uplift of the more primitive.
Imperialism appeared to them to be a necessary step in order
to fulfill this noble mission . So, their exploitation
gained an ideological basis. Lord Macaulay believed that a
single shelf of books of English literature was richer than
all Indian works put together. The same belief possesses
Indians brought up in or influenced by that culture and they
view everything oriental as sub-standard and inferior. With
this view as base, those who shaped the policies and gave
direction to the nation should not be considered wicked or
traitors. They were and are patriots. Due to their view of the
masses being ingnorant they see nothing wrong in deceiving
them a little! For them it is pragmatic to disregard a few
promises in the large interests of the nation.
Macaulay
initiated the system of education to produce people, who,
while brown in colour would behave as the rulers in every way
and become the foundation of the Indian Civil Service. Hence
the British built a government and bureaucracy based on
mistrust of people. This concept of mistrust now extends very
deeply into the fabric of Indian society. Even after our
country became free the same attitude has prevailed. With
mistrust in their own people on the one hand, and blind faith
in everything Western ,our rulers opted for a Western model of
development for which loans and aid from the
Western countries became indispensable. In this scheme of
things foreign exchange became the sine-qua-non. The
natural concequence being that the nation's resources
and all her output rather than being used in the interest of
the people of the country is supplied to the foreign buyers
who can pay higher prices. Needs and interests of the Indian
people are no longer the priority, they are subservient to
those of foreign nations. Such development process of
dependence on external aid and loans begets lack of confidence
on the one hand, and wasteful expenditure and corruption on
the other. These are inevatible. But the tragedy is thatThere
are many men and women who honestly belive that wasteful
expenditure and corruption are the measuring rod of develoment
and they signify progress.
As a
consequence of our attempt to bring prosperity through
external financial aid together with wasteful expenditure and
corruption we have to bear the crushing burden of debts. Apart
from the internal borrowings amounting Rs. 1708.34 billion and
Rs. 104.16 billion inerest thereon, the foreign debt stood at
Rs. 366.70 billion at the beginning of 1988-89. We often have
to find lenders in order to be able to pay loan instalments
and interes. The matter demands serious attention. The most
shattering consequence is the loss of confidence in
ourselves. The people at large stay inactive and aloof from
development programmers. Dr. J. W. Spellman, Head of Institute
of Asian Cultures, University of Windsor, Ontario (Canada), in
his perceptive analysis of the development pattern adopted by
India says (page 106/107):
"such
concept, the reult of a aggressive drive under colonialism and
imperialism - whether that was political, cultural or economic
does not really matter a greate deal - believes that the main
problem of development and the main obstacle to development
are the people of this country themselves.. It is not
necessary to indicate in greate detail the number of the
projects that have failed in this country - projects that have
essentially based on alien ideas, alien institutions,
ans transposed technology. It really didnot matter how
powerful was the organosation sponsoring those ideas.... most
of these projects, I am delighted to say, have been failures
in this country. So long as development plans are based on
Western concepts, the number of failures will rightly
continue. Development must be built and indeed can only be
built on the institution of the people. There is no posibility
of any meaningful development without restoration of
confidence, since confidence and development go
together"....
Development
will have to be based on the massive resources of land, plants
and trees, animal's and human-power, or else we will stay with
no success.
Dr.Spellman
goes on to say:
"Agricultural
technology of tractors and pestisides and pesticides and
chemical fertilisers are found dominating in every
agricultural college of India. It is my hope that the
agricultural colleges woll create a major department of
organic people's gardening which is not based on the
expensive, debilitating system of Western agriculture....All
you can do is to make resourses available for the rich at the
expense of the poor. This is the greast danger in following a
model that is based on alien technology. To sustain that is
the poor have to pay for it".
A farmer from
Gujarat expressed in moving words the plight of vilagers grow
the grain but our own families go without them. The only place
they are available is the market. The cotton we grow goes only
to mills of cities. The type of cloths we wear is
determined by others." Such economic manipulation,
leading to political manipulation is a natural consequence.
The result is total helplessness, total dependence on the part
of citizens.
Top
Q.
: What do
you surmise will be the situation if cow-slaughter is not
banned in the near future? A.
:
There is no need to conjecture as the signs are already
visible. In the absence of bullocks, human beings, especially
women who have to be yoked for tilling operations. A friend
narrated what he saw in Indonesia. The cattle wealth there has
depleted due to slaughter.They now yoke women for tilling
operations. He said that this should be filmed and shown to
the people. These facts when they become public knowledge many
foece people to sit up and think. In
the post-Independence era land distribution amoung tenants and
the landless was undertaken. The Zamindari system was
abolished and lands transferred to tenants. The Land-gift
movement sought to remove the inequalities in land ownership
and conferred ownership rights on hundreds of thousands of
landless labours. But the wheel is now turning in the reverse
direction. Faced with scarcity of bullocks and consequently
with uneconomic agriculture, small farmers are foreced to
abandon their land and a new ownership pattern in the form of
larger farms is developing. Beneath the glitter and glamour on
the surface vilages are milked dry and cities are crushed
under their burden. We must spare a thought on what these
symptoms portend!
Top
|