Write Comment     |     E-Mail To a Friend     |     Facebook     |     Twitter     |     Print

In Dadri, two arrests, two VIP visits and vicious attacks on the media
 
Five days after Mohammad Akhlaque Saifi was lynched over rumours about cow slaughter in this Uttar Pradesh village, Vishal, accused of inciting the mob, was arrested on Saturday.

Vishal is the son of Sanjay Rana, a local BJP leader associated with the party for the past two decades. Mr. Rana is reportedly close to Union Minister of State for Culture and Tourism Mahesh Sharma. The BJP State unit has distanced itself from Mr. Rana, who does not hold any party post.

The arrest came amid a volatile and tense situation in the village, which has become polarised with the Hindu community raging against the media for being “one-sided”. In two instances of attacks, two presspersons were injured and two vehicles damaged.

Family members of Mohammad Akhlaque Saifi, who was lynched over rumours about cow slaughter in this Uttar Pradesh village, had told the police about the possible role of Vishal, son of Sanjay Rana, a local BJP leader, in inciting the mob last Monday, sources say.

The family had told the local administration that they suspect that it was Vishal who had coerced the priest of the local temple to announce that a cow was slaughtered in Akhlaque’s house and that his family was eating beef.

Rana has alleged that his son was being framed.

Besides Vishal, another accused, Shivam, has been arrested. Local police officials said that with the arrest of eight of the accused, the investigation will speed up. The local administration substantially increased the police deployment in and around the village on Saturday.

With two high-profile visits, first by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and later by Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi, the area remained tense. Several hundreds of agitated village women on the streets protested against what they alleged to be “one-sided media coverage”.

Armed with stones, several hundred women took to the streets and abused presspersons and politicians. They chased the media outside the village in the morning and barred anyone from entering the village. The Delhi Chief Minister had to wait outside for over an hour to meet Akhlaque’s family.

Even when the local administration finally managed to control the women protesters with the help of women police personnel, they continued the protest on the road. Stones were hurled at Mr. Kejriwal and presspersons.

Mr. Kejriwal tried to talk to the protesters. He told one of them that what happened in the village was “against humanity”. “It was totally wrong. Neither Hindus nor Muslims benefited from it. It was just vote-bank politics of political parties,” he said.

“It is an extremely sad situation that while one party is trying to consolidate Hindu votes using this tragic incident, another party is in an attempt to consolidate Muslim votes by letting the tempers run high,” he later told presspersons.

He said Hinduism was never in danger because of any Muslim and anybody who thought otherwise was not a Hindu. But the residents of the village, mainly local Thakur community members, had problems with “too much attention given to only Akhlaque’s family”.

They argued with the media persons that nobody was showing the plight of the family of the accused who were “wrongly arrested”.

Muslims, who form about 10 per cent of the population of the Thakur-dominated village, remained in their houses. But the protesters were in no mood to let go of the opportunity. They gheroaed Mr. Kejriwal and tried to argue with the mediapersons. One of the protesters asked this correspondent, “Our sons were arrested by police and framed up by the SP government but nobody is showing the plight of the families.”

The two attacks on the media, one in the morning and second while Kejriwal was leaving, comes in the backdrop of the meeting Union Minister Mahesh Sharma held with the local Thakur leaders in the temple which was misused to incite the mob to lynch Akhlaque. Addressing the villagers, Mr. Sharma warned the media against “doing politics with words”. He expressed displeasure at the media coverage which the villagers complained as being “too one-sided”.

Later, Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi, who kept his visit a secret and did not talk to the media, tweeted: “Met the family of Mohammad Akhlaque and expressed my deepest condolences. It is very sad to see the trust and harmony built over decades destroyed by the politics of hate.”

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav announced an increase in the financial assistance for the family from Rs. 10 lakh to Rs. 20 lakh.

A beef-eating Hindu demands his rights

As a beef-eating Hindu, I am utterly outraged at the killing of Mohammed Akhlaq in Dadri by a Hindu mob claiming the man had beef in his house. Even worse is the attempt of BJP politicians to sanitize the lynching.
 
Culture minister Mahesh Sharma claims it was just “an accident.” Former MLA Nawab Singh Nagar says those who dare hurt the feelings of the dominant Thakurs should realize the consequences. He claims the murderous mob consisted of “innocent children” below 15 years of age. Many BJP leaders blame the Muslims for eating beef. Vichitra Tomar wants cow-killers to be arrested, not Muslim killers. Srichand Sharma says violence is inevitable if Muslims disrespect Hindu sentiments. Sorry, but these are all lame excuses for murder.
 
Mob fury at Dadri began when a temple priest said a calf had been killed. Later, the priest admitted he had been pressured to make this false statement by two Hindu youths. So, this was a planned, murderous riot.
 
The police have sent the meat found in Akhlaq’s house to determine whether it was beef or mutton. Why? How does it matter? The mob will be just as guilty of murder if it is beef. Muslims have every legal right to eat beef, just as I do. Several states have bans on cow slaughter, while allowing the slaughter of bulls and buffaloes. But there is no ban on eating beef.
 
Hindus who hear a cow has been slaughtered can ask the police to investigate a possible violation of cow slaughter laws. But if instead they organize lynch mobs, they are murderous thugs, and should be treated as such. If Modi refuses to condemn such incidents, he will, rightly, be seen as blessing them.

Bloodlust: Ancient literature talks of beef consumption by Hindu sages. The modern intolerance of Hindu goons is a cruel rejection of great Hindu traditions.
 
The claim that all Hindus oppose cow slaughter is false. Yes, there is a strong upper-caste tradition today against beef, but Dalits and tribals have always eaten beef. “Beef is one of the most affordable sources of protein for the Dalit community,” says Mohan Dharavath, president, Dalit Adivasi Bahujan and Minority Students’ Association.
 
Ancient Hindu scriptures establish beyond doubt that even upper-caste Hindus and great rishis ate beef in days of yore. For a quick primer, read Nirad Chaudhuri’s ‘The Continent of Circe’. He says, “Love of cows in the Vedas goes with every possible economic use of cattle, including, of course, their slaughter for food”. There was a long debate, says Chaudhuri, between opponents and defenders of cow slaughter. The two ideas co-existed, very much like the debate today about vegetarianism. The Mahabharata mentions, “without thinking it necessary to add any excuse, that a very hospitable king used to have 20,100 cattle slaughtered every day for his guests.” On the other hand, another story tells of a king who has slaughtered a cow to entertain a sage, an act that is criticized as sinful by another sage.
 
Such differences and debates were the very essence of ancient Hinduism. It was not a rigid religion. By the time the Dharma Shastras were penned, beef consumption had “ceased or virtually ceased”. Nevertheless, Bhavabuti’s famous play, Uttara-Rama-Charitra, written in the 8th century AD, has the following dialogue between two hermit boys at Ayodhya, Saudahataki and Dandayana.
 
D: It is no less a person than the revered Vasishta himself.
 S: Is it Vasishta, eh?
 D: Who else?
 S: I thought it was a tiger or a wolf. For, as soon as he came, he crunched up our poor tawny heifer.
 D: It is written that meat should be given along with curds and honey. So every host offers a heifer, a big bull, or a goat to a learned Brahmin who comes as a guest. This is laid down in sacred law.
 
In India today, such a play would be banned, and its author threatened with death. But ancient Hindu traditions gave Bhavabuti an honoured place in literature, with no censorship or fear of mob lynching. The modern intolerance of Hindu goons is a cruel rejection of great Hindu traditions.
 
In ancient times, neither untouchables nor tribals were regarded as Hindus. Early 19th century censuses did not count dalits and tribals as Hindus. But modern Hinduism claims as its own these two groups whom it cruelly reviled and oppressed through the ages. I am all for the change. But that change must allow for the fact that Dalits and tribals have always eaten beef.
 
As a libertarian believer in free choice, I have always championed the freedom to eat anything one likes. But I also claim the right to eat beef as part of the ancient Hindu tradition highlighted by Bhavabuti. As a Brahmin, I am happily following in the footsteps of the sage Vasiishta.