There are no breaking news at the moment


Our PM is a MASTER BLUFFER, a characteristic learnt sitting at the feet of Guru Golwalkar. Modi ji has completely washed off his hands from the culpability of crimes being committed by ‘gau rakshaks’ by saying “All (state) governments should take stringent action against those violating law in the name of cow protection.” Thus it is not the Hindutva gang whose polarizing agenda is responsible for lynching/robbing in the name of Holiness of Cow but States not taking “stringent action” against the criminals under the garb of Hindutva. Is our PM so naive that as a senior RSS pracharak he does not know how Golwalkar manufactured the fact about cow-slaughter that it was started by Muslims and Christians.

Golwalkar, a shameless liar while responding to a question (1966), “How did cow slaughter begin in our country [India]?” replied, “It began with the coming of foreign invaders to our country. In order to reduce the population to slavery, they thought that the best method to be adapted was to stamp out every vestige of self-respect in Hindus…In that line cow slaughter also began”. [MS Golwalkar, Spotlight, Sahitya Sindhu (RSS publication house), Bangalore, 1974, p. 98.]

It is this propaganda at Hindutva shakhas and boudhik meetings which has created this scenario of terror. Unless PM and his band of rulers disown this blatant lie, the violence in the name of cow is not going to end. The lie that cow-slaughter started with the arrival of Muslims and Christians is not even in keeping with the Vedic version of history as narrated by ‘Hindu’ chroniclers.

Swami Vivekananda, regarded as a philosopher of Hindutva by the RSS, while addressing a meeting at the Shakespeare Club, Pasadena, California, USA (February 2, 1900) on the theme of ‘Buddhistic India’, declared: “You will be astonished if I tell you that, according to old ceremonials, he is not a good Hindu who does not eat beef. On certain occasions he must sacrifice a bull and eat it.”

[Vivekananda, The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, vol. 3 (Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, 1997), p. 536.]

This is corroborated by other research works sponsored by the Ramakrishna Mission established by Vivekananda. According to C. Kunhan Raja, a prominent authority on the history and culture of the Vedic period: “The Vedic Aryans, including the Brahmanas, ate fish, meat and even beef. A distinguished guest was honoured with beef served at a meal. Although the Vedic Aryans ate beef, milch cows were not killed. One of the words that designated cow was aghnya (what shall not be killed). But a guest was a goghna (one for whom a cow is killed). It is only bulls, barren cows and calves that were killed.”

[Cited in the series, Suniti Kumar Chatterji and others (eds.), The Cultural Heritage of India, vol. 1 (Calcutta: The Ramakrishna Mission, 1993), p. 217.]


Shamsul Islam is a retired Professor of University of Delhi.Email:


  1. K SHESHU BABU says:

    Mere talk of stopping lynchings and Carnage by vigilantes and hindutva fanatics would remain an empty rhetoric unless concrete action is not taken. If the PM and rss / vhp really want to follow Hindu ancient texts, they should bring all literature into public domain and answer the verses in the Vedas which clearly describe ancient brahmins as beef eaters .

  2. K SHESHU BABU says:

    The practice of beef eating was mentioned in vedic texts / archives

  3. Dr. P.S. Sahni says:

    The Supreme Court of India has already shared the Vedic facts on holiness of cow with the nation way back in 1958 through its five judge constitution bench judgement in the case of Mohd. Hanif Quareshi & Others v. The State of Bihar.

    “Early Aryans recognised its importance as one of the most indispensable adjuncts of agriculture. It would appear that in Vedic times animal flesh formed the staple food of the people. This is attributable to the fact that the climate in that distant past was extremely cold and the Vedic Aryans had been a pastoral people before they settled down as agriculturists. In Rg. Vedic times goats, sheep, cows, buffaloes and even horses were slaughtered for food and for religious sacrifice and their flesh used to be offered to the Gods. Agni is called the “eater of ox or cow” in Rg. Veda (VIII. 43, 11). The slaying of a great ox (Mahoksa) or a “great Goat” (Mahaja) for the entertainment of a distinguished guest has been enjoined in the Satapatha Brahmana (111. 4. 1-2). Yagnavalkya also expresses a similar view (Vaj 1. 109). An interesting account of those early days will be found in Rg. Vedic Culture by Dr. A. C. Das, Ch. 5, pp. 203-5, and in the History of Dharmasastras (Vol. II-, Part II) by P. V. Kane at pp. 772-773. Though the custom of slaughtering of cows and bulls prevailed during the Vedic period, nevertheless, even in the Rg. Vedic times there seems to have grown up a revulsion of feeling against the custom. The cow gradually came to acquire a special Sanctity and was called “Aghnya” (not to be slain). There was a school of thinkers amongst the Rsis, who set their face against the custom of killing such useful animals as the cow and the bull.”

    “… P.V. Kane argues, that in the times of’ the Rg. Veda only barren cows, if at all, were killed for sacrifice of meat and cows yielding milk were held to be not fit for being killed. It is only in this way, according to him, that one can explain and reconcile the apparent conflict between the custom of killing Cows for food and the high praise bestowed on in the cow in Rg. Vedic times. It would appear that the protest raised against the slaughter of cows greatly increased in volume till the custom was totally abolished in a later age. The change of climate perhaps also make the use of beef food as unnecessary and even injurious to health. Gradually cows became indicative of the wealth of the owner. The Neolithic Aryans not having been acquainted with metals, there were no coins in current use in the earlier stages of their civilisation, but as they were eminently a pastoral people almost every family possessed a sufficient number of cattle and some of them exchanged them for the necessaries of their life,. The value of cattle (Pasu) was, therefore, very great with the early Rg. Vedic Aryans. The ancient Romans also used the word pecus or pecu (pasu) in the sense of wealth or money. The English words, “Pecuniary” and “impecunious”, are derived from the Latin root pecus or pecu, originally meaning cattle. The possession of cattle in those days denoted wealth and a man was considered rich or poor according to the large or small number of cattle that he owned. In the Ramayana King Janaka’s wealth was described by reference to the large number of herds that he owned.”

    The landmark 1958 judgement was delivered by five judges who were all from the Hindu community; the amicus curiae (friend of court), Thakurdas Bhargava, was a Hindu. Thakurdas Bhargava was earlier a member of the Constituent Assembly in 1946. The clause on cow’s protection incorporated in the Indian Constitution is chiefly due to the efforts of Thakurdas and Dr. Rajendra Prasad. The Solicitor General of India was a Hindu. All the lawyers were from the Hindu, Sindhi, Parsi, Anglo-Indian communities – none from the Muslim community. Only the 12 petitioners were Muslims (Quraishi community) mainly engaged in the butchers’ trade and its subsidiary undertakings. The period of 1950s was of Nehruvian secularism and socialism.

    This judgement was reiterated in 1961 by a five judge constitution bench and in 1969 again by a constitution bench of five judges. And yet once more by a bench of two judges of the Supreme Court in 1996. All these four Supreme Court judgements were in response to the efforts of the State governments towards a total ban on the slaughter of cattle through legislation. In all these judgements it was held that a total ban on cattle slaughter is unconstitutional as it violates the rights of the petitioners under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India since the Muslims (Quraishi community) – who worked as butchers, tanners, gut merchants, curers and cattle dealers – would otherwise not be able to carry on their respective trades. The Supreme Court stood by the fundamental right to work; the court refused to be swayed only by the sentiments of the majority community attached to the cow.

    Golwalkar’s thesis about who introduced cow slaughter stands blown to smithereens in view of the quotes in the 1958 judgement by the Supreme Court. This may have been the reason why the likes of Golwalkar did not produce their baseless thesis through affidavits in the Supreme Court; it would have been laughable. From 1958 to 2017 no such effort by the Gowalkars of society has been made. No Central Government in 70 years has denied the Vedic facts of cow as enunciated in the above quotes from the 1958 judgement.

    The Indian nation should be grateful to the long, protracted legal battle of the working class (butchers) from 1958 to 2017; even recently the Supreme Court has stayed the notification issued by the Central Government regarding the sale and trade of cattle primarily through the efforts of this working class. But for their efforts, a total ban on cattle slaughter would long have been a reality in the 1950s itself at least in the cow belt area of northern India.