Myth of the Holy Cow
Book Review
Vinod Vincent Rajesh
Asssitant Professor of History
Manonmaniam Sundaranar University
Tirunelveli
Presented in the 29th Refresher Course in History
Conducted by UGC-ASC, JNU, New Delhi
Historians have greater responsibility in human society mainly because of their dealing with the world of facts. Of course, historical facts might be constructed ones. But when such constructions are evoked on the basis of mere myth making and false assumptions, it becomes historians’ duty to verify the quantum of truth involved in the construction of historical facts. As a true historian of higher merit, D.N. Jha, works with greater realization of this in his book ‘The Myth of the Holy Cow’. However, his task as far as this work is concerned, cannot be categorized as professionally meticulous, for he is not taking part or locating himself in a historical debate generated by professional historians. Nevertheless, the author encounters the problem of being a Marxist while handling the issue under focus. The popular mind which is ingrained with a feeling of aversion and apathy over time has to be sensibly handled. Such issues when treated by Marxists always remain excessively biased. Whatsoever, existing scholarship in the topic has been contributed predominantly by non-Marxist, yet intellectuals of their own standing, among whom very important are H.H. Wilson, Rajendra Lal Mitra, William Crooke, L.L. Sundara Ram, P.V. Kane, H.D. Sankalia and Laxman Sastri Joshi. These scholars have accepted the practice of cow slaughter as present in the ancient past. Particularly mentionable evidence comes to us from William Crooke’s ethnographic collections and H.D. Sankalia’s archaeological findings.
Insofar the selection of the theme is concerned; D.N. Jha has chosen one which has been purposefully cultivated in the popular mind by the socio-political current that gradually started cutting across the nation since 1880’s. It was then Dayanand Saraswathi started his ‘anti cow-slaughter movement’ and sought to establish the holiness of the cow. His fundamental slogan is to ‘go back to the Vedas’. But in this case, it seems that he is not inspired by the ideas of Vedas. The official history books to the present day have left this significant theme altogether. They inform us about sacrifices such as Aswamedha, Purushamedha, Vajapeya etc. But never had they informed us about Gomedha sacrifice. As a serious student of history for the past twelve years, I have never come across any material that depicts even minimum idea about Gomedha. Non-exposing of such facts contributes for evolving misconceived identities, particularly, when there are present forces that could utilize them to their advantage. That is what exactly Dayanand Saraswathi, the proponent of ‘the Shuddhi Movement’ attempted and subsequently succeeded in achieving. Thus was evolved a ‘Hindu identity’ of distinguishing itself from the other, namely Muslims, on the grounds of ‘non-beef eaters’. Usually, in the pre-independence era it was the British administration that strove hard to find difference between the two communities deriving inferences from the Sultanate and Mughal rule. But several rulers including Aurangazeb had imposed a ban on cow slaughter. Therefore, they did not take this issue to divide the people. In fact, in one of the land mark verdicts it favored cow slaughter.
Thus before Jha is present a complex situation in which he has to convince the popular mind on what is truth. It is in deed a difficult task because of the amount of politics involved in it. The Directive Principles of the State Policy of the Constitution of India speaks about prevention of cow slaughter. This may provide scope for vested interests to articulate their means to attain definite political ends. This apart, the problem stems not only from the communalists who fabricate history to their own need, but also from the charismatic and inspired souls like Mahatma Gandhi and Vinobha Bhave themselves. In the post independence scenario Bhave, who was considered as a political disciple of Gandhi, undertook a fast and compelled the Prime Minister Morarji Desai to guarantee the non-killing of cows in the country. The problem is one of politicization of an ordinary issue that leads to sparking of power. For instance one of the television channels in Tamil Nadu exposed to the public that the silver-coating in the many kinds of sweet meats is made of fat of cow and pig. The Brahmins in the state are known vegetarians as are other non-Brahmin dominant castes. Their practice of vegetarianism did not preclude them from taking sweets. But when the news was flashed, it was not politicized – probably owing to the weak presence of the BJP and other communalists in the state – and therefore, none opposed the preparation of such sweets and those developed an aversion kept away from it.
The book is at first hand useful for this kind of a tolerant section of a traditional society. Jha confesses of receiving unauthorized threatening telephone calls and reluctance of a publisher to publish the book. In the context of a situation wherein the freedoms of speech and expression are under challenge, those who take an opposition stand are not definitely waiting to honor the alternative thought. Therefore, he has to pragmatically confine himself to those tolerant minds which are free from bias. Jha in realization of all these, has chosen a simple narrative style which is unlikely for a historian of his caliber. The first chapter of his book opens like a mansion of justice in front of which is being assembled a number of evidences, ranging from literary to archaeological, stretching from the Rig Vedic period to the Age of Puranas and the author makes them to solidly speak for themselves. In fact he begins his argument from the Indo –European background. He clearly identifies the living things that could be sacrificed. He also distinguishes between a cow and an ox. He through the passages of the Holy Scriptures clarifies sharply that the objects of sacrifice are later consumed. In his approach, Jha effectively realizes the need to demystify what has been advocated by his potential intellectual adversaries. For one thing, the source materials used by both are the same – the Vedic Literature – which is abound with self contradictory passages. It is the method of interpretation what varies, and Jha utilizes his professional craft and deals with the misinterpreted sources first.
He for instance takes the term ‘aghnya’ in the one hand and in the other a passage from ‘Sathapatha Brahmana’, a later text of the Later Vedic period. ‘Aghnya’ literally suggests the meaning not to be killed. Of course, because of the economic utility of the animal it was looked favorably compared to other animals. Even it is utilized as an imagery to explain the nature of important deities such as Prithvi, Aditi etc. But it alone is not a sufficient condition to prove that it was kept out of the cuisine. The snake was from time immemorial associated with the male gods of the Brahmanical religion in one way or the other. But it is not a sufficient condition to explain the holiness of the creature. Whenever found out of its territorial limit it is attacked to death. Similar is the case of the cow. Particular evidence of butchered cows from PGW culture of Hastinapur and Athrenjikhera is being corroborated by Jha. He also explains the necessity of such killing apart from being used for food such as tuning the bow, etc.
Further, Jha proceeds to provide information about the most venerated figure of the epics preferring to taste the meat of animals. Surprisingly, he infers the Ramayana episode of ‘chasing the deer’ as an attempt only to kill the animal for its meat. A female of great value in the Brahmanic pantheon like Sita, equates the taste of meat directly proportionate to its beauty. Like the cow, deer is also a soft natured animal. But the temptation could not be averted owing to her early addiction and constant eating of the meat of various kinds. This interpretation of Jha utilizing the icon of Sita assumes importance in the present political situation, wherein the Hindu nation state is being conceived by the communalist and fundamentalist on the lines of reestablishing ‘Ramrajya’.
Jha as a historian goes in defense of the secular nation state which in itself is a product of National historiography. In my opinion, the state as postulated by many as a tolerant one is a great subject matter for debate. Jha indirectly through his book is sharing similar sentiments. Therefore he goes on arguing against the strongly construed idea of the ‘sacredness of the cow’.
No comments:
Post a Comment