An open letter to Shefali Vaidya: How can you justify killing humans in order to protect cows?

Published: October 16, 2015
SHARES
Email

It is not just the followers of one religion who are resorting to terrorist activities; hence, we conclude that terror has no religion. PHOTO: TWITTER

Dear Ms Shefali Vaidya,

I saw your post dedicated to ‘Indian Liberal Intellectual’ through a dear friend of mine.

Let me confess, I may agree partially on the facts with you, but I do disagree with your intentions. And this disagreement in terms of intentions itself draws me to write this reply to your post.

You dedicated your post to the ‘Indian Liberal Intellectual’, and blatantly describe him to be “neither Indian, nor Liberal, nor Intellectual!”

Ms Vaidya, can you please define these terms so that we get some clarity on the issue to examine how one becomes an ‘Indian’, ‘liberal’ and ‘intellectual’? Or do you subscribe to the idea that everybody in dissent is advised to go to Pakistan? Or is it the case that your post is a corollary to the Indian government’s failed call, if people are not going to Pakistan, call them ‘pseudo-Indians’?

What makes a man a pseudo-liberal? Condemning the Dadri lynching? Or conducting it?

The exercise of returning the award is giving away the honour received from various institutions and the state. Prize money actually means nothing. Your demand that they return the money shows how eager you are to strip all those who have returned the awards. Being a writer, instead of giving a peaceful thought about eminent personalities returning the awards, you conveniently label them as pseudo-liberals.

You say these liberals identify religious terrorism only when the terror group is not Islamic. But madam, the proposition that terrorism has no religion popped up when this world realised fundamentalists from all religions are resorting to violence and the victims are members of all religions.

Just like a rapist or a murderer cannot be identified with his religion, there is no need to identify a terrorist with his religion, because all of us, irrespective of our religions, are victims of it. It is not just the followers of one religion who are resorting to terrorist activities, hence, we conclude that terror has no religion.

Terrorism will not have religion when people, whom you subscribe to, call Islam as the religion of terrorists. It will not have any religion, even when the group you are opposed to labels certain terrorist-cum-lynching activities of rightist forces as Hindu terrorism. Your whole conception of terrorism and religion is misplaced and prejudiced.

Before we proceed on the issue of cow or animal slaughter, let me just say that I personally do not subscribe either to the dog festival or cow slaughter. None of the awards were returned ‘just’ because of the meat ban, or Dadri lynching episode, but due to the overall response of the government. The issue is not just the banning of beef, but the overall ban culture undertaken by the new government.

Ms Vaidya, you yourself are a writer and a journalist. Does your conscience really accept the notification issued by the government of Maharashtra, wherein any criticism of government has been declared to be sedition? Is this the so-called liberalism you want this country to imbibe and our future generations to inherit? Just imagine what the title of your open letter would have been had the previous government issued the notification: “After British occupation, the Italians have taken over the role of despots… Blah, blah. Sonia, go back!”

Does condemning the brutal killings and returning awards make you a pseudo-liberal? Or does creating a polarised atmosphere with riot-like situations make one a liberal?

Does justifying the lynching of an innocent man, calling it a reaction of the majority community and demanding silence over it when the state has failed to take any action, or name calling those who are condemning it make one a liberal? Or does creating a free atmosphere, irrespective of one’s caste and religion, advocating rights of all the citizens, irrespective of creed, caste or religion, make one secular and liberal?

Ms Vaidya, I understand you will question where these so-called ‘intellectual, liberal Indians’ were when pandits were killed in Kashmir.

But I want to ask you a simple question – is there no difference between Kashmir and the Indian mainland? You are comparing the exodus of Hindu pandits from a conflict zone, where a mass uprising against the Indian state and an armed conflict was at its zenith.

Is India a war zone right now? Was the killing of pandits a direct consequence of the government’s policies?

For how long will right-wing political parties play the card of Ram Mandir and pandits? Why could you not construct Ram Mandir during Vajpayee’s government? Why is the 56-inch chest now silent on the issue?

Why did your Bharatiya Janata Party-Peoples Democratic Party government cancel the flag hoisting ceremony on May 16, 2015 at Lal Chowk in Srinagar? Should we question your patriotism or should we trust the government’s prudence and call it a mature step considering the volatile position in the valley?

You ask these award recipients, why they didn’t return their awards when pandits were killed. Ask yourself, was the Indian government silent over the armed conflict in Kashmir? Was the Indian government siding with those who killed the pandits? Are you even aware of the aftermath of the Hindu exodus from the valley?

The valley burnt, Ms Vaidya! It literally burnt for years.

Today, the Indian government comes up with vexatious clarifications and shamelessly condemns the killing only on the grounds that the Dadri lynching should not have taken place because it was driven by rumours.

It is insane that to protect cows we are ready to kill humans.

How can you sing songs of Indian-hood when the very government in whose support you are bleating tried to enact a nasty land acquisition law? How can you sing songs of liberalism, when every passing day the government which you support is taking out new notifications to curb individual freedoms?

Ms Vaidya, nationalism is not a character of big talks and high values, cultural superiority and glorious past. Nationalism is not a characteristic of a handful of caste Hindus. In fact, it derives its essence from the sentiments of masses.

You say ‘these people’ will stop breathing if Modi starts a ‘Breathe Bharat’ campaign. Modi started the ‘Digital India’ campaign. By banging net neutrality, what is the use of ‘Digital India’, where net is not neutral and criticising government is sedition?

Do you let compassion and humanity stand in your way when you take the side of those who are responsible of botching up the very fabric of India? Do you let the teachings of love and tolerance of your own religion stand in your way when you bleat victim and attack those who are opposing the current polarisation of the country?

Do you just have no space for those who do not call God by the name you wish them to call Him by?

Clearly not.

Sincerely,

Vedchetan Patil

Secular, liberal, Indian and a Hindu.

Vedchetan Patil

Vedchetan Patil

A practising Advocate of Bombay High Court, who is keenly interested in bringing a steady social change in the society- based upon the ideas he believes in. He is also the Founder President of Hamlet to Globe. He tweets @vedchetan (twitter.com/Vedchetan)

The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of The Express Tribune.

  • Jayman

    When somebody talks about protecting cows it does not mean that they condone the killing of humans. That is outrageous!! The lunatics who did it should hang. Please don’t distort the issue. The killing of cows stir the same emotions as pork does for Yehudis and Muslims.Recommend

  • wb

    “What makes a man a pseudo-liberal? Condemning the Dadri lynching? Or conducting it?”

    Fantastic question. Now, let me give you a very realistic answer.

    What makes one pseudo-liberal is when he fails to blame Godhra incident as the trigger for Gujarat riots.

    When you don’t criticize Indian government for giving in to Muslim extremists and refused the extension of visa to a true liberal like Tasleema Nazreen. Of course, all seculars were quiet then.

    When you don’t condemn all the dozens of riots that are started by Muslims in UP, Mumbai over the last couple of years.

    When you don’t dare to stand for UCC. (what in the entire universe can be more secular than UCC?!! And yet the pseudos don’t support it.)

    When you don’t ridicule the authors who returned their Sahitya Akademi Award protesting the killing of Sikhs which happened in 1984 under Congress rule.

    I can go on and on about your pseudo-secularism. But you get the idea.Recommend

  • wb

    I am surprised at the quality of lawyers we’re producing these days. When simple logic flies over their head and they turn to irrationality, what kind of arguments they do in court? And one day these are the people who become judges.

    No wonder India has one of the worst judicial system in the entire world.Recommend

  • Brutus

    Mr. Author,
    Every word that Shefali wrote is drenched in truth and your long reply to her is nothing but a boorish rant. Go join Congress, if you already not a member of Pappu’s clan.Recommend

  • Hameed from UK

    If you are going to eat innocent human beings, better to eat cows instead.Recommend

  • Hameed from UK

    “When somebody talks about protecting cows it does not mean that they condone the killing of humans.”

    No, sorry it does. Numerous incidents testify to that.Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com/ Anoop

    Why are the liberals so quiet about an animal being butchered for its meat? Not just killed, but tortured?

    I appreciate the people who care for Animals as equally as they care for the life of Human Beings, who are just another species in the Animal Kingdom.
    People should stop using the word liberal, if you are selectively liberal. Stop this selective humanity.

    Tasleema Nasreen doesn’t require your sympathies, its ok if anti-women laws like Muslim personal laws are existing in our law books, but you oppose ban on beef!

    I support the non-killing of Humans as well non-Humans. Liberals don’t practice selective humanity.Recommend

  • Rohit

    > there is no need to identify a terrorist with his religion <
    religious motivated terrorism needs to be identified with religion, the writer seems to have never heard of ISIS.Recommend

  • Enkay

    wb : Thank you for your assessment of the Indian Judicial System. I trust you are now recommending that India follow the Pakistani Judicial System? Is that right?Recommend

  • JP

    Maharaj’s disciple, Sadhvi Prachi’s follower, Modi’s foot soldier, resident
    troll, hater of Muslims and Pakistanis, banned from Saudia, Emirates,
    a stalwart of Shiv Sena, an office chaprassi for Vishwa Hindu Parishad
    the Banarsi mullah, himself, waxing garbled gibberish from Varanasi…?
    Poona?…Mysore? Calcutta? Bombay? Rameshwaram?…Chennai?

    ET moderators, please print, this is the truth.Recommend

  • MaheshRao

    Yes Congress committed many blunders but you can not hide behind pointing at their follies. Keep your hand on your heart and ask your self ” Can I justify dadri killing, Mahesh Sharmas outbursts and deafening silence of 56″ ?Recommend

  • hp kumar

    dude your argument sounds hollow when you talk about kashmiri pandits.for a minute i want to put myself into your shoes and believe that kashmir is not an Indian territory ,even then how do you justify exodus of kashmiri pandits .How is it Indias responsibility to provide them safe heaven ?I donot expect you pseudos to condemn it…But what i would like to say that you people r axing your own leg by protesting against alleged victimization of muslims and by remaining silent when atrocity is committed on the so called majority..Also keep that in mind that muslims have very scant regard for human right ,freedom of speech etc…you people will have lot more to explain when situations arise….Now you r writing this piece on a pakistani website is beyond me(a country which has exterminated all its minority population)…Shefali should not even bother about your piece..Recommend

  • wb

    I’m sorry. But you’re a perfect example of a pseudo-secular. Why?

    1) I didn’t even say that one has to justify the killing in Dadri nor do I justify it. I wholeheartedly condemn it and I’d also like to see BJP MP Som to be put behind bars for provocative speeches and breaking section 144. Yet, you assumed that because you wanted to believe that I support the killing of Muslims. A typical bigotry of pseudo-secular who only see what they want to see.

    2) I didn’t even blame the congress for pseudo-secularism. There are plenty others. Yet, you brought out Congress, because clearly you support Congress. Again, a typical behavior of a pseudo secular.Recommend

  • wb

    I miss your rants man. You know how much I love you and your rants!Recommend

  • wb

    You can trust that a turtle is a hellfish for all I care! You can trust rainbow is a cloud’s fart for all I care! Your trust is not my business. LOL

    However, if you want me to answer you, then learn to answer a question for which you haven’t already assumed an answer from me.

    In other words, shed your bigotry and then ask a question.Recommend

  • wb

    Here’s a beautiful interview that takes off the masks of secularism from the bigoted faces of people like Vedchetan Patel.

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Indian-writers-guilty-of-double-standards-when-it-comes-to-dissent-Taslima-Nasrin/articleshow/49425201.cmsRecommend

  • abhi

    The fact is that Indian “Secularists” have lost the case due to their own prejudices. As it is clear from interview given by Taslima Nasreen in todays Times Of India. Indian seculars happily support Islamic fundamentalists in the name of religious sensitivity but their stance changes when it comes to Hinduism. Your logic about genocide faced by Kashmiri Pandits is shows your irrationality. There is no excuse that the center and state government of Kashmir were not able to provide security to hindus in Kashmir and they were killed by religious bigots in the valley. The worst thing is that these bigots are still opposing the plan to bring back these exiled people back in Kashmir but so called “intelectuals” have no moral courage to support hindus. Arundhati Roy goes and shares the dias with Gilani whose world view is worst than Talibans.Recommend

  • abhi

    Rightly said. I don’t know how can people so so balatan liers.Recommend

  • abhi

    how about being little less violant, live and let others live?Recommend

  • abhi

    I don’t see anybody justifying dadri killing here. Why you guys are not able to talk rationally?Recommend

  • Hameed from UK

    You mean instead of eating cows, kill people like in Dadri and Gujrat and elect the butcher as PM?

    I’ll stick to eating cows.Recommend

  • Hameed from UK

    Your PM did not condemned the incident and neither the Hindu good terrorists involved in it thus sympathising with the perpetrators. Your other BJB leadership has in fact come out and is supporting it in so many ways.Recommend

  • bhushanparimoo

    what justifies is killing of living FaunaRecommend

  • Javed Iqbal Butt

    A perfect world would be without borders,hate

    Right now I don’t want to fight with anyone

    Except myself to be a better person Recommend

  • abhi

    so you have to kill atleast someone, is it?Recommend

  • abhi

    These are your own conclusion without any facts backing that up.Recommend

  • Brutus

    Yes, we elected a butcher as our PM, but mark my words, one day Nick Griffin of British National Party will get elected as a Prime Minister of Britain and that would be because of British Muslims like you!Recommend

  • Hameed from UK

    That’s right. Kill innocent Muslims then blame them for electing the killer.Recommend

  • Hameed from UK

    Not humans over dispute over animals, like Hindus do.Recommend

  • Hameed from UK

    Mine and everyone else’s except the hinduvta guys.Recommend

  • Hameed from UK

    Shefali is effectively supporting killing and killers of innocent Muslim that is why every Hinduvta guy here is madly in love with her.

    She can’t openly support her good Hindu terrorist brothers so she is instead criticising the liberals who are protesting the murders by Hinduvtas.

    Very similar to how Taliban supporters like to curse Malala because she brought bad name to their beloved Talibans but not openly supporting Taliban. Bigots on both side of the border are the same.Recommend

  • Girish

    Meanwhile do check info on the writer…”interested in bringing social change based upon the ideas he believes in” …arre go baba…GO GO Get.. IDEARecommend

  • Kumar Anand

    Dear Mr. Patil,

    The only point that Ms. Vaidya is trying to convey here is, the “Selective Criticism” these people direct towards this particular government. If they would have done it after the 1984 riots(Delhi) or 1989 riots( Bhagalpur) or the more recent ones in UP(2013), it would have been impartial, but the way they are doing it right now it only creates an atmosphere of insecurity in the country. These type of incidences used to happen during the Non-NDA governments also, but neither the media nor these so called “intellectuals” used to cover it, the way they are doing right now. It is not the government which is trying to create an atmosphere of “intolerance” in the country,but it is the media and these “intellectuals” who are doing it.

    Also, non of these so called intellectuals came in support of Mr. A.R. Rehman when a Fatwa was released against him.

    Digital India and net neutrality are totally different issues. Even if( just assume), internet.org is trying to provide selective websites to the people in the rural areas for free, isn’t “Something better than nothing”.Recommend

  • Vedchetan P Patil

    In the dozens of riots started by Muslims, did Government of India, side with those who conducted riots. All as citizens we expect is, if there is an incident like Dadri Lynching, let government take action against the perpetrators of crime. Please discriminate between a crime by Hindus or muslims as a community, and crime by hindus or muslims patronised by State. Godhra incident indeed was a trigger point, but did Government of India or Govt. of Gujarat side with those muslims who burnt the train, whereas, when the so called Hindutva reacted, allegations prevailed for State’s inaction. Now that Court verdict is out and NaMo is given a clean chit, so I do not want to comment on it. So be it. Please see it for yourself.Recommend

  • Vedchetan P Patil

    exactly the point. it need not be condoned, neither it should be allowed to be conducted by handful to further polarise the atmosphere.Recommend

  • JP

    Blog photograph shows a Hindu woman with a
    fake toothy grin..smile?…sneer?…you can count 82 teeth.
    Recommend

  • wb

    LOL. When did BJP government side with the Dadri attackers? I only heard Jaitley, Rajnath Singh condemning the attacks. I also know that within a day, the attackers were arrested.

    So, your argument falls on its face.

    If Godhra incident was the trigger point of riots where Muslims burned down innocent Hindus, then why I haven’t come across any pseudos condemning it? Why have all pseudos blamed Modi, and yet never blamed the extremist organization of Muslims which started it?

    However, you have conveniently ignored the fact that when Tasleema Nasreen was bullied multiple time by the governments on the behest of extremist Muslims, these so called liberal authors did not even raise their voice for her, let alone return their awards.

    How bigoted of the so called liberals. In India, a liberal only means a pro-Muslim-Extrimist.Recommend

  • Bana Post

    When a non -muslim goes or resides to any Islamic state no matter its theocratic or secular,he or she has to obey Shariah Why the same can be said in the case of India.Recommend

  • abhi

    She is not supporting any killing. It is you who is imagining the things. Your analogy with Malala is also not quite correct. She is not even saying that beef eating should be banned in India. All she is doing is pointing out the hypocrisy of these “intellectuals” and how these guys are trying to take political advantage out of it.Recommend

  • Girish

    get out of your imagination of peaceful muslims , it was these peaceful muslims who burned a train in godhra and a village in west bengal. It is those actions that trigger reaction. Muslims should use the word peace carfeully coz it may easily backfire.Recommend

  • Indian

    Butcher now using his previous experiance..to perfection.Now we are developing cannibalistic taste and he is serving the demand.Recommend

  • Milind A

    So let’s see… Hindus destroy a 300 year old mosque, no Muslim is killed.. but Muslims seek revenge (bomb blasts in Mumbai) and our secular crowds rationalise it with “Hindus brought it on themselves” or “provoked Muslims by destroying mosque”.. However that same logic is not extended in Gujarat, when Hindus retaliated. nobody tells the Muslims that “they brought it upon themselves by burning that train”.. Fact is… you and your secular gang have never been at the receiving end of Islamic fundamentalism or are brow-beaten by them.. hence Hindu fundamentalism becomes an easy target for you.Recommend

  • Milind A

    Why should the PM condemn it when its clearly a state issue? If our PM starts condemning everything, he’ll end up condemning more Muslims… because more killings are done by them.. Hindus were killed in a village in West Bengal few days back, but none of our secular media reported it.Recommend

  • Milind A

    No killing can be justified.. But hypocrisy which is a hallmark of your creed sucks.. Keep your hand on your heart and ask your self “Can I justify selective reporting.. ignoring the death of Hindus at the hands of Muslims in West Bengal few days back… but create outrage on a Muslim killed”
    “Can I justify selective reporting to defame BJP on the eve of Bihar elections?”
    “Can I justify rioting under Mulayam’s secular administration, but Modi & BJP being blamed for it?”
    “Can I justify returning awards for so-called lack of freedom of expression under Modi, but refusing Taslima Nasreen an extension to stay back?”
    “Can I justify AAP/Arvind Kejriwal inviting Ghulam Ali to Delhi (after Shiv Sena refused him in Maharashtra), but the same Kejriwal refusing A R Rehman a performance in Delhi, in the face of fatwa and threats?”Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com/ Anoop

    If you can condon the killing of Cows, why shouldn’t others condone the killing of Humans?Recommend

  • meat

    Are you stupid? The cow is an animal, not a human. They have some animal rights, but those are separate from human rights.

    You trying to equate humans with cows is absurd and disgusting… talk about vegetarian fundamentalism…Recommend

  • absar

    I’d agree with you if the beef-eating hindus were also killed for beef eating and not just Muslims.Recommend

  • absar

    So you agree to Shiv Sena and RSS being motivated by some Hindu book for its acts against Pakistanis and Muslims all over India? You agree to IDF’s activites being motivated by the Torah and David? You agree to KKK and Nazi acts being motivated by Christianity?Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com/ Anoop

    Are you slow? Cows are considered holy by Hindus. Read the blog, genius.
    Do Hindus exercise their freedom of expression to draw caricatures of Islams holiest people?
    Just like Dog meat is banned in many states in the US, many states in India have banned Cow meat.
    If you insult someone and their beliefs expect to get a reaction.Recommend

  • Pradhan

    Did anybody support Godhra incident or did any one deny that it triggered the riot ??

    People are critisizing Modi, BJP and RSS coz it is under MODI riot happened and thousands people killed and million people displaced.

    problem is the sick mindset that people like yourself want to force down people’s throat that riot was a good thing since, hindu’s got killed. instead of condemning both actions.

    about returning the award, it is their award and it is upto them when they return, when they keep and when they speak as per their thought and thinking now as per your ideas and hopes. I think they have a far better judgement then you.Recommend

  • Abu Zubair

    people like you are shame to the countryRecommend

  • Vibhu Khanna

    So because cows are considered holy by Hindus, they have the same rights as humans do? How can you value the lives of cattle as the same as the lives of Indian citizens??
    Do you realize that a lot of Dalits, and lower caste hindus are completely fine consuming beef? And that Kashmiri Pundits also don’t consider beef eating to be against their beliefs?
    The fact that you consider “the Hindus” to be some sort of a monolithic people shows your ignorance. The Hindus are far too diverse in every possible way for them to be bracketed, and for you too say that their beliefs are being insulted.
    Wow, your last statement was the equivalent of Rajiv Gandhi’s big tree falls, the earth shakes comment. You need to re-evaluate your priorities regarding the value of human life as against religious beliefs.
    So ridiculous.Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com/ Anoop

    If millions of people consider an animal to be manifestation of their God and hence, looks at them at as a part of their family or a part of their belief system, you HAVE to respect it. However rational or irrational it might seem, common decensy is to respect that belief, especially if it does nobody any harm.
    Saying some Hindus consume Beef in violation of this decency doesn’t make it right. If its wrong, its wrong,.. The perpetrator is a Hindu or Muslim doesn’t matter. Indian ethos have pushed for non-violence and as an extension – Vegetarianism, which is not only good for the body, but also for the environment. Part of this push is to view Animals as manifestation of Gods – Cows, Snakes, Elephants,even Rats! You cannot expect to hurt someone’s belief and expect no retaliation. I am not justifying violence, but trying to paint a realistic picture of the world.

    Its not uncommon for states to ban the sale of meat or outright killing of their favourite animals. For example: In some of the states in the US, killing a Dog and/or a Cat for its meat will land you in jail. Human Rights is in the realm of Humans. Lets not bring Animals into it. It is the right of a Human being to live peacefully and enjoy all the Rights enshrined in our Consitution. Eating Animals a set of people consider sacred is not one of those rights and don’t be arrogant enough to think otherwise. We too are part of Animal kingdom and lets minimize violence whereever possible.Recommend

  • Vibhu Khanna

    It’s definitely within my rights in the constitution to not be killed for eating an animal that is considered sacred by a certain group of people.
    And what about my fundamental right of practicing my religion? There are communities in India who eat beef as a part of their culture, are you going to deny them those rights?
    Let me give you some Hindu scriptures for perspective.
    This is from an article in The Hindu.
    “Many gods such as Indra and Agni are described as having special
    preferences for different types of flesh – Indra had weakness for
    bull’s meat and Agni for bull’s and cow’s. It is recorded that
    the Maruts and the Asvins were also offered cows. In the Vedas
    there is a mention of around 250 animals out of which at least 50
    were supposed to be fit for sacrifice and consumption. In the
    Mahabharata there is a mention of a king named Rantideva who
    achieved great fame by distributing foodgrains and beef to
    Brahmins. Taittiriya Brahman categorically tells us: `Verily the
    cow is food’ (atho annam via gauh) and Yajnavalkya’s insistence
    on eating the tender (amsala) flesh of the cow is well known.
    Even later Brahminical texts provide the evidence for eating
    beef. Even Manusmriti did not prohibit the consumption of beef.
    Recommend

  • Duttatarayan N.

    What is this personal blog post doing on Express Tribune? what sense will it make if an Indian writes an open letter to an Indian on a Pakistani forum? if you want to write an open letter to her then please do so on her facebook/ twitter handles.Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com/ Anoop

    You are half right. You have the right to live. But, in real life hardly works the same way does it. You abuse someone’s mother and he will not sue you for verbal abuse, but punch you in the face. Goumata is equivalent to a mother for millions of people. You are abusing the millions and expecting the mob to not act like a mob. Genius!

    You are still going back to the past to justify someone’s actions. Forget the past. If millions in India today believe Cow as a manifestation of God, respect it. Don’t expect them to change their beliefs because you think they are wrong or stupid, however strong your case is. I would side with you if they are believing in something which is harmful to the society as a whole – but no, they believe in worshipping an Animal, which truly takes the role of a Mother, whose milk nourishes us for the rest of our lives. Just like Hindus revere many Animals, Cow is in the list as well. We are part of Animal kingdom and our life is no more sacred than any other out there.

    There is no Religion out there, including Islam, which mandates eating Beef to be a true follower of that Religion. Just like you expect Hindus to change their beliefs overnight, Hindus expect Muslims to change their eating habits – no, not change, but modify to respect their beliefs. To expect Hindus to change their core beliefs is highly irrational. Eating habits change all the time with each generation. You should know this, yet it would seem you are more interested in stirring things up than actually finding solutions. What a guy!Recommend

  • Vibhu Khanna

    You do realize that you’re being self contradictory by saying that right? If I have the right to life, which is a fundamental right, nobody, under any circumstances whatsoever, can take my life, other than by a due process of law administered by the state.

    If millions of Hindus believe that the cow is sacred to them, they have the right to believe that. But the fact of the matter remains, that those millions of Hindus don’t constitute the entire population of Hindus themselves! The most basic Hindu scriptures explicitly say that eating is beef totally okay. So I can be a practicing Hindu and eat beef as well. You don’t seem to realize that a huge population of the scheduled casts, the dalits and the OBC’s all consume beef. Are you trying to say they are not Hindu? I’m not going to the past to justify anyones actions, I am telling you that beef eating among Hindus is very much a part of the present, and I’m giving you the holiest hindu scriptures as a backing for that. You’re the one who’s using a ridiculous belief to justify the brutal killing of innocent people.

    It’s so reprehensible that in your statements you keep accepting it as a fact of life that mob lynching is a natural reaction and therefore we must not be surprised that it happens.

    A belief, however benign it may be on the face of it, which results in innocent people dying is harmful to the society as a whole.Recommend

  • Vibhu Khanna

    I expect them to keep their beliefs as a matter of personal choice and not enforce it on others through violence.
    Just because jains believe that eating meat is entirely wrong, would it be justified for them to kill someone if they eat meat? Should everyone stop eating meat in order to “respect their beliefs”?
    Muslims think that eating pork is against their religion, so pork should be banned as well right?
    If our lives are no more sacred than those of animals, how is it right for humans to die because you don’t want an animal to be killed? Are you hearing yourself?
    By imposing the beliefs of a section of Hindus over the entire country, we are destroying the very basic principle upon which this country’s constitution functions. To be secular is to respect ALL beliefs in such a way that one does not impede over the other. By making laws that basically impose a majoritarian belief over the minority, you end up destroying secularism. Even Gandhi, the biggest advocate of non-violence and practicing Hindu didn’t believe in banning cow slaughter because he thought that would be imposing Hindu (Brahminical Hindu) beliefs over the rest of the country.
    By giving such arguments you only represent the brahminical form of Hinduism, which is probably the worst form (read rigid caste system). You don’t represent the majority of this country in any way, because you think that a mob lynching someone on the rumours of eating beef is just a natural reaction. The solution here is not to infringe on the rights and lives of minorities, but to bring to justice and severely punish all those who carry out acts of violence based on religion. That is the function of the Indian government, and when MP’s of the BJP make statements justifying and perpetuating religious intolerance, there is a serious problem. And by arguing the way you have, you only end up on their side.
    We need to think about human rights in this country first before we start equating the lives of animals to the lives of our country’s citizens.Recommend

  • guest

    I don’t think anyone justifies Dadri killing…..Recommend

  • guest

    Nope, your comments are made up.Recommend

  • guest

    equating life with life. killing even an ant in hinduism is a sin!Recommend

  • guest

    Cows have the same life as life. It is a twisted idea to think that humans are above. But no one is justifying killing of any kind, human or animal. No one is justifying dadri killingRecommend

  • guest

    you guys have a liking for picking out texts. Hinduism is to be understood in context, not one line here and the other there. So when PETA comes and talks about animals rights that is great but if Hinduism has inherent ideas of animals rights and gives special status to man animals that is incorrect? strange!!Recommend

  • guest

    one lone incident should not be looked at as a norm. no one is forcing. beef has many environmental consequences as wellRecommend

  • Vibhu Khanna

    What is incorrect is forcing your belief on someone else who doesn’t believe what you think is right. I would condemn PETA in the same way if they started threatening people with death for not treating animals well. Its so god damned ridiculous that these extremist Hindu groups use violence to preach non-violence against an animal. The problem here is the double standard. One one hand you use the ethical treatment of animals card, when its so obvious that the underlying intention is majoritarian domination, and on the other hand you find it wrong if someone is outrgaed at the fact that you used violence to present your point!Recommend

  • Vibhu Khanna

    Im sorry but hinduism is what the believer makes it out to be. You are allowed to belive in what you want to believe and that is the beauty and the tragedy of it. What is inherently hindu, is to be inclusive and tolerant of every belief, there is no other fundamental “hindu” belief because its not a religion, it doesnt have one particular holy book, and different hindus can believe in diamemtrically different things and still be hindu. Therefore, to say that cow slaughter outrages athe beleifs of hindus as a whole is fundamentally wrong because that statement is a lie in itself which the extremist hindu groups who are actually a minority are trying to falsely represent the views of the majority. The problem arising now is that these groups find themselves emboldened because of rhe BJP govt. And what is even more surprising is the outraged that bhakts show at others for protesting now and not protesting during the congress regime. So if someone didn’t protest back then, they have no right to voice their displeasure now? So not protesting in the past precludes protest in the future? Then nobody should be protesting at all and we should do away with protests altogether, even though its one of the most essential things in the functioning of a democracy.Recommend

  • SupernaK

    Dear Ms.Vaidya
    Internet Hindus are the scourge of indian social media. They are so aggressive that they will even send spam mail you with their nonsensical ideas in order to create a confrontation. They are so uncouth that in every discussion they will abuse and throw random insults which are totally unconnected to the discussion. They are also downright liars and therefore never answer a straight question. Everything that liberal intellectuals say about them is correct.

    I am not an Internet Hindu, I am a liberal intellectual and proud to be one.Recommend

  • guest

    The problem is that Hinduism’s inherent democracy is used to sabotage it. Where as other faiths are not democratic to begin with. There is no comparison. There is no hindu extremism. Forget the sentiments of hinduism–beef is environmentally unfriendly, something that hindu mind knew ages ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-VO_zZBBt8Recommend

  • guest

    no majoritarian domination. India and hinduism are synonymous. Islam and Christiainty have been influenced by hinduism in India as well. And hence sufism. But India is the only HIndu nation today…it not upholding hindu voice in India where else? religions of conversation would definitely have that voice suppress down and people like you support itRecommend

  • guest

    one lone incident. one lone incident.Recommend

  • guest

    humans and animals are equally important. no one should be killed. one lone incident. always condemn it. sorry that happened. killing cows or even an ant is not acceptable. or killing a human for that matter. why must we not create a country where we respect life, from an ant to an elephant—-including a human being.Recommend

  • Vibhu Khanna

    India is not a Hindu nation, and it never will be. The only Hindu nation in this world is Nepal. Our constitution clearly states that India is secular, therefore it cannot be a nation for Hindus only. You say that there is no majoritarian domination, and in the same breath you call India a Hindu nation. You do realise you’ve completely contradicted yourself right?
    Sufism was not a result of Hindu influences over Islam. Sufism is inherently and originally a part of Islam. It didn’t even start in India, it started in Iraq, Iran and Turkey and spread to India from there. All you have to do to get rid of your ignorance is google it.
    I would condemn the voice in my community which says that India is a nation for Hindus. It most definitely is not. It’s a nation for everyone.
    I would condemn religious extremists of every kind as they are a bane to peace and progress in any nation.
    I feel bad that the ban which was imposed on the RSS after Mahatma Gandhis assassination, was lifted. It makes me nauseous that the same RSS now celebrates Nathuram Godse and Savarkar as national heroes, when actually they were nothing but national traitors.
    Ancient Hindus, who’s minds were indeed great, never said that the cow must not be killed. Something which I’ve tried to tell you again and again, but you refuse to listen.
    If beef is environmentally unfriendly, do you think that goats, chickens, buffalos, pigs are all preserving the environment? Why is the ban only on cow slaughter? Why not Buffaloes? Do they not provide the same nourishment that cows do? Why this discrimination? Please don’t give me ridiculous environmental and ethical reasons.Recommend

  • guest

    India is not a Hindu nation, and it
    never will be. The only Hindu nation in this world is Nepal.

    India always was, and will be Hindu,
    if it weren’t then it would be like Pakistan and
    Bangladesh. The example is before
    you. Nepal has chosen to be a secular,
    under the maoist pressure and it might not be long before they go the communist
    way. —both choices to their own detriment.Recommend

  • Vibhu Khanna

    Are you really thick headed or is your prejudice blinding you? The only reason why India is not like Pakistan or Bangladesh is that we have chosen to be secular, and not a nation formed on the basis of one religion. Pakistan and Bangladesh have both faced very serious problems because of promoting one religion. This whole debate regarding intolerance is to ensure that India does not go down the same path. Hindu extremist groups like the RSS are no different in any way from Islamic extremists in their thinking. It’s just that Islamic extremists have become a lot more violent in Pakistan because their theocratic state has allowed them to.
    Similarly if we give the Hindutva groups the same amount of freedom, we shall be faced with the same situation that Pakistan now finds itself in.
    Anyway, that you claim India as a nation only for Hindus shows that your support for the ban on cow slaughter is purely religious and nothing else. Your arguments regarding the environment and ethics are just to cover up your communal thinking which you have now openly admitted. It’s because of people like you that India and Hindus get a bad name. You’re in the minority even among the Hindus anyway. If all Hindus believed that India is a Hindu nation, then wouldn’t be secular at all, and there wouldn’t even be a debate regarding minority rights.Recommend

  • guest

    Are you really thick headed or is your prejudice blinding you? the only reason we are secular is because we are largely Hindu, and hinduism is inherently secular…….Recommend

  • guest

    Mr. VK, you probably have either a colonised hindu mind or may be you have a different name…like khan instead of Khanna…breeding animals to eat them is unfriendly period. fish is a different issue although many aspects come there as well. Animals have their own family planning methods….they have breeding periods but that is increased artificially when they have to be bred to be eaten. and that leads to generating more farms for just feeding them….and other aspects connected to it. step out of your prejudice and anti-hindu rhetoric and open your eyes to the wisdom that hinduism and many other pagan religions gave.Recommend

  • guest

    your statement ‘Im sorry but hinduism is what the believer makes it out to be’ is usually made by either those who have not read or practiced hinduism or those who are anti-hindu and want to write it off as ‘everything goes’. there is such a thing has dharma while there are exceptions, dharmic acts are not always relative….Recommend

  • guest

    what is incorrect is knowing that beef eating and breeding animals to eat is environmentally unfriendly, and still forcing your ideas that there is nothing wrong in it and ignoring the environmental argument (which is inherent in hinduism, because it is the wisest religion existing today) –and keep ranting about ‘our wish, our belief, and suggesting vegetarianism is imposing beliefs.’ if it were, vegetarianism and ecological foods would not be on the rise all over the ‘western developed world’ they kill the knowledge else where and then claim that they invented it.Recommend

  • Vibhu Khanna

    I don’t think we can carry out a constructive discussion if you keep contradicting yourself and questioning my identity.
    Anyway, here are my last comments.
    1. It’s not Hindu wisdom to justify violence against human beings while advocating non-violence on cows.
    2. I would have accepted your environmental argument, if the banning of cows extended to a ban on meat entirely, whether it is cows, goats, buffaloes or chickens.
    3. Due to the above it’s clearly obvious that your agenda is religious and not environmental or ethical.
    4. You say India is a Hindu nation, and at the same time admit that India is only secular because it is majority Hindu, thereby clearly agreeing with me that Hinduism is inherently secular and Hindus are not one community, but probably the most diverse community.
    5. Therefore the logical conclusion is that a majority of Hindus don’t agree with your contention that India is a Hindu nation.
    6. I have already opened my mind to the wisdom of the ancient Hindus which I have quoted to you already, and which directly contradicts what you believe.
    7. Sorry to say this but your term “colonised Hindu” applies to you and not me. Simply because you’re peddling the ideologies of the RSS and their ilk. The RSS was started during British rule, and throughout the independence movement not of of their leaders was arrested for even a few days. They publicly submitted themselves to British rule, and publicly opposed Mahatma Gandhis call for quit India. And then finally, they tacitly supported his assassination. Who’s the colonised Hindu here?
    Anyway, I’m signing off now. No point arguing with a numbskull fanatic who doesn’t have the decency to carry out a proper discussion and resorts to personal attacks when he has nothing to say.Recommend

  • guest

    I don’t think we can carry out a constructive discussion if you keep contradicting yourself and questioning my identity.

    I apologize for the above. But it seems like you are quite bent on discrediting Hinduism and considering it a religion as any other.
    Now point by point.
    Anyway, here are my last comments.

    1. It’s not Hindu wisdom to justify violence against human beings
    while advocating non-violence on cows.

    My response: when did I or any other Hindu ever justify violence against anyone? Dharmic fight is Dharmic and that is a different story. The war on kurukshetra was for upholding dharma. These things have to be understood after much reading, pondering, discussion, analysis and sadhna.

    2. I would have accepted your environmental argument, if the banning
    of cows extended to a ban on meat entirely, whether it is cows, goats,
    buffaloes or chickens.

    My response: So, yes, on the face of it, I will agree with you. But here are the reasons…..1. can you imagine the uproar if this extended
    to even other animals. In time, that may be possible though and I think that is where India will head, not just yet. It might be the only country to get that way—partly because of history, and partly because of ayurveda’s knowledge. Any flesh eating then will be part of medicinal practice. 2. Beef industry is definitely much more environmentally unfriendly simply because of the amount needed for its upkeep.
    Very different from pigs, goats, and definitely fish and chicken. So environmental argument is not invalid.

    3. Due to the above it’s clearly obvious that your agenda is
    religious and not environmental or ethical.

    a. Have provided responses above, and you can believe what you
    wish.

    4. You say India is a Hindu nation, and at the same time admit that
    India is only secular because it is majority Hindu, thereby clearly agreeing with me that Hinduism is inherently secular and Hindus are not one community, but probably the most diverse community.

    a. See, your westernized thinking is obvious. What you are missing is that Both Islam and Christianity are not secular by nature.
    When religions or faith forms like that keep spreading their tentacles
    in the name of secularism it is dangerous. They use a concept that they do not uphold. Do you not see the hypocrisy in
    it? If beef eating is someone’s freedom, then our freedom should also include teaching that God can be human, animal, stone or a tree. But that part of my freedom is not upheld. Instead, I am told that I am a heathen and less than the religions of the book. So please
    understand Hinduism is diverse, but both religions of the book work like a virus from within that can destroy the very fabric of a culture as deep,
    diverse and eco friendly as Hinduism. If you have any doubts check out what happened to largely Buddhist areas such as Afghanistan and China—one destroyed by fanaticism, other by communism. Cultures killed and youngsters left to ape western countries.

    5. Therefore the logical conclusion is that a majority of Hindus
    don’t agree with your contention that India is a Hindu nation.

    a. Nope that is NOT a logical conclusion. India is secular till it remains Hindu. The moment it calls itself a secular rather than a hindu nation, its destruction will begin, which thanks to Missionaries has been started. Hindus, neither read nor are interested in religion. Especially the westernized, cosmopolitan, global community kinds. All they care
    about is how they look, major dance parties and eating good food. They do not think beyond it, or else we would not have lost our nation to outsiders. But even then you can see a glimpse of it, in the story chess players (Shatranj ke khilari—shyam benegal) –although it focused on the Mughals, hindus today, rich in pockets are doing the same.

    6. I have already opened my mind to the wisdom of the ancient Hindus which I have quoted to you already, and which directly contradicts what you believe.

    a.
    Please tell me how it contradicts. Be specific so we can debate on that.

    7. Sorry to say this but your term “colonised Hindu” applies to you and not me. Simply because you’re peddling the ideologies of the RSS and their ilk. The RSS was started during British rule, and throughout the independence movement not of their leaders was arrested for even a few days. They publicly submitted themselves to British rule, and publicly opposed Mahatma Gandhis call for quit India. And then
    finally, they tacitly supported his assassination. Who’s the colonised Hindu here?

    Anyway, I’m signing off now. No point arguing with a numbskull fanatic who doesn’t have the decency to carry out a proper discussion and resorts to personal attacks when he has nothing to say.

    MY RESPONSE:
    ha, I knew you were going to bring RSS—all the RSS phobes who have no understanding of what the organization is…and never attended its meeting, never read its literature, may be a line here or there….here for the lack of time, information from wiki…the easiest to find, you should have researched. RSS was banned in British times. RSS and Gandhi’s assassination have no connection. But Indira Gandhi and death (killing) of Shastriji has some things to explore. Same with Netajibose.

    It was banned during British rule,[17] and then thrice by the post-independence Indian government — first in 1948 when Nathuram Godse, a former RSS member,[23] assassinated Mahatma Gandhi;[17][24][25] then during the emergency (1975–77); and after the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992. The ban imposed in February 1948 was withdrawn unconditionally in July 1948.[26] The ban during 1975-77 was a part of the illegal suspension of individual and collective human rights during the emergency. After Indira Gandhi lost the elections,
    the new government withdrew restrictions on human rights. The ban in 1992 was lifted in the absence of material evidence for supporting a ban.[27]

    No point arguing with a numbskull fanatic who doesn’t have
    the decency to carry out a proper discussion and resorts to personal attacks when he has nothing to say.

    That is not appropriate. I keep giving you information, but you go around it and keep mentioning your own points. Hindus may not say that India is not a hindu nation, that is a result of colonization, both by the Mughals and then by the british. Next globalization
    has done wonders. We all want to wear trousers and skirts, both men and women getting rid of pagris and bindis to join the global community that eats lays chips and pizzas…not realising the diseases of places where they come have already started affecting us. Clothes are not universal either….warm countries should always wear loose clothes, mainly cotton for airing….ah, the extent of colonization is available at every level….Do read Rajiv Malhotra’s Being Different and then we can have another discussion….keep well…Recommend

  • guest
  • guest

    been trying to send you messages but not all are getting through, so it is impossible to have proper discussion from that freedom –some of my opinions are not being published. will see if this gets published.Recommend

  • guest

    life is life…is life, is life….a cow is not less than a human life, same as an ant, or a mosquito….a life is life..Recommend

  • guest

    I don’t think we can carry out a constructive discussion if you keep contradicting yourself and questioning my identity.

    I apologize for the above. But it seems like you are quite bent on discrediting Hinduism and considering it a religion as any other.
    Now point by point.
    Anyway, here are my last comments.

    1. It’s not Hindu wisdom to justify violence against human beings
    while advocating non-violence on cows.

    My response: when did I or any other Hindu ever justify violence against anyone? Dharmic fight is Dharmic and that is a different story. The war on kurukshetra was for upholding dharma. These things have to be understood after much reading, pondering, discussion, analysis and sadhna.Recommend

  • guest

    I would have accepted your environmental argument, if the banning
    of cows extended to a ban on meat entirely, whether it is cows, goats,
    buffaloes or chickens.

    My response: So, yes, on the face of it, I will agree with you. But here are the reasons…..1. can you imagine the uproar if this extended
    to even other animals. In time, that may be possible though and I think that is where India will head, not just yet. It might be the only country to get that way—partly because of history, and partly because of ayurveda’s knowledge. Any flesh eating then will be part of medicinal practice. 2. Beef industry is definitely much more environmentally unfriendly simply because of the amount needed for its upkeep.
    Very different from pigs, goats, and definitely fish and chicken. So environmental argument is not invalid.Recommend