Hindu Cow Christian sheep
Cow, sheep, pig, monkey: any religion,
please
Dr Harrison John Theophilus
Cow slaughter should not
be a political or religious plank, if it stoops to that level we become the
laughing stalk of the West. All humans’
beings eat. We all have to eat if we are to live. Some of us eat vegetable and
meat, some eat only vegetables, and there could be a few who eat only meat. But
the fact is that everything that we eat was a living thing, including plants,
before we eat it. Obviously we cannot eat anything while it is still living.
Only wild beasts like tigers and leopards do that when they eat sheep, goat,
bullocks which they have hunted but who are not yet dead. We the civilized
humans do not do so. The only
difference is that the non-veggies kill living beings that can cry in pain when
they are being slaughtered, while a plant cannot do so. At least we do not hear
the silent scream of a plant when it is killed – may be a writer or a
politician can hear that sound. What you are doing is a fact of life, a
necessity of life. The point is that all humans across the length and breadth
of our globe have to kill to live i.e. exist on other forms of life.
Newfound hero of BJP,
whose portrait was recently unvield in the Central Hall of Parliament, Veer Savarkar had asked Hindus to take up eating beef
whenever there was a famine. Here are his words on Cow Protection: "O
Hindus, don't treat the cow as a Goddess. It is only an animal! Use the cow for
your welfare. Do Gopalan and not Gopujan" (Breed cows, but do not worship
them). He also decried all forms of superstition. And above all he rejected
casteism totally as unjust and inhuman. He never tried to defend the anomalies
of the caste system as some proponents of Hindutva do today
In this context a truthful picture of the issue is
important if we have save the future generations from complete annihilation. The legislation is being seen as a tactical step on
part of the ruling B J P to take on the anti-cow slaughter plank adopted by
Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Digvijay Singh as a political and religious
plank. Any legislation has to be first cleared by the Cabinet and then notified
through the ministry of parliamentary affairs before being brought into the
House for discussion.
|
|
We
also keep hearing about the religion directed conviction that the pig is an
unclean animal. All these attitudes
which many a time create social tensions, communal riots and most importantly
defy human commonsense are a challenge to every thinking human. Ironically not
all members of our thinking species of the human being use that faculty which
distinguishes us humans from the rest of living beings - our capacity to think
rationally.
Vegetarian
Hindus would say that the Gomata (cow-mother) is holy to Hindus, she is their
mother. I don' t think that anybody
would believe that we humans can be children of a four legged animal like a
Cow! Also some others also believe that
the pig is unholy or impure, hence we don't eat it. (We eat only Kosher or
Halal meat). What fault has the pig committed to be so impure? He is living the
way nature has made him. Wallowing in the garbage and stink. Yet bacon and ham
are really delicious. Mind you, I am not advocating that all of us start eating
beef or pork. That is a personal decision.
The
irrational opinion that any particular animal is either holy or unclean is the
point. There is no sense in getting upset whenever any fanatic throws a piece
of beef or pork in front of or into a place of worship. This should be borne in
mind by those who consider the cow to be holy or the pig to be unclean. The
point is to decry the mentality that seeks to build animosity amongst humans by
asking the followers of one religion to wage an (Un)Holy
War on the followers of other religions and asks for its followers
to butcher with impunity the followers of other religions or also the followers
of other sects within the same violent religion!
Incidentally,
the revolt of 1857, is also linked to this issue, besides the Hindu-Muslim wars
in the One Thousand year period between 715 C.E. up to 1761 C.E. many a time, a
victorious Hindu army was thwarted from pursing a retreating Muslim army by the
Muslims using cows as a shield to cover their retreat and prevent the
cow-worshipping Hindus from attacking the Muslim army; in the fear that they
(the Hindus) would end up harming the cows which the Muslims used as a
protective shield! Because
of such fickle-mindedness, the Hindus could not carry to its victorious
conclusion a war in which they had defeated the Muslims. Such events have been
recorded in the many wars that Prithviraj Chouhan fought with Mohammed Ghauri.
Prithviraj won all wars except the last one, which he lost, and with it he
lost, his eyes (which were gouged out by the fiendish Ghauri), his life and
most importantly he lost for the country its sovereignty. And we owe these
defeats to the feeling of considering the cow as Holy.
The problem
of cow protection is not that the farmer has become anti-livestock. The farmer
does feed all the fodder to one animal or the other. But he feels that a
buffalo is more profitable than the cow. In village after village we can see
the population of buffaloes increasing while that of cows declining.
It may
indeed be that the cow is more beneficial for the farmer but he does not know
it. Youth in a Goarkhpur village said that the Brahmins keep cows while others
keep buffaloes. That is one reason why their children are more intelligent. My
grandmother used to say that if one drank buffalo milk his mind becomes like
that of a buffalo. The Punjabis would use AK-47, if they hear this.
Milk which
has two components—fat and Solid Non Fat or SNF. Milk fat is essentially the
same as any other fat. Some dairies emulsify vegetable oils and add to milk to
maintain the required fat content. Buffalo milk has higher fat content while
cow milk has higher SNF. These beneficial effects of cow’s milk come from the
SNF, not fat content. But our dairymen and policy makers look at the fat
content alone. The milk purchase system devised by them measures fat content
rather than SNF. As a result the farmer has adopted the buffalo rather than the
cow.
The mother
of an Indore businessman was suffering from cancer. Allopathic treatment was
both painful and inadequate. Someone suggested that cow urine could help. He
tried and got wonderful results. Then he started promoting cow urine therapy.
He buys cow urine from goshalas and places it in a steel
container in front of his house every morning. There is a stream of sick people
who come and take their doze of cow’s urine—and most have got wonderful
results. The blood pressure of one person declined from 270 to 150. Another got
relief from skin disease. Such benefits from the cow may be real but most are
undocumented, if not unknown. In absence of this knowledge the farmer has
discarded the cow.
The second
factor is that of agricultural subsidies. The male progeny of the buffalo has
higher meat content while that of the cow has greater traction power. The value
that the economy places on meat versus power, therefore, determines whether the
farmer will maintain cows or buffaloes.
Present
government policy is to subsidize inanimate sources of energy. Electric power
and diesel are subsidized. The work of tilling and irrigation, which was once
done by the bullocks, has almost completely been taken over by machines running
on subsidies. On the other hand the government has encouraged export of meat,
which has led to a demand for buffaloes. These policies have led to the buffalo
becoming more profitable.
The
government could just as well subsidize the import of straw and increase the
taxes on petroleum products. That would make it profitable to maintain bullocks
instead of killing them and, in turn, improve the profitability of the cow.
The real
question is not that of educating the farmer about the benefits of organic
manure, use of better indigenous breeds of cows, gobar gas, the doomsday
scenario about oil and energy shortages and decline of soil fertility, or the
premium on ahimsa. These factors
operate equally for the buffalo as well as the cow.
The
proponents of the cow should focus on educating the people about the benefits
of the cow as against the buffalo; and building pressure on the government to
change its subsidy policy. It simply will not do to demand a ban on cow
slaughter when cow is seen as a loss proposition. Those seeking the welfare of
the people cannot ask the people to give up their economic welfare unless there
some clear social good is secured by doing so. It is indeed the responsibility
of the government to secure public good even if it involves economic loss for
some individuals. In order to evoke this principle, however, it has to be first
established that public good is secured by keeping the cow. The proponents of
the ban have to establish what social good is established by maintaining the
cow. This has not been done.
Most
of the alleged benefits from the cow accrue to the farmer himself—IQ of his
child, health of his wife, sustainability of his soil, etc. There is no case of
a conflict between social- and private good. If the farmer does not know these
benefits then the task is to educate him. If it is shown that the IQ of the
child increases upon drinking cow’s milk, one daresay many a mother will want a
cow rather than a buffalo.
Secondly, if
government policies of subsidies on energy and promotion of meat export are
leading to the slaughter of the cow, then the effort should are to get those
policies changed. It will not do to leave those policies intact and seek ban on
cow slaughter, which is a result thereof.
Hence there exists no case for a ban on cow slaughter. The task is that
of removing the ignorance of the farmer and studying the costs and benefits of
present economic policies. If at all the demand should be to change the
economic policies responsible for the slaughter of the cows rather than banning
the slaughter directly.”
In fact ‘The secular cow economy’, web site gives us a beautiful incite into
the issue: “The agitators have, either from ignorance or on
purpose, nearly ignored the most important aspect of the cow-issue, namely, its
economy woven in the Indian life through centuries and centuries. Even the
Muslim rulers of India. From Babar downwards accepted that the basic fibre of
the Indian Economy is woven around the cow to the extent that even reportedly
anti-Hindu Aurangzeb did not ado the cow-slaughter ban confirmed from time to
time by Babar, Akbar and other Emperors.
The cow is the foundation of one of the greatest economies in the world. It is
forgotten that the Hindu Religion, the Hindu Culture and the Indian Life are
woven around the cow, and in consequence protagonists of cow-slaughter ban are
dubbed religious fanatics, communalists and reactionaries by the foreign and
the Indian vested interests whose vigorous propaganda has created an atmosphere
of scepticism in the country, clouding the real issue. And yet the stormy
scenes witnessed in New Delhi on 7th November 1966 and the fasts of the
Jagatguru Shankaracharya have aroused considerable interest in the world.
Here it should be noted that the agitation for cow slaughter ban was not an
election stunt; in fact a complete cow slaughter ban has been advocated from
earlier periods of the British Rule as far back as 1857. Late Sheth Shri
Goculdas, the pioneer of the famous house of Morarji Goculdas appealed to the
British Government to enforce a cow slaughter ban. His son Sheth Morarji
Goculdas did plan to go to England and agitate for the cow slaughter ban but
unfortunately his early death foiled the plan. Thereafter his son, Sheth
Narottam Morarji undertook his father’s mission and did present a case to the
British Government in London. And throughout in the subsequent years this
demand has persisted through different persons and institutions all over the
country. Shree Jivadaya Mandli of Bombay has always worked for the
implementation of the cow slaughter ban and its Hon. Secretary Shri Jayantilal
Mankar has devoted his life to this cause.
So old thinkers placed the cow on a high religious pedestal to provide adequate
protection to the cow and thereby to the economy
The total area of our country is 32.6 crore hectares having East to West
distance of 2977 km. and North to South span of 3219 km. A population of nearly
50 crores is spread over this vast area. Of this 82% is in 666878 villages,
nearly half of these villages having less than 500 persons. And of course It Is
this rural area that does the farming and so supports the cow. In the
centuries-old cow economy of this country, nearly all-basic necessities of life
were woven around the pivotal cow. These are
Farming and manure; Food and nourishment; Transport; Fuel; Housing and
Medicinal usage.
The bullock pulls the plough, manures the land by
its dung, and feeds itself on the left over stalks of the cereal crops which
man consumes.
We have nearly 40 crore acres under the crop. To switch this area over to
mechanised farming, we shall need five million tractors against which we have
today only a meagre 31000. To make these tractors we will need 30 mm. tons of
steel and our annual production of steel is 4.5 min. tons. And as we have
during the last 20 years made 12000 locomotives, 0.6 min. trucks and
automobiles, what a long span of time shall we need to make the needed five
million tractors? Even if we make these alone? And from where the capital
estimated to be Rs. 14000 crores has to be raised. The annual depreciation of
Rs. 1400 crores apart from the required spare parts (capital and steel for
these) and the astronomical diesel consumption needs to be accounted for to get
the complete picture of the Tractor Farming Fantasy. Instead of bringing about
this situation by continuous cow-slaughter, would it not be more advisable,
economic and in the national interest to export steel and to earn foreign
exchange?
The problem of farming does not solve itself by employing 5 ml. tractors at the
cost afore-estimated. No cow, no manure. So we shall need to make fertilizers.
Our annual needs would be .40 min. tons (against our fourth Plan target of 1.6
min. tons) of different fertilizers. Please add the capital and other
investments to the tractor production. Of course the fertilisers will have to
be transported all over the country and in given time. Our vast country of
566878 villages has 6800 railway stations, 58300 km. of railway, 23818 km. of
high ways and 283680 km. of surfaced roads with 219933 trucks to ply over the
roads how are we going to make up for the transport of the fertilisers in
proper seasonal time? Obviously, the effort will involve further, capital
investments; further steel consumption and so on. Go on adding these to the
tractor production programme.
The socialistic policies of the Government and its capitalistic execution have
brought about a monopolised capital accumulation and though negligible in
comparison with the country’s demand, the production of tractors and
fertilisers and its many fangled branches have proved only to be in the
interest of that small monopolist group controlling the country’s capital and
economy but at the vast cost of the country as we should see. Cow-slaughter
serves the interests of this small group only. If we destroy our cattle wealth
even God will not be able to save the country. Let us see.
To plough our 400 min. acres of land we have 406,70,000 traditional ploughs and
for these we have 73 bullocks. Counting a pair per plough we need 81.3 min.
bullocks. Therefore it is clear that we have a much smaller number of bullocks
than required for farming alone. But surely a very large number is employed in
transport and other work, thus even as it is we are very short of bullock
availability for ploughing Many of us have been men and women pulling a plough
in our fields. The position is quite apparent that our land is not fully
utilised on account of shortage of bullocks and this fact reflects in our food
shortage.
To meet this food shortage, the Government have built many dams. More than Rs.
15000 crores have been spent on these dams, but there has been reduction in
food production instead of the promised increase.
In this situation we have to decide whether we should invite national
destitution by slaughtering the cow or promote prosperity by improvement and
increase of cattle.
To maintain high fertility of our soil and to meet our other requirements of
health, transport fuel, etc., we need 630 min. cattle as against our present
wealth of only 170 min. heads and it is this cattle shortage that lies at the
root of our famine conditions, shortage, unemployment, rural exodus, daily
rising costs and under-nourished health.
Let us see how cow slaughter has contributed to our spiraling costs and
unemployment. Unlimited slaughter of cattle and imported economic policies of
the Government have brought about a steep price rise.
During the 20 years of our Independence the price rise has been 20 to 160 times
as compared with the latter 40 years of the British Rule. As the tempo of the
cattle slaughter increased, shortage of manure and bullocks resulted in
diminishing food production. Milk and ghee production went on reducing and
prices started galloping. The price rise in the cost of cattle during the
period 1940 to 1967 exposes clearly the alarming acceleration of cattle
slaughter. Cattle are neither a hoarding nor a speculative commodity so that
artificial price rise can be manipulated. It is simply a case of lower supply
against higher demand. And yet foreign experts and their indigenous disciples
advise us that our agriculture Is deteriorated and production reduced on
account of excess of cattle population and therefore the cattle needs to be
slaughtered.
The American Bell Commission have advised that all
our food and nourishment problems are due to excess number of cows, that
India’s greatest problem is that she has no adequate machinery to slaughter
cows more than 30000 a day; that India should slaughter about 200000 cows per
day and earn foreign exchange by billions and start new industries.
And U.S.A. Is very anxious to help to supply modern
machinery to slaughter these two lakh cows per day and unburden us of the cow
liability. This foreign and the indigenous experts and their advices smack of
vested interests and pose the greatest danger to the nation, an unprecedented
one, directed to create complete dependence on the foreign food supply.
On account of the bullock and the manure shortage, our food production per acre
is diminished by stages on one hand and on the other hand, because of the ghee
and milk shortage cereal consumption increased. The Imbalance between
consumption and supply thus created. Resulted In higher and higher prices. An
accepted principle of economy is that when food prices raise all other things
and commodities start up the price ladder. It is argued that our population
increase is the cause of the price rise, but it is not correct. If population
increase is 50% than land under cereal production is increased by 100%, which
should mean more and cheaper food, supply and if there were no export; surely
the imports would not become necessary. Our foodgrain imports are multiplying
every year Last twenty years have seen this increase by 1000 per cent and yet
different parts of the country are falling in the clutches of famine and price
of food grain and on its account of other commodities are rising In tidal
waves, In reality the doom of our agriculture is solely on account of our
reckless slaughter of the cattle wealth.
Our Ministers and industrialists falsely daydream that our agriculture can take
huge strides by establishing scientific fertilizer plants. Our 400 min. acres
under agriculture will need (every season) 40 mln. tons of fertiliser. To
produce these 40 mln. Tons of fertiiisers annually, how many billions of rupees
will be needed? One fertiliser factory established in 1946 with a capital of As
7 crores is manufacturing about 2,75.000 tons of fertilizers annually. On this
basis, capital requirements to meet our 40 mln. Tons needs may be estimated.
Further, the use of these fertiliser costs Rs. 90.00 per acre while the food
grain produce attained is only 15 mds. Meaning an additional expense of As.
6.00 per md. Of foodgrain. And by these fertilisers the agriculture is
extra-burdened by As. 36,000 min. Can the farmer bear the burden?
And though in the final stage, the burden is passed on to the consumer from
where would the farmer produce this fantastic amount even before crop is sown?
A further danger to this Impracticable fertilizer idea is its monopoly either
in the hands of few foreign and indigenous capitalists or in the hands of the
State Governments. Apart from all these, the fact remains that in spite of all
the scientific fertilisers, manure is indispensable. Manure is needed to obtain
effects of fertilisers. Ten cartloads of manure per acre have to be used prior
to the use of the fertilisers. Therefore even taking for granted that all
problems in respect of the production and distribution of the scientific
fertilisers are solved and these are delivered at the door of the farmers in
the desired time, the fact remains that if manure is not available, the entire
labour is lost and the fertilizer remains useless.
So it will be seen that if being misguided on advice of the foreign and the
indigenous vested interests, we slaughter our cows treating them unproductive
(American Bell Commission advises slaughter of the 80% cows) we shall be left
without manure and all our investments and labour for fertiliser manufacture
will be in vain. The country will for centuries not come out of the most
unhappy and disastrous era. Further the use of scientific fertilisers needs
increased use of water. We cannot provide this. Even after spending As. 1,500
crore on dams, 26% of our population semi-starves for water. On what basis then
can we expect to provide the additional water supply to our 400 min. acres
necessitated on account of the use of the fertilisers? There are many instances
where adequate use only of manure and well ploughed land and no scientific
fertilisers at all have yielded 50 to 70 mds. Of grain in our country while
scientifically advanced countries like America and Russia with fertiliser are
not getting more than 15 md yield per acre though we hear loud praises about
over abundance of their crops. Does it stand to sanity and justice that we
should sink billions in fertiliser plants; burden our lank transport by further
14% and load agriculture with Rs.3600 crores of added cost solely because we
are advised that the cow is unproductive and so be slaughtered. instead of going
into all this unending labyrinth of problems; why not feed the so-called
unproductive cow at a negligible - completely indigenous cost and in return
receive milk, ghee, manure and bullocks, even of negligible value. This way
seems more sane and in the interests of the country.
The U.S.A. uses scientific fertilisers; but it has to use manure and probably
short supply of manures enforces the use of fertilisers as additive, for their
cattle wealth is limited. However, the adverse effect of the excessive use of
scientific fertilisers is now being felt in their output as also on the
produce. Their crop yield per acre is in no way more than the Indian acre,
while the quality of their foodgrain is much inferior to its Indian prototype.
Compare their red wheat with our Khandva or Pisi and their red Jowar with our
white Jowar. It seems sensible that the inferior foodgrain we receive from
America are not specially grown for us but it is the only quality produced
there and what they eat is sold to us. Both the U.S.A. and India have nearly
the same acre-age under agriculture and produce 100 mln. Tons each but because
of their population being a third of that of India, the U.S.A. has food
surplus. Further their daily diet has a very high content of milk products adding
to the exportable surplus. After 1947. the agriculture cost in the U.S.A. has
risen by 35%. Progressive mechanisation of the agriculture progressively
increased the output costs and deteriorated the quality. We should not remain
under a false impression about the vastness or prosperity of their agriculture.
If U.S.A. would not increase their cattle wealth on a very large scale, they
would never have cheaper or larger foodgrain output. Higher production per acre
is the headache for U.S.A. while that Russia is to become self-sufficient.
Lnspite of this fact both these countries boast of improving our agriculture
and alleviating our distress. Not only foodgrains produced with manure are
definitely superior in quality but also are more resistant to roting. Our
foodgrains last for years while the American varieties rot in a few months.
Here it would be worthwhile to assess the part played by the cow in food
preservation. To establish a buffer stock of foodgrains is the permanent
post-independent headache of the Government. To meet famine conditions and
provide against war-time contingency, a buffer stock of about 20 mln. Tons
should regularly be maintained. To preserve this stock the use of poisonous
insecticides and pesticides and air-conditioned godowns are prescribed. And
even after these huge costs the results obtained, are far below expectations.
The cheapest and most secure method of food preservation is to mix weight by
weight the cowdung ash with foodgrains and store it in containers. Cowdung ash
is insecticidal and germicidal, and moreover it absorbs moisture. If sufficient
number of cows is available in the country and if rationing and controls are
removed, people would store two years requirements in this manner. Fifty years
back foodgrains were preserved in this way. What the Government could not
achieve in twenty years the people will achieve in two years.
Irrigation by huge dams is a folly. Wells are the only answer. But are we to
fit pumps to these wells? Or KOSH (leather water lifter)? If use pumps, we
would need 20 mln. Engines and 20 min. engine rooms. These engine rooms would
eat away fully our entire years cement production as also iron sheets and steel
in huge tonnage. And we are miserably short of all these commodities. Moreover
all these costs would be on farm produce. Now if we propose to use
bullock-drawn Kosh (leather water lifters) for water drawing, no extra costs
are added. The bullock will plough and irrigate the land, carry loads and give
manure. Mechanised farming involving tractors, motors and pumps, fertilizers
and trucks for transport would add very heavily to the costs so that the farmer
will never be able to sell his products below the present prices and people can
never hope for a relieved and easy lif
TRANSPORT
Our agriculture and industry produce 100 min. tons
of foodgrains, 10 min. tons of sugarcane, 2.2 min. tons of sugar and an equal
tonnage of jaggery, 10 min. tons of cement, millions of tons of spices,
vegetables and fruits, 5.8 mln. Tons of minerals oils, 66.5 min. tons of coal,
thousands of tons of tea, and coffee, 50,000 tons of rubber, 11.1 min. tons of
paper and boards, 6.9 min. tons of pig Iron, 4.5 min. tons of steel, 600 min.
tons of grass, 6 min. tons of groundnut and a few min. tons of other oilseeds,
soap and millions of tons of chemicals, fertilisers, salt and 6.5 min. tons of
cotton and equal if not more tonnage of cloth and yam. Agriculture and
industrial production aggregates to more than 1,000 mln. Tons. This 1,000 mln.
Tons of commodities have to be transported from fields to factories and from
factories to the consuming centres, which are spread over these vast areas, and
the bullock carries the major bulk of this transport. For transport we have
1.21 min. bullock-carts, 3,58,000 railway wagons and 2,20,000 motor trucks.
Obviously, if these 12.1 mln. Bullock-carts were to be removed from the
operation, our transport and distribution system, and as a result both
agriculture and industries and the resultant national life, would be in a
chaos, for the reason that the railway carries only 180 mln. Tons and trucks
only 120 min. tons. Whereas the balance 70 per cent, or 700 mln. Tons, is
carried by the age-old bullock-carts. Therefore it will be seen that if this
poor bullock is done with either by slaughter or by negligence, nothing but
chaos will result. And yet we are moving in this direction simply following the
advice of the so-called experts (both foreign and indigenous).
Slaughter your cow, and your bullock supply is slaughtered. Neither trucks nor
railways can be built up to replace this transport for obvious economic and
technical reasons, roads and so on. Even if we plan and carry out the
mechanised transport (a remote possibility) would our farmer be able to bear
the cost of such transport? Instead, if we only export the diesel only expected
to be consumed in such eventuality (of total mechanised transport) we will earn
enough foreign exchange. Instead of adopting the right way if we slaughter our
cattle, which actually are much lesser than required, we have no alternative
but to face a nationwide unprecedented famine and chaos.
Let us examine further the price on account of cow and bullock shortage. A
farmer grows food in his field if he has bullocks he would bring his produce to
city in his cart and therein he incurs no extra expenses. But once we
slaughtered bullocks, his produce has to be transported by truck and of course
the cost thereof, resulting in higher price of his produce, will be borne.
Ultimately by the Consumer Price-rise results, and transport by trucks would at
every stage go on adding to the costs so that the farmer can never sell his
produce below the present rates and the poor millions ground in the price mill
may never hope for a respite and for an easy and ample life. This is not imagination,
it is a fact based on careful study.
As we have seen our agriculture depends upon the cattle and its removal does
not seem possible even in distant future. Our food supply from ploughing of the
field to the delivery of grain at our home depends on the son of the cow, the
bullock.
NOURISHMENT
Milk is essential nourishment and even a reduction
of its quantum affects the people and therefore the nation adversely. Total
deprivation is suicidal. Before the First World War army recruitment required
minimum 45-chest measure. But during the passage of time since more and more
cows were slaughtered, reducing thereby milk and ghee availability to the
people, the construction and physique of the Indians deteriorated so that today
the army has to accept recruits with minimum 29 chest. New Zealander consumes
one-gallon milk per capita and hence New Zealand has proved to be the sturdiest
and the strongest soldier during the last World War. Per capita milk
consumption in America is 5 lbs. while in Britain it is 2½ lbs. The British
Medical Council has prescribed minimum two and a half pounds of milk per man
for him to keep physically fit. Provision of two and a half pounds of milk per
capital four our people, would need 1250 m.lbs. Of milk per day. To obtain this
quantity of milk we would need 62.5m. Milch cows and an equal number for dry
period replacements averaging 20 lbs per cow. However against our need of 125
m. cows we have today 54 m. cows and 49 m. heifers. Most of the 54 m. cows give
less than 3 lbs. milk a day and possibly less in the case of about 80% of the
cows. Because of this reason along their slaughter is unwarranted; and if they
are slaughtered the entire social and economic life of the country would be
disorganised and in a mess. Moreover, if not for milk, even for the fuel and
the housing (as would be seen later) this low yielding cow should not be
slaughtered, as thereby the people — the villagers would be left in a most
helpless position. Such cow, though of negligible value in respect of milk-yield,
amply justify their existence as being very profitable to the nation in respect
of the cow-dung fuel to the villager; manure and most important the bullock
they could give. These forty million cows in their life time would give 200 m.
bullocks valuing Rs. 50,000 M. on the present lowest market value. Further this
class of cows can be developed and improved to give about 10/12 lbs. of milk
per day in about 15 years time, and forty lbs a day in further 15 years.
Instead of adopting this sane way if these 40 m. cows are slaughtered, then
crores of Rupees worth milk powder and condensed milk shall have to be imported
annually for our children, pregnant women and the sick only. Higher prices may
be demanded in our dire need and moreover we shall yearly lose 65 m. tons of
cow dung. A life of 15 years for such cows would result in a loss of 972 m.
tons of cow dung amounting to loss of fuel to the villager, manure and 12,000
m. lbs. of milk.”
A pregnant mother has to have milk. In cities owing to short supply of milk,
calcium can be injected, but what will be the plight of 82% village population’
There are no injections, no doctors and no nurses. And these people have no
money to buy injections and to pay for doctors’ services even if these could be
available. For them milk is the only valuable source of nourishment. The health
of the country, already deteriorated, would be racked to pieces. We have seen
the milk requirements of other nations’ and there seems no sense in
disregarding their cows and depriving our children and mothers and sick of this
precious and sole nourishing food.
We should fix minimum per capital requirements of foodgrains, nourishment,
clothing and housing and should see that this minimum is maintained. Otherwise
the Independence is of no avail to the common man. Per capital American
consumption of nourishing food are one ounce of butter and 1-½ ounces of fat.
Fatty foods are essential to body and insufficient quantities open the door to
many diseases. Against the American nourishment standard if we accept only half
the quantity, we need half an ounce of ghee or Vanaspati Ghee and one ounce of
vegetable oil.
Provision of half-ounce ghee per capita would need
19 min. cows only for this purpose. (On estimation of 10 lb milk per cow).
These 19 mln. Cows would mature 3.8 mln. Acres of land to yield 76 min. tons of
jowar and bajri and the stalk of these corn plants would well feed these cows.
The by-product, buttermilk would be 380 mln. Lbs. Both ghee and butter milk
would save 2 ounces of foodgrain per man. This health giving buttermilk would
reduce the incidence of sickness and illness.
Now instead of pure ghee, if we were to provide Vanaspati ghee the requirement
would be 255 mln. Ounces or 6975 tons per day. Today we produce 1000 tons.
(Here we do not propose to go into its demerits on human health and consider it
only from its economic aspects). Our dehusked groundnut production is 4 min.
tons which quantity if fully crushed would give 1 .6 mln. Tons of oil. (Of
course we do not crush entire production of groundnut). To get this daily
production of 1000 tons of vegetable ghee we use 375000 tons of the oil
annually. To get daily 6975 tons of vanaspati we would need 2.6 mln. Tons of
oil annually. For this purpose only 9.7 min. tons of groundnut will have to be
harvested and the area under groundnut crop will have to be increased six
times. The result would be so much less acreage for foodgrains. The loss of
foodgrains on account of this sixfold acreage under groundnut would be of such
a magnitude that the deficit cannot be made up with any large scale means of
whatever nature. Then again the transport problem arise. These 9.7 mln. Tons of
ground have to be transported from fields to oil mills and more than two and a
half min. tons of vegetable ghee to be returned to villages. This would further
load our already over burdened poor transport means to a cracking point. Above
all these vanaspati supplies will be monopolised into say, a few capitalist
hands, and the entire nation would be at their mercy as to the prices they
would extort from the people. The profits of these 2.5 mln. tons of vanaspati
will be shared by only these few capitalists whereas the distribution of the
profits of pure ghee will be amongst more than one Iakh MALDHARIS.
Decentralisation of the production of ghee between these one lakh people would
doubtlessly be a curb to any price rise by them for hoarding would be beyond
their reach. Further, because of production being in the consuming areas
themselves the transport has not to carry extra burden. Also one Iakh of the
Indian citizens would earn their bread in an honourable way out of the ghee
production as against a few hundred employed in the vanaspati ghee industry.
Industry is for people and not people for industry. Vegetable ghee factories’
uproar of loss of investment should be ignored and the factories be scrapped if
other uses cannot be found.
There are a few instances to show that the cow slaughter brings about price
rise while cow protection and propagation would actually and effectively
counter act it as also bring ease in life of people. To put it in a nutshell,
pure ghee is socialism, while, vegetable ghee is capitalism. Moreover it is
obvious how pure ghee production instills healthy national economy while how
the vanaspati production gnaws at the very core of the national life.
Now let us consider edible oil. One ounce per head per day would need 52,00,000
tons of oil. Industrial requirements are not included in this figure. This
quantity of oil would need crushing of 12 min. tons of groundnut, which if
crushed at mills would involve transport to cities and back resulting in added
cost to consumers and added load on transport means. More damaging to the
consumer interest would be the resulting monopoly in hands of the few hundreds
industrial crushers, and these wealthy gentlemen by whatever means would keep
the prices higher, the Government remaining helpless, onlooker and people being
stripped. In some areas artificial shortage may be created by hoarding resorted
to by these speculators while in others by zonal restrictions. This is
happening today. The profits of the entire oil industry will flow to the
bulging coffers of these few hundred individuals exploiting the common man. How
do we reconcile this aspect with our avowed socialistic pattern of the society?
Further elaboration on oil prices does not become necessary for the fact that
people of all the States have experienced to their cost that in spite of lakhs
dt tons of oil production and despite the fact that about 50 per cent of the
people cannot afford to buy oil, the prices are soaring higher and higher and
one or the other state is always in the grip of oil shortage
If this situation is to be counter-acted
effectively and the prices of oil have to be brought down, we shall have to
seek the assistance of the bullock. Gandhiji always preached that production of
a commodity should be in the area it is consumed. The entire produce of oil
seeds should be crushed in the traditional Bullock-ghani, in the areas in which
It is consumed. Each village should have sufficient ghanis in proportion to the
local consumption of crop. Having fulfilled the local requirements, the surplus
should be carried by bullock carts to the nearby cities. This would put an end
to hoarding, by decentralization of production and distribution through small
traders and so would check price rise. Such production and distribution would
reduce adulteration to the minimum and provide earning to the lakhs of
ghaniwalas and small traders and the profits that the vat oil industry Is
pocketing would be distributed among these lakhs; instead of among the few
millionaires.
This switch over to ghani would need 6,70,000 ghanis and 13,40,000 bullocks,
apart from those required for the transport. Mechanised oil crushing has gifted
us with artificial speculative hoardings and resultant shortages, zones, tax
evasion, price rise, and such harmful legacies; whereas bullock-oriented
industry would lower prices, provide living and employment to millions, create
a fair distribution of the commodity, and distribute the profits amongst the
people reducing their economic and mental strains.
If on account of the cow-oriented economy, the people were to get cheaper and
better foodgrains, sufficient ghee, milk and buttermilk, oil etc., their life
would be easier and ample and free from worry and their health would improve
adding to their capacity for work. As a by-product the drugs and medicines thus
saved can be exported.
FUEL
In our villages, the traditional cow dung cake
along with firewood is the common fuel. In cities like Bombay if electricity or
gas is not available, may. be on account of strike or damage to the plants even
for a day than what disorder and discontent life hell is created. Then if these
575000 villages are deprived of their only source of fuel what would be the
result? Even the thought is staggering.
Life needs cooked food. For 82% population of India in villages, kerosene gas
or electricity is neither available nor within the villager’s means. For them
the only economic and easily available fuel is cow dung cakes and firewood.
Gas, electricity, kerosene and coal are costly and in difficult supply in
cities. The situation in the rural districts is still more difficult. Possible
75% of the villagers may not have seen most of these. To them the only
available fuel is cow dung cakes. Before slaughtering cows, we should think in
what untenable position these 82% will be placed into.
insignificant though this problem would appear at first, its ramifications are
nearly attaining nation wide grave complexities. If appropriate steps are not
taken in time, the day may not be far when imports of bread and biscuits would
be necessitated for want of fuel to cook. We have six types of fuel available,
namely, electricity, gas, kerosene, coal, wood and cow dung. Electricity and
gas are city luxuries because we have no means to plan these within the reach
of the 566888 villages and huts. Even if these were possible from where would
the villager meet its costs; when for him to get two meals a day is a problem?
In cities like Bombay kerosene supplies are short so that eight hours queues is
a day-to-day affair then, from where are we to feed these villages? To most of
the villagers kerosene even for night lamp is not available and they go without
night lamps.
Thoughtless use of wood and coal as fuel has result in depletion of jungles,;
producing water shortage.
River bed filled by falling river banks denuded of trees shallows and dries
rivers, causing both water and wood shortages. We are at the dangerous juncture
where if we do not develop our jungles the entire country would turn into a
desert.
This leaves us with cow-dung cakes. Easily available, of this we can meet the
demand if simply the cow population is increased. For such fuel requirements we
would further need 80 m. cows, and if these cows were to give us 5 lbs. of
milk, a lb. per capital supply can be assured. This milk supply would save 2
ounces of foodgrains per head, annual saving being 8.55 m. tons. Cow-dung cake
ash becomes a very good fertilizer."
HOUSING
Before our own eyes lakhs of human beings live on
footpaths unprotected from rain, sun and told, their life a howling hell.
Deprived of nourishment, education and reasonable upbringing; their children
grow up in the gutters. Millions of the middle class society live in tottering
tenements always in tear of a live burial. The solution to this problem has so
far eluded all state governments and municipalities. Housing society schemes
have provided buildings for a few thousands only. And not even a full one
percent of the footpath dwellers can afford living in these costly houses.
Villagers having lost their independent small trades and professions as a
result of mechanisation, to escape from the increasing grip of shortages
created by rationing, zonal restrictions and controls, rush to cities to earn
bread. In the cities their only resort is footpath, a life-hell. We dumbly
witness this tragic downfall of the Indian culture and religion. Nobody says a
word against this. Nobody seems to have an answer to this most uncouth and
degrading predicament of human life settlement of this ocean of human beings
has to be found. Deprived of any human facilities, their children either
succumb to many sicknesses or, if they survive they add, to the growing
anti-social elements. If this process is not checked in time a large section of
such anti-social roughs will form in the society endangering the very existence
of the cultured and good and the entire Indian culture and religions would face
extinction. At such a stage, this internal devouring monster would get beyond
all control.
There is only one answer to this: a nationwide earnest for adoption of the cow
based economy at all government levels and its serious implementation with a view
to return this vast millions to the villages, providing them housing and
employment.
At the time of building of the Bhakra-Nangal Dam, the Government proudly
announced that the Aryans of Rigveda times did not know even to build a house
where today a dam of the vast magnitude is built. The officials seem to have
only heard the name of Rigveda. Even a volume may not have passed under their
eye. Therefore how would they know that the Rigveda describes five types of
houses, in detail. namely, those of stone, of bricks, of wood and bamboos, of
cow-dung and mud and of tree leaves. Choice of housing should be in
consideration of time, financial reach of the people concerned, the
circumstances and climate. Our cement production is tar below to suffice buildings
for all the required houses. Nor can people afford cement built houses. Of the
annual one crore ton cement production half has to go for defence purposes.
Cement shortage impeded defence constructions of Rommel, enabling Montgomery to
break through the German lines in one onslaught. Therefore defence requirements
have to be met on priority. A large bulk of the balance would be consumed in
large houses and roads, and industries, leaving a negligible surplus for
people’s small dwellings. Are we to allow these unhappy millions to rot on
footpath and gutters for the next fifty years? And where is the guarantee that
at the end of the fifty years the cement supply would meet total requirements
of people’s dwellings?
Therefore we should adopt the practical and sensible way of providing cow
dung-cum-mud dwellings. more suited to the climate, necessities, circumstances
and most important to the finances of the people of our country. Cement
structures demand repairs in about five years time while the garmati, dwellings
need a fresh wash with the dung and earth carried out by the owner involving no
monetary expenses. Two to three hundred years old structures of this
combination of clay and cow-dung survive today.
It is seen that even the housing problem can easily
be solved with the help of cow. Villagers do not get dung on account of the cow
slaughter and so cottages are also not available to them. Housing requirements
of the country is 9.3 min. in cities and 56.1 min. In the rural area. To
provide one room dwellings to the villages only would need 170 min. tons of
cement and our annual cement production is only 10 min. tons. We cannot wait
for generations to build cement structures. This mud-dung dwellings would
require dung of 6.30 mln. cows and with this the entire rural housing
requirements can be met and comfortably solved.
FODDER
One of the arguments by the cow-slaughter
protagonists is that when man does not get food from where to feed the cow?
Conversely, feed cows and keep them alive and allow men to starve and to die.
This argument is clearly misleading and false for the fact that men do not eat
grass and cows do not eat rice, dal and chapaties. Obviously men’s food
interests do not clash with that of the cow. We grow Jowar and Bajri and men
eat grain while cows its kadab (decapitated stalk). Our food interests are
interdependent and correlated. The root of our food shortage is in the cow
shortage. We have seen that if the cow is not there how adversely, to the
disastrous limit our commerce and industry, our agriculture and health are
affected.
The difficulty experienced in feeding cows is due to the fact that our
agriculture is industry-oriented and not food oriented, which means that
instead of meeting human needs, the agricultural priorities are made to serve
industrial needs. For example, groundnut is sown in 2.40 crores of acres,
yielding 16 lakh tons of oil. To get, this 16 lakh tons of oil til sowing needs
only 60 lakh acres. But til oil cannot be converted into vegetable ghee.
Therefore, til is neglected by the farmer because the industrial consumer, the
vanaspati ghee manufacturer would not buy this, as also the farmer is
encouraged by the Government to produce groundnut. In fact til sowing would not
only create a surplus of 1 .8 crore acres of land for foodgrains, amounting to
45 lakh tons of excess food, but would benefit soil, it not being deteriorated
as in the case of groundnut cultivation. Further, til-oil-cake is the best food
for cattle. In India rice eaters are about 16 crores as against 32 crores of
wheat eaters. For this wheat eating population 8 crores tons of wheat plus a
further stock of 3 crores tons for famine and war contingencies, totaling to 11
crores of tons has to be provided for. To meet this tonnage, 16 crores acres
have to be under wheat (our present land under cultivation cover 40 crore
acres). There is no alternative but to achieve the target. Huge dams and
fertilizer factories have, instead of helping towards this target, actually
retarded the progress. Therefore 16cr. acres should be allotted for wheat
sowing only. Of these 32 crores wheat-eaters about 6 crore are Jowar eaters, 3
crore Bajri eaters and 5 crore maize eaters. Now jowar, bajri and maize are
kharitf crops while wheat is a Rabbi crop. Khariff crops will yield 5 crore tons
of food grains alongwith 140 crore tons of kadab (stalks). Immediately on
harvesting kharif crops gadab should be sown yielding 100 cr. tons. This gadab
is also a good fodder and dried gadab is a good fertiliser. The same land can
then be utilised for wheat sowing, yielding 5 crores tons of wheat.
Sixty-three crores cows will need 175 crore tons of grass and sowing jowar and
bajri only we get a grass yield in excess of this need. Further by developing
graze fallow lands an additional 100-150 crore tons of grass can be made
available. If the people’s need of one ounce edible oil is met 6.25 crore tons
of oil-cake would be available. Twenty-six Iakh tons of cotton seed is
produced, lakhs of tons of jowar is produced and having procured sufficient
manure and bullock supply for farming our foodgrain production would rise
threefold. With such huge food production the cattle fodder does not remain a
problem at all. As a matter of fact we would have fodder in surplus. Along with
this, because of superior quality, world markets would willingly pay higher
prices for our foodgrains. To achieve this, first of all vegetable ghee
production should be totally banned. On our agriculture, cattle and the social
economy vegetable ghee has deadlier effect than even atom bombs.
AICC held in Ahmedabad under the presidentship of Late Shri Purshottamdas
Tandon passed a resolution to ban completely production, sales, imports and
exports of vegetable ghee. This step was in the right direction but for
whatever reasons it was never enforced.
The figures above should satisfy the reader that cattle feeding is not a
problem at all for us but if we do not completely stop the slaughter of the cow
progeny our already difficult food problem would aggravate into the question
‘What will men eat?’ and our rulers will recommend meat and fish eating duly
supported by foreign experts; inspite of the fact that fish diet accelerates
population growth.
Today we have only two alternatives: Prosper through propagation and
development and improvement of cattle, or destroy cattle and perish yourself.
DEFENCE
Now let us consider the impact of the cow economy
on the defence of our country. The atom bomb is the gravest danger to the very
existence of the mankind. Even the USA and Russia fear its outcome. So far no
defence is invented against atomic explosions. The Indian Government expects an
atomic umbrella from the Atomic Powers. But this provision is not protective,
and seems impracticable and purposeless. Manufacture of the atomic bombs does
not provide protection against atomic bombs. It is only a deterrent, as the
invading nation fears return attacks. But in the eventuality of an atomic
umbrella or possession of the bombs. The atomic umbrella would necessitate the
furnishing powers’ installations on our land and it can in return rain, fire on
the enemy territories but cannot defend us from destruction. And China cannot
be deterred with atom bomb. Our development structure if viewed with sound
sense and defence potential, would be found to be very defective. All our
industries are localized from fiscal considerations only and in disregard of
defence planning. In all industry-saturated areas peoples’ hardships are very
great in respect of housing, supplies water and transport. Now suppose we are
invaded by China and Pakistan. By enemy air raids industrial centres like
Bombay, Ahmedabad, Calcutta, are destroyed while armies are fighting on battle
fronts. This would immediately result in disruption of supply line. Both army
and civil life would starve of essential supplies and chaos all over the
country would result in our defeat. Germany lost both the world wars solely on
account of her supply line being hit. During the first world war, the German
armies were spread over very vast French territories led by great generals like
Hindenberg and Leudendort and yet they were beaten solely on account of food
shortage. At the end of the second world war the German armies were intact but
the Allied aerial bombardments destroyed their industries and distorted supply
lines and ushered in the German defeat. We should learn a lessor from these
facts. Our country is so vast that if decentralised economy were implemented,
even the retreating armies from the battle fronts would not impair or damage
the national life as the distribution of life’s necessities would remain
unimpaired and uninterrupted. Railway and Motor trucks would fully be spared
for military demands only. Decentralised economy implies the cow economy. In
this decentralised economy large cities are not very important; it is the self
sufficient villages and districts which are really important radiating power
and strength to the entire nation from end to end. The creation of such self
sufficient units is of vital importance, units not dependent for smooth running
of life on any outside help. Such units cannot be destroyed by atom bombs.
review the Indian History of many centuries. Alexander, Huns, Sythians, Timur,
Mahmud Gazni and Ghori, Nadirshah and Ahmedashah Abdali came like typhoons
blowing destruction and went back. Large cities were burnt, looted and
massacred and these invaders carried away fabulous wealth. But the Indian
prosperity and wealth did not recede nor did the inherent strength of the
country ebb. Because the heart and soul of Bharat was throbbing in villages.
Her industry was humming under each roof in her villages. And all this power
and strength and culture and dignity were symbolised in cow, for the country’s
economy was woven around the cow. Every palace and every hut had a cow tied to
its life and the foreign raiders were not able to pierce or damage this power,
generated in such a vast land in each dwelling. But the British penetrated the
truth; the root base of our strength and power. They slaughtered the cow and
broke the cow economy; hit the villages and developed the cities by
establishing industries. With this our prosperity departed and poverty stepped
in. Cities cracked villages and city thronged people were sucked dry by the
vested interests created by the industries, reducing us to the plight we are
in."
The temptation to atom-bomb Bombay, Calcutta, Ahmedabad and Kanpur is very
difficult for the enemy to resist but what would he benefit by bombarding
villages in the rural vast? No power would be foolish enough to squander away
atom bombs on villages to destroy meager life and few huts. The atomic armour
of both Russia and USA deters each against the other. But China fears none.
Russia forced the British retreat on Suez Canal by atom bomb threat in one
warning but neither of the top atomic powers have been able to impose even a
streak of fear in China because the Chinese strength lies not in her heavy
industries but in her multitudes. China cannot be defeated by bombardment of
cities like Peking and Shanghi. Her strength lies in smooth functioning of her
decentralised industrial and agricultural unit, the village. Both the USA and
Russia avoid direct war with China because despite the destruction of cities,
these units will function, war will drag on and it will be very very long time
before it can be won. Japan could not conquer China for years despite her quick
occupation of Peking and Naking, because the Chinese power was decentralised in
her villages, and defeat and destruction of each village the Japanese could not
achieve. An identical situation persists in Vietnam. Tiny Vietnam combats huge
American armies for years, for her strength lies in her jungles, in her marshy
lands and in her population distributed in small units. Dependence on heavy
industries would have brought Vietnam to its knees at a much earlier stage of
the war. Boasting of no large industries this tiny Vietnam has during last two
and half decades faced, Japan, routed France and now baffles the USA.
We have two alternatives, namely to develop large scale heavy industries, make
atom bomb and starve and become debtors by billions, (a further load would be
inevitable to accomplish this in addition to the resulting agricultural
recession) OR create such conditions that the enemy would have no temptation or
inclination to atom bomb us. My reasoning may not appeal at present but when
two of our neighbours would poise for invasion our remorse will know no bounds.
Pakistani disturbance on the Kutch borders affected our transport line, so that
wagons for commercial uses were difficult to get. What would happen if both the
eastern and the Western borders were afire? All our mechanised transport would
have to be employed for the military needs bringing all civil transport to a
stand still, all civil life to disorder and chaos. Food, clothing and medicines
and agricultural and industrial necessities would accumulate at the production
centres, transit of these commodities to cities and villages becoming damned
difficult. Entire civil life would break down. Chaos in the rear supply lines
would result in defeat of the army on the front irrespective of its large size,
experience and up-to-date equipment. Poland, France, Italy and Germany are
examples of such defeat during the second world war.
The cow economy discussed herein assures well
disciplined national civil organisation, non-stop all round production and
undisturbed distribution to the relief of the government to concentrate full
attention on the war in such an eventuality, because the enemy cannot bombard
home to home production centres spread over such a vast area. The cow is the
creative atomic power while atom bomb is destructive power of an atom. Power of
destruction can be countered only with power of creation. Destruction of
fertilizer factories or destruction of railways in times of war, or transport
means in total service of defence, any one of these contingencies would result
in a total failure of crops and the ensuing defeat on the war front. On the
other hand accumulation of huge stocks of fertilizer and industrial products in
the factories would create unprecedented financial crisis. Therefore it will be
seen that the cow based economy is a guarantee of the safety of our frontiers.
If the cow protects us from the outside invader,
she also protects us against the physical enemies, namely diseases, and that to
a higher degree. Cow’s milk, ghee and other produce gives immunity from
Tuberculosis, Raktapitta, small-pox, dysentery and nearly 105 such diseases.
Immunity and treatment of diseases with cow medicines will leave a large
surplus of indigenous pharmaceuticals for exchange earning export. Today the
cow problem has to be considered not only from milk and hide and skin aspects
but from all angles of her use and utilities. Enormous benefits the nation
would derive from cow progeny development against her negligible feeding
costs.”