Problems of Cow Protection and Mahatma Gandhi

[Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav]

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist

Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- [e-mail];

[e-mail]    

Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India

 

 

Problems of Cow Protection and Mahatma Gandhi

 

 

 

Unfortunately today we seem to believe that the problem of cow-protection consists merely in preventing non-Hindus, especially Mussalmans from beef-eating and cow-killing. That seems to me to be absurd. Let no one, however, conclude from this that I am indifferent when a non-Hindu kills a cow or that I can bear the practice of cow-killing. On the contrary, no one probably experiences a greater agony of the soul when a cow is killed. But what am I to do? Am I to fulfil my dharma myself or am I to get it fulfilled by proxy? Of what avail would be my preaching brahmacharya to others if I am at the same time steeped in vice myself? How can I ask Mussalmans to desist from eating beef when I eat it myself? But supposing even that I myself do not kill the cow, is it any part of my duty to make the Mussalman, against his will, to do likewise? Mussalmans claim that Islam permits them to kill the cow. To make a Mussalman, therefore, to abstain from cow-killing under compulsion would amount in my opinion to converting him to Hinduism by force. Even in India under swaraj, in my opinion, it would be for a Hindu majority unwise and improper to coerce by legislation a Mussalman minority into submission to statutory prohibition of cow-slaughter. When I pledge myself to save the cow, I do not mean merely the Indian cow, but the cow all the world over. My religion teaches me that I should by my personal conduct instill into the minds of those who might hold different views, the conviction that cow-killing is a sin and that therefore it ought to be abandoned. My ambition is no less than to see the principle of cow-protection established throughout the world. But that requires that I should set my own house thoroughly in order first. 1

It is my view that we have not given careful thought to this important problem of cow-protection. How can we stop the adharma that is going on in the name of cow-protection? My reason does not function when I start thinking about it. Religious minded Hindus donate lakhs of rupees for cow-protection, but their aim is not served. In a country in which protection of the cow is a sacred duty, the cow is least cared for! Neither cow-slaughter nor cruelty to the cow is stopped. Those who sell cows for being slaughtered are Hindus, as also those who inflict cruelty on them. Not a single measure out of the many adopted for cow-protection succeeds, or promises to succeed. Why is it so? 2 

There is no doubt that, like the growing poverty of India, the cattle problem is growing more and more serious. But the cattle problem of India is, for the vast majority of the population the Hindus, the problem of cow-protection, taking the expression in its broad sense. There is, therefore, no doubt that we shall have to pay ‘a staggering price’ forever. If we have no ‘cow-veneration’, we could make short work of all the surplus and dilapidated cattle, and save the seventeen hundred and sixty-four millions of rupees which the writer has dished out for us. Similarly, no doubt, we could free this land from poverty by killing out all the surplus population, all the diseased, all the weaklings, and a few thousands of us may then live on this vast surface of the earth, with a few pistols or some more quickly-working weapon of destruction for ridding ourselves of those men and animals, ferocious or otherwise, whom we may regard as a burden. But in India, like the poor and the diseased everywhere, we shall have to have our brethren the cattle also, and we must, therefore, solve the cattle problem, as the poverty problem, along our own, or as some might say superstitious lines. I have endeavoured to show the way in my address to the Cow-Protection Conference. Within the limitations prescribed by religious sentiment, we must adopt the latest scientific methods. We must resort to scientific castration, we must find out an economical method of feeding our cattle, we must take the maximum of service consistently with the welfare of the cattle, we must increase the milk supply from the existing cows and buffaloes, and we must make the best economical use of the hides of all dead cattle. If we succeed in doing these things, we shall have gone a long way towards solving the cattle problem. 3

I discussed at the conference the problem of cow-protection and of social reform. As I see more of goshalas, I realize that the people do not get all the benefit they can from them. How very painful it is that hides of dead animals, worth nine crores of rupees, are exported every year to countries like Germany while we use foot-wear made from the hides of slaughtered animals and still believe that we are preserving our dharma! Marwaris run the largest number of goshalas in the country. They seem to be contributing most to the cause of cow-protection. But the money they give is not used wisely, with the result that the number of cows and bullocks slaughtered is increasing, instead of decreasing. Their quality is degenerating, milk is becoming costlier and its adulteration is becoming more widespread. What a chaotic state of affairs! Marwari friends do not mismanage their business in this manner. Why do they, after contributing money for goshalas, take no further interest in them? Does not a philanthropic cause call for efficiency and practical ability? It is in the power of Marwaris to stop the use of the hides of slaughtered cattle. It is their dharma to take in their hand, with a purely philanthropic motive, the trade in the hides of dead cattle. At present, we refuse, in the name of religion and through sheer superstition, to utilize the hides of cattle which die in goshalas. We thereby encourage the slaughter of other cattle, for it would be a different matter if we refused to use the hides of cattle altogether, dead or slaughtered. But no Hindu looks at the matter in this way; on the contrary, Hinduism permits free use of hides, in the same way that, though we venerate the cow, we regard her milk as holy and encourage its consumption. I can look at this matter objectively, since I never consume cow’s or buffalo’s milk and use leather as little as possible.

I have, from experience, come to the conclusion that, if we wish to protect the cow and the buffalo, we shall have to use their milk and hides and the manure which they yield to the fullest extent. If a time comes when we will not use even milk, we should welcome it; but, when it comes, we shall no longer be running goshalas and Nature will protect cows and buffaloes according to her own laws as she now do with other animals which we have not domesticated. Till that time comes, the principle behind cow-protection seems to me to be the protection of all useful cattle which have been or may be domesticated; and their protection, too, means refusing to kill them for food or pleasure and looking after their physical well-being, as long as the animals are alive, with as much care as we exercise in looking after our own bodies. If with that end in view we do not use their hide after they are dead, the number of cattle slaughtered is bound to increase from day to day. This is why I wish to plead with Marwari friends who want to serve the cause of cow-protection that they use their intelligence and their business acumen in one year, and, in the course of time, will succeed in stopping their slaughter altogether without having to entreat anyone for the purpose. Those who see no wrong in eating beef will not desist from eating it just out of respect for the Hindu sentiment, so long as it is cheap. Giving up something even though it costs little requires a sensibility of a very high order. Such sensibility is a religious feeling, and it can be awakened neither through force nor through entreaties. I wish, therefore, to make the same suggestion to other Hindus which I have made to Marwari friends. They should not only overcome their aversion to taking advantage of tanneries, but should also realize that, within limits, it is one of the essential functions of goshalas to run them. 4

With a little intelligence, some self-sacrifice and a measure of practical knowledge, we can save countless cows and buffaloes and thereby preserve the wealth of the country. An attempt is being made in these pages to explain this. This way of protecting cattle will necessarily ensure the protection of disabled and infirm cattle. At present, such cattle are a burden on us, and therefore, one might even say that they are not protected in the right manner. I am convinced that, when we have solved the problem of cow-protection in an intelligent manner, we shall be able to take excellent care of infirm and disabled cattle. 5 We should atone for this sin by infusing the spirit of dharma in that work. I have been discussing the problem of cow-protection with some rich persons here. These discussions also lead me to the same conclusion. Give me from time to time a detailed description of your experiences there, so that I may gradually get the complete picture. I suppose I told you that Chhotelal had accompanied me here. 6

 

References:

 

1. Young India, 29-1-1925
2. Navajivan, 3-5-1925
3. Young India, 27-8-1925
4. Navajivan, 18-10-1925
5. Navajivan, 13-6-1926  
6. Letter to Surendra, November 29, 1928