Cow Protection.

1.9.2003

The TOI dated 24.8.03 carried an article by Swaminathan A Aiyer on cow protection as a hindutva plank. He quoted sources to say that our ancients in the land did not consider beef eating as taboo. His main quote was from Uthararamacharitham a drama in Sanskrit by Bhavbhuti who is consided second to famous Kalidasa. The same quotes were mentioned by H.Y.SharadaPrasad in one of his regular colums in Asian Age a few months back. A response to the later was something like an accusation against the columnist that he was advocating beef eating. This letter writer simply got wild when when a scholar quoted a very authentic source as evidence against todays hindutva claims that was anathema to Indians. Similar responses to Swaminathan’s column came in TOI dated 31.8.03 thru one N S Chakravarti. The reader claimed that Bhavabhuti (8^th centuary CE) about whom little is known. He wanted the columnist to read Valmiki’s Ramayana and find Vasishta was not eating beef. The reader cautioned interpreting Ramayana thru Bhavabhuti’s drama. The gentleman simply did not understand that Aiyer was not interpreting Valmiki’s Ramayana but citing Bhavabhuti against hindutva claim on Gomata. The letter writer seems to be not at all familiar with Sanskrit scriptures or literature. Does the writer mean to say that since Bhavabhuti is little known his literary work is of inconsequence? Can he assert who is Valmiki except the he is the author of Ramayana? Did he know the saying: “Uthare Ramacharite Bhavabhtirvisishyate” a great scholarly evaluation of the second great dramatist? The same ‘little known’ could be attached to all ancient Sanskrit scholars and literary giant such as Bhasa, Kalidasa and many more including Valmiki and Vyasa. There are no other evidences of their life except their writings. The writer also seems s to have very little knowledge of Ramayana traditions. No community in India recites Valmiki Ramayana in its original Sanskrit. Only Sundara Kanda is recited on some auspicious occasions. Most of the language groups have their own versions of Ramayana no just a translation from Sanskrit original. If the writer decides to read original Valmiki Ramayana in Sanskrit; he will be surprised to know that the story of Rama of Valmiki is not that of divine personality. Much of the narrative is down to earth in nature.

Sunday Express of 31.8.03 had another write up about Gomata wher the author quotes more scriptural sources to show that while the cow is considered as venerable beef was still prevalent. The episodes in Mahabharata are too and the author Vyasa cannot be considered as little known by anyone in India. Other than that are cited in Sunday Express, the Brihadaranyakopanishad in its last parts advises couple desiring to have intelligent son, to ritually eat oxen flesh prepared in Ghee along with rice and milk.

Mr. Charavarti will start shouting that the author of the Upanishad not just little known but completely unknown. If given opportunity Mr. Chakravarty and his like will get ready to expunch references not just beef but to all non-vegetables from ancient texts including the Vedic. It is not that we do not have such examples. The  revered sage of Kerala, the late Nitya Chaitanya Yati a commentator of ancient texts and a prolific writer on the subject of Vedanta in his massive three volume translation and commentaries on Brihadanyakopanishad omitted to print certain mantras saying that they composed of some obscene or vulgar words. Yati is referred as a Rishi by his followers for vast and deep knowledge of Vedic, Upanishadic and Bhagavadgîtâ literature.

In a laboured tome criticizing secular, for him Marxist, historians; the Hindutva ideologue Arun Shourie, congratulated himself as against K M Srimali in a talk show. The subject was ‘beef eating in ancient India’. He writes that Srimali was not able to quote from any ancient writings in support of beef eating. TV cannot be considered as any definitive debate. They are just talks. I do not think that Arun Shourie is ignorant of the vast references in ancient scriptures and literature as shown above. He should have accepted honestly that he has no knowledge of Sanskrit and therefor unaware of the subjects dealth in those literatures. He is hiding from truth.

 K.N.Krishnan