Reappraisal of the role of Sufis working as Missionaries of Islam

R.K. Ohri, IPS (Retd)

For centuries the Sufi creed and Sufi music have been tom-tomed as great symbols of spiritualism and promoters of peace and harmony between the Hindus and the Muslims. The cleverly marketed concept of Sufi spiritualism has been unquestioningly accepted as the hallmark of Hindu-Muslim unity. It is time we studied the history of Sufis, tried to track the narrative of their coming to India and analyzed their explicit missionary role in promoting conversions to Islam. More importantly, it needs to be assessed how did the Sufis conduct themselves during reckless killings and plunders by the Muslim invaders? Did they object to the senseless mass killings and try to prevent unremitting plunder of Hindu temples and innocent masses? Did the Sufis ever object to the capture of helpless men and women as slaves and the use of the latter as objects of carnal pleasure? These are some of the questions to which answers have to be found by every genuine student of Indian history.

Prominent Sufis in India

Most Sufis came to India either accompanying the invading armies of Islamic marauders, or followed in the wake of the sweeping conquests made by the soldiers of Islam. At least the following four famous Sufis accompanied the Muslim armies which repetitively invaded India to attack the Hindu rulers, seize their kingdoms and riches and took recourse to extensive slaughtering of the commoners. Almost all Sufi masters were silent spectators to the murderous mayhem and reckless plunder of temples ands cities by the marauding hordes across the sub-continent. Taking advantage of the fact that the Hindu masses are deeply steeped in spiritual tradition and mysticism, the Sufis used their mystic paradigm for applying sort of a healing balm on the defeated, bedegralled and traumatized commoners with a view to converting them to the religion of the victors. The following well-known Sufi masters came to India along with the invading Muslim armies which repetitively invaded India in wave after wave:

1. Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti of Ajmer had accompanied the army of Shihabuddin Ghori and finally settled down at Ajmer in the year 1233 A.D.
2. Khawaja Qutubuddin came to Delhi in the year 1236 in the train of Shihabuddin Ghori and stayed on to further the cause of Islam.
3. Sheikh Faridudin came to Pattan (now in Pakistan) in the year 1265.
4. Sheikh Nizamuddin Auliya of Dargah Hazrat Nizamuddin came to Delhi in the year 1335 accompanying a contingent of the Muslim Invaders.

Additionally, the famous Sufi Shihabuddin Suhrawardy of Baghdad was brought to India for carrying out the missionary work of conversions by Bahauddin Zakariya of Multan several decades after the Hindu ruler had been defeated and the kingdom laid waste after repetitive plunder and manslaughter. Like all Sufi masters, his main task was to apply the balm of spiritual unity on the traumatized Hindu population and then gradually persuade them to convert to Islam. Not a single Sufi, the so-called mystic saints, ever objected to the ongoing senseless manslaughter and reckless plunder, or to the destruction neither of temples, nor for that matter to the ghoulish enslavement of the so-called infidel men and women for sale in the bazaars of Ghazni and Baghdad. Operating from the sidelines of spiritualism they even participated in the nitty-gritty of governance to help the Muslim rulers consolidate their authority in the strife torn country. And significantly, their participation in the affairs of the State was not conditional upon the Muslim rulers acting in a just and even handed manner. On the contrary, the Sufis invariably tried to help the Sultans in following the path shown by the Prophet and the Shariah.

Sufis were practicing Muslims and not even Secular

Another important objective of the spiritual and mystic preaching of the Sufi masters was to blunt the edge of Hindu resistance and prevent them from taking up arms to defend their hearth and home, their motherland and their faith, through the façade of peace and religious harmony. The Naqashbandi Sufis had very close relations with Jahangir and Aurangzeb. The well known Sufi Saint of Punjab, Ahmad Sirhindi (Mujadid) of the Naqashbandi order (1564-1634) held that the execution of the Sikh leader Guru Arjun Dev by Jehangir was a great Islamic victory. He believed and openly proclaimed that Islam and Hinduism were antithesis of each other and therefore could not co-exist. Even the Chishti Sufi, Miyan Mir, who had been a friend of Guru Arjun Dev, later on turned his back on the Sikh Guru when the latter was arrested by Jahangir and sent for execution.

It may be recalled that the great Sufi master of the eleventh century, Al Qushairi (A.D.1072) had unambiguously declared that there was no discord between the aims of the Sufi ‘haqiqa’ and the aims of the Sharia. The definition given by Al Hujwiri should be able to quell any doubt about the commitment of Sufis in upholding the supremacy of the Islamic faith over all other religions. That dogma has been the key component of the philosophy of Sufism not only in India, but across the world - from India to Hispania (i.e., the Spain). The great Sufi master, Al Hujwiri, laid down the golden rule that the words “there is no god save Allah” are the ultimate Truth and the words “Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah” are the indisputable Law for all Sufis. In other words, the Sufism and the ulema represent the same two aspects of the Islamic faith which are universally accepted and obeyed by all Muslims. By definition therefore Sufi masters could be no exception. The renowned ninth century Sufi master, Al Junaid, also known as “the Sheikh of the Way”, and widely revered as the spiritual ancestor of Sufi faith, had categorically proclaimed that for Sufis “All the mystic paths are barred, except to him who followeth in the footsteps of the Messenger (i.e., Prophet Muhammad) [Source: Martin Lings, What is Sufism, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, London, 1975, p.101].

Sufis and Muslim Laws

As pointed out by Reynold A. Nicholson in the Preface to the famous tome, ‘Kashaf al Mahjub’ (Taj & Co., Delhi, 1982). “No Sufis, not even those who have attained the highest degree of holiness, are exempt from the obligation of obeying the religious law”. In fact, the famous tome, ‘Kashaf al Mahjub’ written by Ali bin Al-Hujwiri, who was also known as Data Ganj Baksh, was widely regarded as the grammar of Sufi thought and practice. Most Sufis have invariably drawn on the contents of this Treatise for preaching the Sufi thought (also known as Sufi sisals). As already stated, on page 140 of Kashaf al Mahjub Al Hujwiri loudly proclaims that “the words there is no God save Allah are Truth, and the words Muhammed is the Apostle of Allah” are the indisputable Law.

Sufism leaves no scope for Hinduism

K.A. Nizami in his celebrated book, The Life and Times of Shaikh Nizamuddin Auliya (Idarah-I Adabiyat-i-Delhi, Delhi) has stated that the Auliya openly used to say that “what the ulama seek to achieve through speech, we achieve by our behavior.” The Auliya was a firm believer in the need for unquestioned obedience of every Muslim, every Sufi, to the dictates of the ulema. According to K.A. Nizami, another Sufi saint Jamal Qiwamu’d-din wrote that though he had been associated with the Shaikh Nizamuddin Auliya for years, “but never did he find him missing a single sunnat …… ” .The well known authority on Sufism, S.A.A. Rizvi has recorded in his book, ‘A History of Sufism in India’ that Nizamuddin Auliya used to unhesitatingly accept enormous gifts given to him by Khusraw Barwar which implied that the Auliya was unconcerned with the source of the gift, provided it was paid in cash. Yet the Auliya was a firm believer in the need for a Muslim’s unquestioned loyalty and obedience to the ulema. As reiterated by K.A. Nizami, Auliya used to preach that the unbeliever is the doomed denizen of Hell. In his khutba he would leave no one in doubt that Allah has created Paradise for the Believers and Hell for the infidels “in order to repay the wicked for what they have done”. It has been categorically stated on page 161 in the famous treatise, Fawaid al-Fuad, translated by Bruce B. Lawrence (Paulist Press, New York, 1992) that the Auliya confirmed on the authority of the great Islamic jurist, Imam Abu Hanifa, that the perdition of the unbelievers is certain and that Hell is the only abode for them, even if they agreed to confess total loyalty to Allah on the Day of Judgment.

Sufis against Hindus

In the above mentioned treatise on Sufi philosophy, Fuwaid al-Fuad, a very interesting instance of enslaving the kaffir Hindus for monetary gain has been cited which shows how another Sufi, Shayakh Ali Sijzi, provided financial assistance to one of his dervishes to participate in the lucrative slave trade. He had advised the dervish that he should take “these slaves to Ghazni, where the potential for profit is still greater”. And it was confirmed by Nizamuddin Auliya that “the Dervish obeyed”. Obviously therefore, neither spiritual ethics and nor justice to all, including the infidels, were the strong points of Sufi saints.

If the narrative of the preaching and acts of Khawaja Moinuddin Chishti of Ajmer are taken as indication of his religious philosophy and deeds, he emerges as a Sufi master who nursed a deep hatred against the infidel Hindus and showed utter contempt for their religious beliefs. As elaborated by S.S.A. Rizvi in ‘A History of Sufism in India, Vol. 1 (Munshiram Manoharlal, 1978, p. 117), there is a reference in the book, Jawahar-i- Faridi, to the fact thatwhen Moinuddin Chishti reached near the Annasagar Lake at Ajmer, where a number of holy shrines of Hindus were located, he slaughtered a cow and cooked a beef kebab at the sacred place surrounded by many temples. It is further claimed in Jawahar-i-Faridi that the Khwaja had dried the 2 holy lakes of Annasagar and Pansela by the magical heat of Islamic spiritual power. He is even stated to have made the idol of the Hindu temple near Annasagar recite the Kalma. The Khwaja had a burning desire to destroy the rule of the brave Rajput king, Prithiviraj Chauhan, so much so that he ascribed the victory of Muhammad Ghori in the battle of Tarain entirely to his own spiritual prowess and declared that “We have seized Pithaura alive and handed him over to the army of Islam”. [Source: Siyar’l Auliya, cited by Rizvi on page 116 of ‘A History of Sufism in India’].

Sufis and Patronage of Muslim Rulers

Throughout the Muslim rule all Sufis enjoyed full confidence, royal favor and patronage of the cruel Muslim rulers. Though foolishly accepted as “secular” by most Hindus seeking spiritual solace after being battered, bruised and marginalized, almost all Sufi saints dogmatically followed the commandments contained in the Quran, the Hadith and Sharia. Historians have recorded that many Sufi saints had accompanied armies of the Muslim invaders to use their spiritual powers in furtherance of Islam’s conquests. Not one of them raised even a little finger to forbid slaughter of the innocents, nor did they question the imposition of jiziya by Muslim rulers. In fact, most of them guided the Muslim rulers in carrying forward their mission of conquest and conversion by furthering their campaigns of plundering the wealth of Hindus, of which many Sufis willingly partook share.

Sufis were not pro-Hindus

It was almost a taboo for Sufis, the so-called saints, to accept a Hindu ascending the throne of any kingdom during the heydays of the Muslim rule. In an example narrated by S.A.A. Rizvi on page 37 of his well researched book, The Wonder That Was India (Vol.II, Rupa & Co, 1993, New Delhi) it is pointed out that when the powerful Bengali warrior, king Ganesha, captured power in Bengal in the year 1415 A.D., Ibrahim Shah Sharqi, attacked his kingdom at the request of outraged ulema and numerous Sufis of Bengal. In the ensuing strife, the leading Sufi of Bengal, Nur Qutb-i-Alam, interceded and secured a political agreement to the benefit of the Muslim community and satisfaction of Sufis. Under dire threat King Ganesha was forced to abdicate his throne in favour of his 12 years old son, Jadu, who was converted to Islam and proclaimed as Sultan Jalaluddin - to the satisfaction of the Sufi masters. Similarly Sultan Ahmed Shah of Gujarat (1411-42), though a practitioner of Sufi philosophy, was a diehard iconoclast who took delight in destroying temples, as stated in the same tome, by S.A.A. Rizvi. The Sultan also used to force the Rajput chieftains to marry their daughters to him so that they would become outcastes in their own community. And the endgame of the Sultan could as well be that perhaps some of the outcaste Rajputs might then opt to become Muslims.

Sufi Philosophy is one-way street

Unfortunately due to relentless colonization of the Hindu mind during 1000 years long oppressive Muslim rule, the Hindu masses till date have failed to realize that the so-called Sufi philosophy of religious harmony is a one-way street. This trend of Hindus praying at tombs and dargahs has been nurtured by the strong undercurrent of belief in spiritualism among Hindu masses, even educated classes. That is the crux of the matter. Deeply steeped in their traditional belief in spirituality and mysticism, the Hindus have developed the custom of visiting dargahs and continue to pray at the tombs of Sufis, no Muslim, nor any Sufi, has ever agreed to worship in a Hindu temple, nor make obeisance before the images of Hindu Gods and Goddesses. For them it would be an act of grossest sacrilege and unacceptable violation of the basic tenets of Sufism. That is the truth about the Sufi saints and their philosophy of inter-religious harmony.

Where’s the beef?

Krishen Kak

Circulating over the web are many nauseatingly gruesome videos of cows in India being trucked to slaughter, and many revolting grisly videos of their slaughter for their meat. Their meat is commonly called “beef” and this essay raises questions of the ‘what’ and ‘where’ in India is “beef”. The opening focus is on official aspects at the national and international level; we look at official aspects at the level of some States, and conclude with the reality of the Indian beef industry and some questions that must concern all patriotic Indians.

The Directorate-General of Foreign Trade of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry prescribes the “Indian Trade Classification (Harmonised System) Classification for Export & Import Items”. The following points are relevant:

§ in Ch. 1, “cattle” is only the cow species (s.no.8 in the table there enters “buffaloes” separately).

§ in Ch. 2, Note 1 says “beef” is....and this is only the cow species.  Note 3 refers to buffalo offal, and Note 5 again has “cattle” and “buffaloes”.  Serial nos. 18 and 19, and serial nos. 22 and 23, have “beef” referring to the cow species only.  Buffalo is “buffalo meat”.  

The 2002 report of the National Commission on Cattle in its Preface refers to “Sub-Group VII (on Cattle and Buffaloes) of the Working Group on Animal Husbandry and Dairying, which was set up by the Planning Commission for the Tenth Five Year Plan proposals”, thus repeating the officially-drawn distinction between “cattle” and “buffaloes”. 

This distinction is found in other official records too. So it is clear that while “cattle” and “beef” colloquially and in the claims of our so-called “secular” activists  may or may not include the buffalo and its meat, legally and officially in India “cattle” is only the cow species, and “beef” is the meat of the cow species.

The legality of cow slaughter (and therefore the sale of beef) varies from State to State. The export of beef is banned (though the NCC report and media reports refer to efforts to sneak this back in, and there are web advertisements openly for the export of beef. There can be no doubt that beef is being exported from India, with the full knowledge and connivance of the Indian State).

The slaughter of other domesticated species such as the buffalo and the sale and export of their meat is legal, though conditions generally apply.

However, the ITC-HS classification also has “bovine animals”, which is cattle + buffaloes.Therefore, in this essay, “cattle” is used only for the cow species and “beef” for cattle meat, and “bovine” is used for cattle + buffaloes collectively. Official data of bovine meat export is only of buffalo meat and there is official data in regard to buffalo slaughter and meat. There is no official data of the export of beef, and there is little, if any, official data in the public domain of cattle slaughter for beef, that too presumably for domestic consumption.

The NCC report cites official figures for the increase in beef production from 70,000 tonnes in 1976 to 12,16,000 tonnes in 1992 to 13,78,000 tonnes in 1997. It also quotes a press report of official sources in 1996 saying that 70% of the beef was exported to the Middle East. The Export Import Data Bank of the Department of Commerce shows statistics from 1996-97 which year has the export of “meat and edible meat offal” but there is no entry for “beef” in that year or thereafter.

The FAO website has a report titled “Indian Meat Industry Perspective” by Dr SK Ranjhan (he features too in the opening para of the Preface of the NCC report). The report gives data from 1975 to 2001-2002 in which latter year India’s meat export was 243,560 MT of which 98% was buffalo meat, the remaining 2% being of sheep, goat and poultry. Within India, the “meat production is estimated at 4.9 million tons (sic)… Buffalo in India contributes about 30% of total meat production. The contribution by cattle…30%”. In other words, “the share of bovine meat in the total meat production in India is about 60%”. The growth rate of beef production is 2% in 1975-1985, 3.8% in 1985-2000. The report gives buffalo meat export figures from 1997 to 2002, but shows no export of beef. This report with an FAO url gives a clarion call for a Pink Revolution:

If India had the “Green” Revolution, the “White” Revolution, and the “Blue” Revolution, can the “Pink Revolution” be far behind? The Green Revolution had led to self-sufficiency in food grains, the White Revolution saw India occupy the Number One Position in milk production in the world, and the Blue Revolution brought about increase in fish production. This proves that the Indian farmer is Progressive. What he needs is the lead in the right direction. Contribution of buffalo in bringing about the White Revolution in India is well known. India is now poised to achieve the Pink Revolution through buffalo. If this could be done, India can also achieve the Number one position in meat production……

These views are echoed on the official website of the Ministry of Food Processing Industries, which too calls for a Pink Revolution to succeed the Green, White, and Blue ones. It is clear that, while there was official awareness of beef export, primarily to the Middle East, till 1996, after that – officially – there has been no export of beef from India.

Curiously, the US Government presents a very different picture for India. The Foreign Agricultural Service of the US Department of Agriculture in its April 2012 report on “Livestock and Poultry: World Markets and Trade” opens with the headline “World Beef Exports: India Takes Lead in 2012” and a chart “India Fuels Growth in World Beef Trade”. One reason identified for this “growth” is “increased slaughter”, and the forecast for India is an increase to 3.5 million tons, currently at 1.5 million tons “making it the world’s leader”. India’s exports rose from 672,000 tons in 2008 to 1,525,000 tons by April 2012. Our main markets are Southeast Asia, the Middle East and North Africa.[8]

The USDA Foreign Agricultural Service’s Global Agricultural Information Network for 2011 reports that “according to the Ministry of Food Processing Industries, the state of Uttar Pradesh in India is the largest producer and exporter of buffalo meat, accounting for roughly 70 percent of the production. South India produces around 17 percent of the total buffalo meat with the state of Andhra Pradesh accounting for the largest share”. There is aggressive government intervention to promote buffalo meat production in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and West Bengal.

“Indian consumption of buffalo meat averages approximately two kilograms per person per year” and, “while Indian buffalo meat competes on a cost basis, there are several other factors which impact trade. Specifically, all Indian buffalo meat is produced according to halal standards”. Not surprisingly, “the vast majority of export growth in 2010 was to Middle Eastern and North African Countries (Only 2 of the top 10 growth markets were outside of this region). This was led (sic) by Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, UAE, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait and Syria”. Of the 55 countries listed as “partner countries” in the table “India: Beef Exports”, Pakistan is there, registering a dramatic decline in its “beef” import from India, and Bangladesh does not feature at all.

The US Department of Agriculture defines “beef” as cattle meat. The American buffalo, which is not a true buffalo, is the “bison”, to be distinguished from the Asian water buffalo, which has no entry in the USDA glossary. The USDA further recognizes that the American buffalo (bison) and the water buffalo are not the same, and that bison (i.e., American buffalo) meat is not the same as “beef”. The buffalo that is exported from India is definitely not “beef”, and this is said so in the texts of the USDA’s FAS reports but where it is cleverly assimilated to “beef” by being called “carabeef” (though there is no entry for this either in the USDA glossary).

American officialese then proclaims Indian water buffalo meat as “beef” all over the world, and media headlines mockingly trumpet “Holy Cow! India is the World’s Top Beef Exporter” and “Growing Beef Trade Hits India’s Sacred Cow”. Ask yourself why the US Government portrays India as a beef-culture, even as it distinguishes between the meat of its own buffaloes and cattle, and it knows our water buffalo meat is not beef.

The USDA’s April 2012 report on “Livestock and Poultry: World Markets and Trade” also tells us that India’s broiler meat production rose from 2,490,000 tons in 2008 to 3,200,000 tons by April 2012, our domestic consumption rising from 2,489,000 tons in 2008 to 3,190,000 tons by April 2012. We do not feature in the broiler meat exports list and we do not feature at all in the swine/pork data.

Interestingly, the Indian government itself recognizes in the National Research Centre on Pigs’ “Vision 2030” document the very favourable economics and considerable significance of pork production in poverty alleviation, especially of tribal communities in the country. It is relevant that, in global meat production in 2012, beef is estimated at 57 million tons, pork at 104.4 million tons, and broiler meat at 82.2 million tons. In other words, the global demand for pig meat is almost double the demand for bovine meat.

It makes “secular” economic sense that the Indian State promote and market pig meat rather than bovine meat. But the State won’t, and the Integrated Sustainable Energy and Ecological Development Association suggests why in its Booklet No.190: “Pig Introduction: Breeds and Characteristics”, where it informs us of the comparative cheapness of good quality pork and of the contribution of swine farming in India to 6 to 7% of the total meat production in the country. It notes that “the importance of pigs for raising the low nutritional standard of our country cannot be over-emphasized”. It lists as the first “constraint” in pig rearing the fact that “consumption of pork is forbidden by certain religions and pig production is not encouraged. Thus it is not an universally accepted food”.  

Please note that beef is also “not an universally accepted food”, but the Indian State does not find itself “constrained” from extending to the cow-sensitive religions the same “secular” sensitivity that it extends to the pig-sensitive religions. “Around one hundred worshipers of the cow laid down their lives in 1966, during the agitation seeking for total ban on cow slaughter in Parliament Street, Delhi, when they were shot down for raising slogans like ‘Gomata ki Jai’” – s.103, Ch.1 of the NCC report. 

The Constitution of India in Article 48 directs that:

The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.

This would appear to exclude buffaloes.

The Constitution of India in Article 51A(g) requires that:

It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures.

“Living creatures” will include buffaloes.

Bovine slaughter is governed by State laws, and the report of the National Commission on Cattle has a convenient summary in its Annexure II(8), discussed in its report in s.17, Ch.2. The NCC is specific about certain State governments, notably West Bengal and Kerala, flouting laws, judgments and sentiments against cow slaughter. “The State of Kerala can be termed as the ‘Cow Slaughter State’, where the main business in the market is slaughter of cattle and sale of beef” - s.138, Ch.1.

The following in regard to legislation of bovine slaughter is taken from the NCC summary after checking the concerned State Government’s website: 

Andhra Pradesh - The A.P. Prohibition of Cow Slaughter and Animal Preservation Act, 1977 bans the slaughter of cattle females and allows it conditionally of the males. It should be obvious that there could be ways of getting around these conditions. The “main activities” of the State Department of Animal Husbandry and Fisheries do not include the meat industry. There is an A.P. Meat and Poultry Development Corporation Ltd but it has no website of its own. There is no numerical data given of bovine slaughter within the State.

Kerala – no legislation – only local rules banning bovine slaughter “unless the animal is over 10 years of age and is unfit for work or breeding or the animal has become permanently incapacitated for work or breeding due to injury or deformity”. It should be obvious that there could be ways of getting around these conditions. The Department for Animal Husbandry has no reference to the bovine meat industry. The Kerala State Planning Board in its economic review 2011 for “Agriculture and Allied Sectors” notes:

6.69   Cattle population in Kerala which was 33.96 lakh in 1996 declined to 21.22 lakh in 2003 and further to 17.40 lakh by 2007. The crossbred cattle population which stood at 22.87 lakhs (67%) as per 1996 Census decreased to 17.35 lakh numbers and in percentage terms increased to 82% by 2003. It further declined to 16.21 lakh numbers and in percentage terms increased to 93% in 2007. This increase in proportion of crossbred population was made possible by expanded health care facilities and artificial insemination services available in the State.

6.71……Though meat production is increasing over the years, it cannot cater to the demand fully…..meat other than poultry meat [increased] from 102026 tonnes in 2009-10 to 108398 tonnes in 2010-11 registering an increase of…6.24 percent…over the previous year.

There is no data specific to bovine meat. The chapter on “Trade Flows” has no data specific to the bovine meat trade. The State Plans too do not refer to the bovine meat industry. The State Animal Husbandry Department “is committed to provide MILK, MEAT and EGG for ALL...”but there is no reference specifically to bovine meat.

Presumably, towards this carnivorous public objective, the government-supported Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences University runs a meat plant and the government-ownedMeat Products of India Ltd markets Mattupetty Premium Beef with “the meat…obtained from superior quality animals reared at KLD Board farm”. KLD Board is the Kerala Livestock Development Board, and some of the beef animals are statedly younger than 10 years. Whether the KLDB connects with the National Research Centre on Meat is unclear since the NRCM’s Annual Report 2009-2010 does not mention beef at all. 

Apart from some gory pictures of beef carcasses, the official Kerala website is quite sanitary about its beef industry. This is the State that the NCC labeled The Cow Slaughter State. It is non-official sources that reveal the reality of cattle slaughter in Kerala, for example:

The meat trade in Kerala evokes images of a savage cattle trail: cows and bulls jammed into trucks and box cars coming from Tamil Nadu, Karnataka or Andhra Pradesh, or tied horn-to-horn in small groups, trudging across the inter-State border. The crossover is often done surreptitiously, the animals going without food, water or rest and with broken tails and bones, dislocated necks, chilly-peppered eyes and horn-gouged body parts… In 1998, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, engaged locally in livestock development, estimated that a total of 11 lakh head of cattle “migrate” thus to Kerala every year. The figure could be higher today. Only 4.16 lakh head of cattle pass through government checkposts, the rest are smuggled in. Eventually, all of them end up in slaughterhouses lining the State's towns and villages. There are 774 authorised abattoirs and, according to government officials, over three times that number of unauthorised meat stalls……State Animal Husbandry Department statistics indicate that nearly 4.83 lakh head of ‘white’ cattle (excluding buffaloes) are slaughtered legally in the State, producing 24,278 tonnes of beef every year. The Department estimates that three times the number are actually killed every year, the rest in the unauthorised sector, the total beef production thus being 72,834 tonnes……According to the State Animal Husbandry Department, of the 4.83 lakh head of ‘white’ cattle slaughtered in the authorised centres, 4.16 lakh are cattle imported from neighbouring States. Such legal trade is a mere one-third of the total beef business in Kerala and there are no reliable statistics on the unauthorised trade……On a small scale at least, beef is now regularly exported from Kerala to West Asia and countries like Malaysia… The State government also has plans to promote the export of beef, and is currently working on a Rs.30-crore project with the National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) to create “disease free zones” for cattle, aimed at the export market”

(“Beef without borders” by R Krishnakumar, Frontline, Aug 30 – Sept 12, 2003).  

Tamil Nadu - The Tamil Nadu Animal Preservation Act, 1958 is not listed at in the list of State Acts available at the Government Publication Depot. However, the NCC summary says that from Aug 30, 1976 “slaughter of cows and heifers (cow) is banned in all slaughterhouses in Tamil Nadu”. It is not clear whether this affects the import of beef into Tamil Nadu, since the consumption and sale of beef is openly advertised there. The Animal Husbandry Policy Note 2012-2013 opens with a quote of MK Gandhi - “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be measured by the way in which its animals are treated”. Some bovine livestock figures are given, and there is a remark on the “decrease in unproductive animals in the State”. There are references to “meat” but it is not clear whether this includes bovine meat. Section 10.2 is titled “Meat Inspection” and there is mention of taeniasis, trichinosis and hydatidosis. Of these, taeniasis at least can be an infection of beef. Section 11 is informative about the legislation on the prevention of cruelty to animals, but not at all about its implementation. As with other States, the official website is quite sanitary about its beef trade.

West Bengal – the NCC has The West Bengal Animal Slaughter Act, 1950; an official WB site has The West Bengal Animal Slaughter Control Act, 1950 which allows bovine slaughter under certain conditions. It should be obvious that there could be ways of getting around these conditions. The State Government’s website lists a Department of Animal Resources Development but there is no mention of “meat” in the Annual Administrative Report 2011–2012, and the page for the Livestock Census in West Bengal says “This Account Has Been Suspended”. The West Bengal Food Processing Industry Policy 2011 has just a passing reference to “meat”.

The West Bengal government website is even more sanitary about any bovine meat industry within its borders than the Kerala one. However, the non-official website Love4cow in “Why Delhi-Dhaka ties ride on the cow” is more forthcoming. Excerpts: 

Discussing the issue with journalists in New Delhi on September 17 last year, BJP Member of Parliament and animal rights activist Maneka Gandhi accused Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav of being bribed by the cattle smugglers to lift the ban on transport of cattle. As many as 300 animals are stuffed into each railway wagon, violating the law which allows only 10, she said. All these trains are bound for Howrah, the main station for Kolkata. Most of the animals die due to the cramped conditions, and are sold to leather and meat dealers in Kolkata. 

“The Howrah Cattle Dealer Association in Howrah runs the illegal trade by bringing lakhs of cows, buffaloes, bullocks and bulls from northern states like Punjab, Haryana to West Bengal where these animals are slaughtered or smuggled to Bangladesh,” she said. “Bangladesh has thin cattle population of its own, but its exports of beef runs into lakhs of tonnes.”

……every third head of cattle in Bangladesh is smuggled in from India. Many come from as far away as Haryana and Punjab. An estimated 20,000 to 25,000 animals enter Bangladesh almost everyday through West Bengal alone. While the trade is illegal on the Indian side, it becomes legal the moment the livestock enters Bangladesh. Some estimates put the annual turnover from leather, meat and meat exports from smuggled Indian cattle in Bangladesh at over Rs 25 billion (more than half a billion dollars)…… There is a massive cattle mafia which stretches all the way across to Haryana and other places, where cow slaughter is illegal. Most of the cattle are sent to West Bengal by train, where buffalo slaughter is legal, but the numbers far exceed the demand in that state. 

West Bengal’s official and illegal pandering to beef-eating cultures, notwithstanding even Supreme Court judgments, is recorded by the NCC for as far back as 1958 - ss.82, 83, Ch.1, NCC report. See also s. 61 – “The ghost of secularism and concern for the Vote Bank of Bengali Muslims seems to over-rule even the judgments of the Supreme Court in the Writers’ Building in Kolkata even now. The tragedy is that even Mamata loses ‘mamta’ for the cow, as is evidenced by her interruption and, subsequent walk-out from Parliament on 25.5.96, when President Shankar Dayal Sharma, during his customary address to both Houses in Central Hall of Parliament, declared the resolve of the BJP Government, led by Atalji, to take up suitable measure ‘in order to ensure cow protection, and to impose a total ban on the slaughter of cows and cow progeny’”.

Assam - The Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 1951 (1950 in the NCC summary) – bare act not on site. According to the NCC, the slaughter of all cattle is allowed with certain conditions. It should be obvious that there could be ways of getting around these conditions. The government’s website says nothing about any bovine meat industry.

According to the NCC, Manipur, Meghalaya and Nagaland have no legislation. Their official sites and those of Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram have pages that do not open. There appears to be no information on their sites of their bovine meat industry. Tripura has a “Revised Perspective Plan for Attaining Self Sufficiency in Animal Origin Food” - but there is no specific reference to bovine meat.

Finally, we come to mainstream media and other reports on the reality of Indian cow slaughter and the beef trade. The following are typical: “Growing beef trade hits India's sacred cow” by Arezou Rezvani, Benjamin Gottlieb and Elise Hennigan, for CNN, April 19, 2012. Excerpts: 

While the bulk of Indian exports is buffalo meat bound for Middle East and Southeast Asian markets, the growing middle class in Arab countries has sparked a new craving for cow beef…… there is concern that Hindu-mandated bans on beef could hamper the industry's future growth, particularly in states like Kerala and West Bengal where the practice is legal. …… “Cow beef could be a very lucrative business in India,” said Dr. S.K. Ranjhan, the director of Hind Agro Industries Limited, who believes that religious attitudes may stand to change once the extent of business opportunities are realized. “I think five-to-10 years from now, people won't be so scandalized by the sale of cow beef.”…… The strict laws against cow slaughter in the majority of India's provinces have forced the lucrative cow beef trade underground. An estimated 1.5 million cows, valued at up to $500 million, are smuggled out of India annually, which some analysts say provide more than 50% of beef consumed in neighboring Bangladesh.

*

“Where's the beef? Indians don't want to know” by Mark Magnier, Los Angeles Times, May 02, 2010. Excerpts:

Estimates suggest 1.5 million cows, valued at up to $500 million, are smuggled annually, providing more than half the beef consumed in Bangladesh.

The cows come from as far as Rajasthan, about 1,000 miles away. Many trade hands several times en route.

At the Panso market in Jharkhand state, an interim stop about 300 miles from the border, the 15,000 or so cows passing through each week fetch about $100 apiece, local vendors say.

Animals that arrive exhausted are injected with Diclofenac sodium, a banned anti-inflammatory drug, to energize them. Most of the traders are Muslims. Many of the drivers and handlers are Hindus. At the border, crossings are usually done at night.

Most cows pass through West Bengal state, which shares a 1,300-mile border with Bangladesh. The state's communist government maintains a neutral line on religion, allowing cows to be openly slaughtered and traded.

The profits can be significant. A $100 medium-size cow in Jharkhand is worth nearly double that in West Bengal and about $350 in Bangladesh. Indian residents along the border complain that the markup also attracts illegal migrants from Bangladesh, who steal cows at night and dart back home.

*

“Blood On The Border” by Tusha Mittal, Tehelka, 15 Oct 2011. Excerpts:

…….illegal cattle trade, valued by insiders at Rs 5,000 crore……While the cattle trade is illegal in India, the sale of Indian cows in Bangladesh is legal and taxable. Cows are herded into Murshidabad from Punjab, Bihar and Haryana and sold at weekly markets dotting the border. With an average sale of about 1,000 cows in 20 such goru haats in Murshidabad, nearly 20,000 cows gather at India’s eastern tip every month. With the price of beef nearly double in Bangladesh, it is unlikely that the cows are going anywhere else…….

*

 

The NCC report, Preface (see also ch.3, vol.2):

“We are constrained and deeply hurt to note that even in the State Capitals, under the very noses of the Chief Ministers, Secretaries and the Director Generals of Police, slaughter and massacre of even cow and calf, which is prohibited in almost all the States, except Kerala, takes place almost every day in suburbs, busy localities and townships, not to talk of villages. In Bhuvaneshwar, daily slaughter of cow and its progeny is taking place for providing beef to the zoo animals, as the Commission found, after rushing to the spot and catching the culprits red-handed.

But whether it is Cuttack or Patna, Ranchi or Kolkata, Mumbai or Bangalore or Jaipur, Government’s inability to stop the cow slaughter with iron hands continues, and the excuse given is that it is a social problem to be abetted and tolerated shamelessly for years together. The various State Governments have admitted their inability to stop the coming up of large numbers of illegal slaughter houses and their similar inability to stop the mass smuggling of cattle to Bangladesh and Kerala, from the States of U.P., Haryana, Rajasthan and M.P. in the North and A.P., Karnataka and Tamil Nadu in the South. This admission should put the present Central Government on red alert. In Mewat, daily slaughter of thousands of cows are going on with the Governments of Rajasthan, Haryana and U.P., all turning a blind eye to it, presumably due to being soft towards Mews[Meos, who are Muslim].

“I cannot understand why in a Hindu-majority country like India, where rightly or wrongly there is such strong feeling about cow slaughter, there cannot be a legal ban. In all the Muslim countries, even those who are considered to be most modern, I doubt if pork would be allowed to be sold, or served in public places. I think the same would be true for Israel. Likewise, in some Christian countries on certain days of the year no meat is eaten or sold” 

– Jayaprakash Narayan.

*

When our “Government looks the other way”, it is legitimate for Indians to ask “where’s the beef?” because the Indian State refuses to see it.

It is legitimate to ask why the Government of India and so many State governments connive in the illegal slaughtering of cattle and the illegal trade in beef.

It is legitimate to ask why the Indian State has so conspicuously failed to implement Article 48 of the Constitution.

It is legitimate to ask why the Government of India and so many State governments turn a Nelsonian eye to the stomach-churningly cruel and generally clandestine domestic beef industry and the stomach-churningly cruel and totally illegal beef export from India.

It is legitimate to ask why the Indian State so conspicuously fails to implement Article 51A(g) of the Constitution.

It is legitimate to note that the major domestic and export markets for Indian beef are the beef-eating cultures to the politico-religious sensibilities of which the Indian State displays a craven and pseudo-secular sensitivity.

Finally, it is legitimate to ask why the Indian State restrains itself from the aggressive promotion of swine husbandry and pork marketing because beef-eating religions consider the pig profane, but does not restrain itself from the aggressive promotion of the bovine meat industry even though a much larger number of Indians consider the cow sacred.

Source:

http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=2361

Muslims flee as communal violence scorches UP village

A large number of members of the minority community are uneasy about returning to their homes in Asthan village in Pratapgarh district of Uttar Pradesh, from where they had to flee 10 days ago following violent communal clashes over the rape of a Dalit girl. Violence had rocked the village, located nearly 150 km from Lucknow, after the 13-year-old Dalit girl was allegedly gangraped and murdered by four Muslim boys from the same village.

In the communal flare-up following the incident, houses and shops belonging to the Muslim community were burnt down by an angry mob after local authorities failed to initiate any action against the accused.

No effort was made by district authorities to get a post-mortem done on the victim.

The disturbance started when the victim's family and other villagers decided to take the funeral procession through the Muslim locality.

Most families, terrorised by the violence, have chosen to leave the village in search of a safer haven. The administration has deployed armed personnel in the village but this has failed to restore their confidence.

"We would have returned by now, but it appears that visits by leaders of different political parties have been responsible for raising the tension once again. We are scared to go back to Asthan," a villager told Azam Ansari, a resident of Pariyavan village, four km away from Asthan.

Ansari told this scribe over the telephone, "I myself tried persuading some of the Asthan people to return to home, but they are still terrified after what they have gone through".

The issue has also come up in the state assembly, where Parliamentary Affairs and Urban Development Minister Azam Khan has drawn much flak over it. He chose to use offence as the best form of defence by reminding Opposition Bahujan Samaj Party of the incidents of rape and communal clashes that took place during Mayawati's regime.

He claimed, "Action had already been ordered by the state government and nearly a dozen people have already been taken into custody."

He added, "It was to send a positive message that we ordered the suspension of both the district magistrate and superintendent of police; the new team is taking effective steps to rebuild the confidence of the people."

Congress leader Pramod Tiwari demanded a judicial probe into the incident. He also demanded higher compensation for the victims, who were given an ex-gratia payment of Rs 50,000 as their homes were razed during the violence.

No mention was made about whether any compensation had been offered to the family of the rape victim.

Source:  http://www.rediff.com/news/report/muslims-flee-as-communal-violence-scorches-up-village/20120630.htm