Ban on animal sacrifice in Occupied Kashmir

[Pakpak]

https://www.arabnews.com/node/1895546/world

The ban follows a series of regulations targeting the indigenous population of the region that until August 2019 was India’s sole Muslim-majority state

NEW DELHI: A wave of outrage was set off in Indian-controlled Kashmir on Friday after authorities in the disputed Muslim-majority region banned the sacrifice of animals during the Eid Al-Adha holiday.
Muslims constitute more than 70 percent of Kashmir’s population. They traditionally mark Eid Al-Adha, the Islamic festival of sacrifice, by offering special prayers and slaughtering livestock, usually a goat, cow or camel, and giving the meat to the poor.

But the local administration on Thursday ordered a “ban on illegal killings or sacrifices of cows or calves, camels and other animals,” warning of “stringent action against the offenders violating animal welfare laws.”

Kashmiris say they see the ban, coming ahead of the second-most important Muslim holiday, as yet another move by India targeting their identity.

“The order is against Article 14 of the Constitution of India which guarantees equal treatment, and also against Articles 25 and 26 which guarantee freedom of religious practices,” Srinagar human rights lawyer Habeel Iqbal told Arab News. “This order targets a particular community and hence is bad in law.”

Others see the ban also as an attack on religious freedom in Kashmir.

“This is a communal agenda of the right-wing Hindu government who are depriving Muslims, who are a minority across India, even of their basic fundamental rights to the freedom of religion,” said Majid Hyderi, a journalist and political analyst in Srinagar.

“The issue like the ban on meat goes against the basic emotion and sentiments of the people and this might lead to a backlash and further alienation of the people of the region.”

Divisional Commissioner Kashmir Pandurang K. Pole, the main implementing authority for the order, was not available for the media on Friday, while the director of the Department of Animal Husbandry in Srinagar, Purnima Mittal, declined to comment.

The ban follows a series of regulations targeting the indigenous population of the region that until August 2019 was India’s sole Muslim-majority state.

In that month India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government abrogated Articles 370 and 35A of the country’s constitution, which granted special autonomous status to Kashmir, and scrapped its statehood by dividing it into two federally administered units.

That move was followed by a crackdown on political activity, arrests of hundreds of political leaders, and a series of administrative measures that raised concerns over attempts at engineering a demographic change in the Himalayan region.

“Since Aug. 5, 2019, there has been a pattern of issuing new orders, one after another, at a galloping pace. Most orders are being viewed as a part of the ruling BJP’s civilizational and ideological project with respect to Kashmir,” Srinagar author and journalist Gowhar Geelani said.

“The latest order, the ban on slaughter, is a part of the series. The BJP decides the menu, food habits, culture, identity and history,” he said.

Srinagar businessman Aijaz Ahmad said the new ban was like rubbing salt in the wound.

“This attack on religious sentiment is not good,” he said. “This is a deliberate provocation and attempt to stir up resentment.”

FAST FACTS
• Administration in Indian-controlled Kashmir on Thursday ordered an end to what it said was ‘illegal killings or sacrifices’ of livestock.

• Muslims traditionally mark Eid Al-Adha by offering special prayers, slaughtering livestock and giving the meat to the poor.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

What is the point of this ban? The authorities should just ban meat as a food product since in essence, the only way to eat it is if animals are sacrificed.

 

[Napa]

Not sure if there was no ban, or the government is backtracking.

SRINAGAR, India (AP) — Authorities in Indian-controlled Kashmir on Friday said there is no ban on the sacrifice of animals during the upcoming Islamic Eid al-Adha holiday, a day after the government asked law enforcers to stop the sacrifice of cows, calves, camels and other animals.

G.L. Sharma, a senior government official, said the earlier communication was “misconstrued,” and the government had been seeking proper transportation of animals and the prevention of cruelty during the Muslim festival.

“The letter was sent to enforcement agencies to enforce the laws of the Animal Welfare Board and it is at the time there is mass slaughter of animals to prevent cruelty on animals,” Sharma said, according to the local news portal The Kashmir Walla. “This is not a ban on slaughter and sacrifice.”

https://www.yahoo.com/now/officials-kashmir-ban-animal-sacrifice-095150593.html

 

[OMB]

https://www.arabnews.com/node/1895546/world

The ban follows a series of regulations targeting the indigenous population of the region that until August 2019 was India’s sole Muslim-majority state

NEW DELHI: A wave of outrage was set off in Indian-controlled Kashmir on Friday after authorities in the disputed Muslim-majority region banned the sacrifice of animals during the Eid Al-Adha holiday.
Muslims constitute more than 70 percent of Kashmir’s population. They traditionally mark Eid Al-Adha, the Islamic festival of sacrifice, by offering special prayers and slaughtering livestock, usually a goat, cow or camel, and giving the meat to the poor.

But the local administration on Thursday ordered a “ban on illegal killings or sacrifices of cows or calves, camels and other animals,” warning of “stringent action against the offenders violating animal welfare laws.”

Kashmiris say they see the ban, coming ahead of the second-most important Muslim holiday, as yet another move by India targeting their identity.

“The order is against Article 14 of the Constitution of India which guarantees equal treatment, and also against Articles 25 and 26 which guarantee freedom of religious practices,” Srinagar human rights lawyer Habeel Iqbal told Arab News. “This order targets a particular community and hence is bad in law.”

Others see the ban also as an attack on religious freedom in Kashmir.

“This is a communal agenda of the right-wing Hindu government who are depriving Muslims, who are a minority across India, even of their basic fundamental rights to the freedom of religion,” said Majid Hyderi, a journalist and political analyst in Srinagar.

“The issue like the ban on meat goes against the basic emotion and sentiments of the people and this might lead to a backlash and further alienation of the people of the region.”

Divisional Commissioner Kashmir Pandurang K. Pole, the main implementing authority for the order, was not available for the media on Friday, while the director of the Department of Animal Husbandry in Srinagar, Purnima Mittal, declined to comment.

The ban follows a series of regulations targeting the indigenous population of the region that until August 2019 was India’s sole Muslim-majority state.

In that month India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government abrogated Articles 370 and 35A of the country’s constitution, which granted special autonomous status to Kashmir, and scrapped its statehood by dividing it into two federally administered units.

That move was followed by a crackdown on political activity, arrests of hundreds of political leaders, and a series of administrative measures that raised concerns over attempts at engineering a demographic change in the Himalayan region.

“Since Aug. 5, 2019, there has been a pattern of issuing new orders, one after another, at a galloping pace. Most orders are being viewed as a part of the ruling BJP’s civilizational and ideological project with respect to Kashmir,” Srinagar author and journalist Gowhar Geelani said.

“The latest order, the ban on slaughter, is a part of the series. The BJP decides the menu, food habits, culture, identity and history,” he said.

Srinagar businessman Aijaz Ahmad said the new ban was like rubbing salt in the wound.

“This attack on religious sentiment is not good,” he said. “This is a deliberate provocation and attempt to stir up resentment.”

FAST FACTS
• Administration in Indian-controlled Kashmir on Thursday ordered an end to what it said was ‘illegal killings or sacrifices’ of livestock.

• Muslims traditionally mark Eid Al-Adha by offering special prayers, slaughtering livestock and giving the meat to the poor.

I read it carefully.
Seems to be a step to regulate the meat industry (perhaps more like setting up proper abbatoirs, maintaining inspections and records, avoiding illegal trade practices).
Mountain being made out of a molehill

 

[Tubs]

Religion is no excuse to harm sentient beings. However, the exploitation of animals should be minimised and eventually eliminated (in all ways practicable) in affluent nations, before it is considered in poorer nations.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Religion is no excuse to harm sentient beings. However, the exploitation of animals should be minimised and eventually eliminated (in all ways practicable) in affluent nations, before it is considered in poorer nations.

Take a day off man.

 

[Local.Dada]

Keeping religion aside what is wrong in banning animal sacrifice from a humanity perspective?

 

[Colorblind Genius]

Keeping religion aside what is wrong in banning animal sacrifice from a humanity perspective?

An American said once to a vegetarian Indian in my office,

“If animals are not supposed to be eaten, then why are they made with meat?”

 

[Local.Dada]

An American said once to a vegetarian Indian in my office,

“If animals are not supposed to be eaten, then why are they made with meat?”

You see the difference between eating meat and creating a whole public spectacle of slaughtering an animal in front of everyone right ?

 

[street cricketer]

Keeping religion aside what is wrong in banning animal sacrifice from a humanity perspective?

You want the government to enforce strict vegetarianism?

 

[Local.Dada]

You want the government to enforce strict vegetarianism?

No but killing an animal in a ritualistic manner in front of little kids is barbaric and not needed at least I feel that way. I apologize if that causes you enjoyment

 

[Local.Dada]

^ by the way it happens in some cultures in Hinduism too before I get called an islamiphobe

 

[street cricketer]

You see the difference between eating meat and creating a whole public spectacle of slaughtering an animal in front of everyone right ?

We are dealing with semantics. Whether the animal is slaughtered in the abattoir or it is slaughtered by muslims during Eid, at the end of the day, it meets the same fate.

In muslim societies, public slaughtering may not be an issue. In non muslim societies, I don't think they do public slaughtering anyway and I think it is done in an enclosed area. So why is it a problem?

 

[street cricketer]

No but killing an animal in a ritualistic manner in front of little kids is barbaric and not needed at least I feel that way. I apologize if that causes you enjoyment

Drop the patronising tone. I can't personally kill an animal, but I do enjoy my meat and realise that someone has to slaughter an animal for it to be on the table. So I'm not hypocritic enough to enjoy my meat dishes while at the same time giving sermons on animal cruelty online. I take it you're a vegan given your passionate views on this topic.

 

[Local.Dada]

We are dealing with semantics. Whether the animal is slaughtered in the abattoir or it is slaughtered by muslims during Eid, at the end of the day, it meets the same fate.

In muslim societies, public slaughtering may not be an issue. In non muslim societies, I don't think they do public slaughtering anyway and I think it is done in an enclosed area. So why is it a problem?

Just because it happens doesn’t mean it is correct. Any way I personally think killing an animal in a public setting is neither pleasing to watch nor it is a very hygienic process in 2021. If you need to see the animal killed in front of you to enjoy its meat then thats your personal preference. I find that repulsive.

In USA people hunt but there are certain checks and balances for that too and I feel this is no different. I don’t think government is banning consumption of meat, is it?

 

[Local.Dada]

Drop the patronising tone. I can't personally kill an animal, but I do enjoy my meat and realise that someone has to slaughter an animal for it to be on the table. So I'm not hypocritic enough to enjoy my meat dishes while at the same time giving sermons on animal cruelty online. I take it you're a vegan given your passionate views on this topic.

I am not a vegan, I am a vegetarian and I do eat eggs though and I don’t need to see someone taking the eggs from the nest or live process of milking a cow to enjoy it. If that was happening in public display and was banned, I wouldn’t mind it and neither would it stop me from the enjoyment of consuming it.

Having said that I don’t care if people eat meat, pretty much most in my family do and I am a vegetarian not for some religious mandate, I don’t enjoy meat and I think vegetarian is a healthy lifestyle and gone are the days you only need meat for protein. Anyways that’s a different debate but I have no issue with someone going to a licensed butcher shop and buying meat.

 

[street cricketer]

Just because it happens doesn’t mean it is correct. Any way I personally think killing an animal in a public setting is neither pleasing to watch nor it is a very hygienic process in 2021. If you need to see the animal killed in front of you to enjoy its meat then thats your personal preference. I find that repulsive.

In USA people hunt but there are certain checks and balances for that too and I feel this is no different. I don’t think government is banning consumption of meat, is it?

Do you think people slaughter animals because they like seeing animals getting killed? Most people slaughter animals (be it the muslims or even the hindus who do it) because of religious beliefs.

You finding slaughtering of an animal repulsive is because you don't see what happens in an abattoir and therefore you are protected from witnessing the gory event of animal slaughter. So when you see one publicly, your senses get offended because you are not used to seeing what happens to the animal in a slaughter house. You being repulsed by it is no different to muslims feeling repulsed by religious beliefs of hindus or a westerner lecturing Indians to have a cracker free Diwali to save the environment.

 

[street cricketer]

I am not a vegan, I am a vegetarian and I do eat eggs though and I don’t need to see someone taking the eggs from the nest or live process of milking a cow to enjoy it. If that was happening in public display and was banned, I wouldn’t mind it and neither would it stop me from the enjoyment of consuming it.

Having said that I don’t care if people eat meat, pretty much most in my family do and I am a vegetarian not for some religious mandate, I don’t enjoy meat and I think vegetarian is a healthy lifestyle and gone are the days you only need meat for protein. Anyways that’s a different debate but I have no issue with someone going to a licensed butcher shop and buying meat.

Your entire argument is based on the assumption that people who slaughter animals, be it the hindus or muslims, do so because of "enjoyment", and not religious beliefs. So I have nothing more to add.

 

[Local.Dada]

Do you think people slaughter animals because they like seeing animals getting killed? Most people slaughter animals (be it the muslims or even the hindus who do it) because of religious beliefs.

You finding slaughtering of an animal repulsive is because you don't see what happens in an abattoir and therefore you are protected from witnessing the gory event of animal slaughter. So when you see one publicly, your senses get offended because you are not used to seeing what happens to the animal in a slaughter house. You being repulsed by it is no different to muslims feeling repulsed by religious beliefs of hindus or a westerner lecturing Indians to have a cracker free Diwali to save the environment.

There is always a middle ground isn’t it? Yes Diwali there is noise pollution and we have evolved to a point where there are some timings given around it. No one argues that they didn’t exist during the days of Ramayana, do they?

Banning fire crackers is an extreme step but putting checks and balances around is called evolving.

Similarly I would have understood your pain had the government banned meat. They just banned the ritualistic torturing and killing of animals in public settings and I totally support that decision.

 

[Local.Dada]

Your entire argument is based on the assumption that people who slaughter animals, be it the hindus or muslims, do so because of "enjoyment", and not religious beliefs. So I have nothing more to add.

That’s your comprehension skills. Religious sacrifice is always done in a group setting and people are obviously doing that to appease gods which is an act of gratification , so it would qualify as a recreational setting.

 

[street cricketer]

There is always a middle ground isn’t it? Yes Diwali there is noise pollution and we have evolved to a point where there are some timings given around it. No one argues that they didn’t exist during the days of Ramayana, do they?

Banning fire crackers is an extreme step but putting checks and balances around is called evolving.

Similarly I would have understood your pain had the government banned meat. They just banned the ritualistic torturing and killing of animals in public settings and I totally support that decision.

I'm afraid you being a vegetarian really clouds your views on this issue and that's probably why you have prejudiced views on muslims and the few hindus who do sacrifice.

First you said they do it because they derive a sadistic pleasure in killing the animal. Now you've said they "torture" the animal during a sacrifice. I've participated in an animal sacrifice feast (although I didn't actually go to the event of the sacrifice at the village temple). You are probably from the north and so north Indians being predominantly vegetarian, you might find it as a culture shock. But in the south, particularly in many villages, it is common for people to give animal sacrifice to the local deity and organise a feast for the village in case of any good event.

And trust me, people don't actually "torture" animal by giving electric shocks or kicking it. Hindus just give a blow to the neck of the animal, instantly killing it. I believe muslims do it in the halal manner by blood letting. In any case, the intention in both situations is to kill the animal and not make it suffer or torture it. You're free to have preconceived notions about the entire thing, but at the end of the day, the animal is not just killed just for the sake of killing. The meat is distributed to people and not wasted. So it's not anymore different than a slaughter house. If anything, you'll be more horrified of what happens inside a slaughter house. I would say dairy companies abuse animals more than these people. It's better for the animal to die than live a life full of abuse and torture in a dairy company where you enjoy your daily milk and ghee.

 

[AdamM97]

Not the first time. I believe it was banned during Sikh and Dogra rule in the 19th century as well.

 

[maverick85]

Just because it happens doesn’t mean it is correct. Any way I personally think killing an animal in a public setting is neither pleasing to watch nor it is a very hygienic process in 2021. If you need to see the animal killed in front of you to enjoy its meat then thats your personal preference. I find that repulsive.

In USA people hunt but there are certain checks and balances for that too and I feel this is no different. I don’t think government is banning consumption of meat, is it?

So let me get this straight. The 800,000 indian soldiers occupying kashmir and the hindutvadis in india are finding it abhorent that the locals of the area will be sacrificing animals as per their customs..

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Keeping religion aside what is wrong in banning animal sacrifice from a humanity perspective?

Why not just ban harming animals without mentioning sacrifice if that is your aim?

 

[Local.Dada]

Why not just ban harming animals without mentioning sacrifice if that is your aim?

I personally wouldn’t mind that. However I have no problem if some one eats a <insert animal> Biryani or someone making it as part of their livelihood like running a restaurant etc . I have a problem making a public spectacle of it or using appeasing a higher power excuse.

Even a lion or a tiger only hunts only when it is hungry and only hunts enough to satisfy its hunger.

 

[Ashmal]

Why not just ban harming animals without mentioning sacrifice if that is your aim?

We all know what's the real motive behind all this animal-love talk right before Eid every year

 

[ahmedzee]

Ban the sacrifice but still be #1 beef exporter in the world. Indians are losers and hypocrites!

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I personally wouldn’t mind that. However I have no problem if some one eats a <insert animal> Biryani or someone making it as part of their livelihood like running a restaurant etc . I have a problem making a public spectacle of it or using appeasing a higher power excuse.

Even a lion or a tiger only hunts only when it is hungry and only hunts enough to satisfy its hunger.

How do you think meat will end up in a biriyani or a restaurant table without killing the animal? You were asking about preventing this from a humanitarian perspective right?

 

[maverick85]

We all know what's the real motive behind all this animal-love talk right before Eid every year

some of these hindutvadis carry out lynchings for harming their revered animals, which suggests indian muslims to be lower on the pole of sentient beings in their views.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

We all know what's the real motive behind all this animal-love talk right before Eid every year

Yes, but let's give the opportunity for them to wiggle around a bit and try and come up with some novel reasons.

 

[Local.Dada]

How do you think meat will end up in a biriyani or a restaurant table without killing the animal? You were asking about preventing this from a humanitarian perspective right?

Ok I will say this for the 4th time . I guess if you haven’t got it by now you will not get it even if I repeat it again so let me try one last time ,

do you see the difference between eating for your own survival/ dietary needs vs creating a spectacle out of it which causes inconvenience to people around you who may not really be into it or is not really a hygienic practice after what we know in this day and age either.

If you don’t nothing much to discuss further

 

[maverick85]

Ok I will say this for the 4th time . I guess if you haven’t got it by now you will not get it even if I repeat it again so let me try one last time ,

do you see the difference between eating for your own survival/ dietary needs vs creating a spectacle out of it which causes inconvenience to people around you who may not really be into it or is not really a hygienic practice after what we know in this day and age either.

If you don’t nothing much to discuss further

it's not every day that animals are sacrificed. most people only have fresh meat on these occasions and weddings etc. none of it is wasted either, especially in that part of the world.
with regards to hygienic, we don't bathe in the blood of the sacrifice if that's what you're implying. hindutvadis dunk themselves in the ganges with whatever is in there and dump a lot of stuff there which you should look up or know already.

 

[Local.Dada]

it's not every day that animals are sacrificed. most people only have fresh meat on these occasions and weddings etc. none of it is wasted either, especially in that part of the world.
with regards to hygienic, we don't bathe in the blood of the sacrifice if that's what you're implying. hindutvadis dunk themselves in the ganges with whatever is in there and dump a lot of stuff there which you should look up or know already.

I am not sure why you are making this religious or taking it personally but yes I do agree with the 2nd part of your statement too if that makes it better for you

 

[SangasCoverDrive]

Sacrifice at homes should be banned.

 

[Tubs]

Take a day off man.

Haven't been posting for a while, I have taken many days off brother, don't worry!

Everyone is allowed to talk about how wonderful they find their respective religions on here, and I am free to talk about why I think religion is not a justification for doing objectionable things.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Ok I will say this for the 4th time . I guess if you haven’t got it by now you will not get it even if I repeat it again so let me try one last time ,

do you see the difference between eating for your own survival/ dietary needs vs creating a spectacle out of it which causes inconvenience to people around you who may not really be into it or is not really a hygienic practice after what we know in this day and age either.

If you don’t nothing much to discuss further

This is what you said:

Keeping religion aside what is wrong in banning animal sacrifice from a humanity perspective?

So are you concerned about animal welfare from a humanity POV or not? If you are, then how come you are happy to see restaurants serving meat and people chomping mutton biriyani? Then when I mentioned that animals still have to be killed to end up on the table, you switched to inconvenience and hygiene.

Get your story straight before jumpng in, that's my advice.

 

[Local.Dada]

This is what you said:

Keeping religion aside what is wrong in banning animal sacrifice from a humanity perspective?

So are you concerned about animal welfare from a humanity POV or not? If you are, then how come you are happy to see restaurants serving meat and people chomping mutton biriyani? Then when I mentioned that animals still have to be killed to end up on the table, you switched to inconvenience and hygiene.

Get your story straight before jumpng in, that's my advice.

Arrey bhayya I thought English was your first language “Sacrifice” being the key word as in ritualistic Sacrifice.

Funny that you put in bold and still didn’t get it

 

[Local.Dada]

How is I am hungry so I will go to a butcher shop and buy some meat or I need to feed my family so I will cook meat for my livelihood the same as

I want to pass an exam without studying or I am an incompetent person living on welfare but want to marry a beautiful celebrity so I will kill an innocent animal to appease a higher power and leave a carcass lying around that can cause health issues to others.

 

[street cricketer]

How is I am hungry so I will go to a butcher shop and buy some meat or I need to feed my family so I will cook meat for my livelihood the same as

I want to pass an exam without studying or I am an incompetent person living on welfare but want to marry a beautiful celebrity so I will kill an innocent animal to appease a higher power and leave a carcass lying around that can cause health issues to others.

At this point, you're straight up being dishonest when people have mentioned multiple times the meat will be used fully and the "carcass" will not be left lying on the ground.

 

[cricketjoshila]

At this point, you're straight up being dishonest when people have mentioned multiple times the meat will be used fully and the "carcass" will not be left lying on the ground.

Religious sacrifices are being banned or regulated in different states in India.

One example

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...-hc-ban/story-owVYzxxalPNihs00Bzt3iL_amp.html

 

[cricketjoshila]

At this point, you're straight up being dishonest when people have mentioned multiple times the meat will be used fully and the "carcass" will not be left lying on the ground.

Killing of animals and selling of meat should be regulated. Designated places and proper rules should be framed.

 

[street cricketer]

Religious sacrifices are being banned or regulated in different states in India.

One example

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...-hc-ban/story-owVYzxxalPNihs00Bzt3iL_amp.html

Killing of animals and selling of meat should be regulated. Designated places and proper rules should be framed.

I do not know how well regulated this rule is across India. Because I've heard about goat sacrifice events in villages in the last few years. And the meat is not sold. It is used to cook up a feast for the villagers, particularly when there's a special occasion in the house of one who organises it.

 

[OldWarHorse]

I do not know how well regulated this rule is across India. Because I've heard about goat sacrifice events in villages in the last few years. And the meat is not sold. It is used to cook up a feast for the villagers, particularly when there's a special occasion in the house of one who organises it.

AFAIK there are temples in Bengal and Odisha where animals are sacrificed as part of rituals even now. Must be even more places still.

 

[street cricketer]

AFAIK there are temples in Bengal and Odisha where animals are sacrificed as part of rituals even now. Must be even more places still.

Yes it is common practice in villages of south india as well..

 

[Ashmal]

How is I am hungry so I will go to a butcher shop and buy some meat or I need to feed my family so I will cook meat for my livelihood the same as

I want to pass an exam without studying or I am an incompetent person living on welfare but want to marry a beautiful celebrity so I will kill an innocent animal to appease a higher power and leave a carcass lying around that can cause health issues to others.

You keep shifting your goalposts from animal welfare, vegetarian diet to now inconvenience to others and hygiene.

Cook up a better story next time and be consistent with it.

 

[Local.Dada]

Yes it is common practice in villages of south india as well..

I have been to every major temple in South India bar Sabarimala and other temples in Kerala and leave alone Animal sacrifice I can’t even find a Veg-Non veg restaurant in close proximity. Also if it is happening it doesn’t make it right, I am sure there are some obscure villages still discriminating against Dalits or tonsuring heads of widows after husbands death, doesn’t mean it is justified.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

You see the difference between eating meat and creating a whole public spectacle of slaughtering an animal in front of everyone right ?

Yeah, what's next? People shouldn't eat meat in front of everyone, too?

 

[street cricketer]

I have been to every major temple in South India bar Sabarimala and other temples in Kerala and leave alone Animal sacrifice I can’t even find a Veg-Non veg restaurant in close proximity. Also if it is happening it doesn’t make it right, I am sure there are some obscure villages still discriminating against Dalits or tonsuring heads of widows after husbands death, doesn’t mean it is justified.

Well you have to realise the hinduism practised in north india is a bit different from the hinduism practised in south india. In the Vedic era, after the fall of the Indus valley civilization, when the Vedic religion was talking shape, the Vedic gods worshipped were primarily Indra, Varuna, Vayu, Agni, Surya, etc. Tribal and indigenous gods were largely worshipped in south India. Murugan is said to be the primary deity worshipped in south India from time immemorial and it is believed that Shiva was also a tribal deity - he was described after all as a hunter and forest dweller who hunted and ate his prey in the earlier hindu texts. Gradually the tribal deities got appropriated into the Vedic religion that transformed into modern version of Hinduism that we know now, which spread all across India. All major religions, regardless of what their followers think, developed by appropriating pre existing belief systems and Hinduism was no exception to that rule.

You would probably be surprised when you learn that animal sacrifice was an integral part of the Vedic religion and it was only later that it transformed into the modern brahminical version of Hinduism where an "aryan" was described to be as the righteous, an upholder of dharma and one who was pure and abstained from eating meat (along with other qualities). So it is no surprise when the people from north India and western India, who are primarily Indo aryans by classification, develop an aversion for animal sacrifice as they're primarily vegetarian by their dietary and religious preferences. Even in north India, you would have states like Jharkhand and Chattisgarh that are home to more indigenous communities, being more meat eating than vegetarian like their other north Indian state counterparts.

Of course, all this does not mean the deities worshipped in north india are not worshipped in the south. Ganesh, Vishnu, Hanuman, Parvati, Krishna are all very popular in south india too, but you'll find that the patronage towards Ram is very less in the south and festivals like Rama navami, etc., aren't that popular here, except among the upper caste. It is why the Ram janmabhoomi movement isn't popular in the south as it is in the north. In contrast, the main deities worshipped are Murugan, Shiva, Ayyappan, Balaji, Ganesh and a host of tribal deities that every family has. So even though south Indians worship all the deities I mentioned above, they also have their own clan gods that each clan has and that clan god is considered as the supreme deity foremost because every good event in the family is done first with the blessings of that clan/tribal deity. It is also why the further interior you go into the villages, you'll find worship of more tribal/indigenous deities than any other popular Hindu god you know. And no, I'm not talking about some isolated village that has no contact with the modern world, every village in south will have their own tribal gods like Ayyanar, Muniyandi, Mariyamman and a lot of female deities. And believe me, those native traditions are not bound by the brahminical version of Hinduism where eating meat is considered impure and sin, meat is offered in a lot of those rural temples, a lot more than what you think is prevalent. The large south indian temples you visited would not have indigenous/tribal gods, you would have to go to villages to see those temples.

 

[OMB]

Well you have to realise the hinduism practised in north india is a bit different from the hinduism practised in south india. In the Vedic era, after the fall of the Indus valley civilization, when the Vedic religion was talking shape, the Vedic gods worshipped were primarily Indra, Varuna, Vayu, Agni, Surya, etc. Tribal and indigenous gods were largely worshipped in south India. Murugan is said to be the primary deity worshipped in south India from time immemorial and it is believed that Shiva was also a tribal deity - he was described after all as a hunter and forest dweller who hunted and ate his prey in the earlier hindu texts. Gradually the tribal deities got appropriated into the Vedic religion that transformed into modern version of Hinduism that we know now, which spread all across India. All major religions, regardless of what their followers think, developed by appropriating pre existing belief systems and Hinduism was no exception to that rule.

You would probably be surprised when you learn that animal sacrifice was an integral part of the Vedic religion and it was only later that it transformed into the modern brahminical version of Hinduism where an "aryan" was described to be as the righteous, an upholder of dharma and one who was pure and abstained from eating meat (along with other qualities). So it is no surprise when the people from north India and western India, who are primarily Indo aryans by classification, develop an aversion for animal sacrifice as they're primarily vegetarian by their dietary and religious preferences. Even in north India, you would have states like Jharkhand and Chattisgarh that are home to more indigenous communities, being more meat eating than vegetarian like their other north Indian state counterparts.

Of course, all this does not mean the deities worshipped in north india are not worshipped in the south. Ganesh, Vishnu, Hanuman, Parvati, Krishna are all very popular in south india too, but you'll find that the patronage towards Ram is very less in the south and festivals like Rama navami, etc., aren't that popular here, except among the upper caste. It is why the Ram janmabhoomi movement isn't popular in the south as it is in the north. In contrast, the main deities worshipped are Murugan, Shiva, Ayyappan, Balaji, Ganesh and a host of tribal deities that every family has. So even though south Indians worship all the deities I mentioned above, they also have their own clan gods that each clan has and that clan god is considered as the supreme deity foremost because every good event in the family is done first with the blessings of that clan/tribal deity. It is also why the further interior you go into the villages, you'll find worship of more tribal/indigenous deities than any other popular Hindu god you know. And no, I'm not talking about some isolated village that has no contact with the modern world, every village in south will have their own tribal gods like Ayyanar, Muniyandi, Mariyamman and a lot of female deities. And believe me, those native traditions are not bound by the brahminical version of Hinduism where eating meat is considered impure and sin, meat is offered in a lot of those rural temples, a lot more than what you think is prevalent. The large south indian temples you visited would not have indigenous/tribal gods, you would have to go to villages to see those temples.

It may well have been happening in villages but largely it is not happening in South India. I have been to many temples and rarely see any meat being offered. Exceptions maybe there but they are not the norm.

 

[OMB]

Yeah, what's next? People shouldn't eat meat in front of everyone, too?

I think the OP has been unreasonably opinionated and putting a religious spin on this ban where it is just an issue of health concerns (animal welfare laws).

Why protest? Such rules bring better regulation over the food industry.

 

[street cricketer]

It may well have been happening in villages but largely it is not happening in South India. I have been to many temples and rarely see any meat being offered. Exceptions maybe there but they are not the norm.

I never said it is the norm. I only said it is common to usually give a goat sacrifice in rural temples during any special event in someone's family. It's not like they offer mutton pepper masala as prasad daily in the temple.

 

[Local.Dada]

Well you have to realise the hinduism practised in north india is a bit different from the hinduism practised in south india. In the Vedic era, after the fall of the Indus valley civilization, when the Vedic religion was talking shape, the Vedic gods worshipped were primarily Indra, Varuna, Vayu, Agni, Surya, etc. Tribal and indigenous gods were largely worshipped in south India. Murugan is said to be the primary deity worshipped in south India from time immemorial and it is believed that Shiva was also a tribal deity - he was described after all as a hunter and forest dweller who hunted and ate his prey in the earlier hindu texts. Gradually the tribal deities got appropriated into the Vedic religion that transformed into modern version of Hinduism that we know now, which spread all across India. All major religions, regardless of what their followers think, developed by appropriating pre existing belief systems and Hinduism was no exception to that rule.

You would probably be surprised when you learn that animal sacrifice was an integral part of the Vedic religion and it was only later that it transformed into the modern brahminical version of Hinduism where an "aryan" was described to be as the righteous, an upholder of dharma and one who was pure and abstained from eating meat (along with other qualities). So it is no surprise when the people from north India and western India, who are primarily Indo aryans by classification, develop an aversion for animal sacrifice as they're primarily vegetarian by their dietary and religious preferences. Even in north India, you would have states like Jharkhand and Chattisgarh that are home to more indigenous communities, being more meat eating than vegetarian like their other north Indian state counterparts.

Of course, all this does not mean the deities worshipped in north india are not worshipped in the south. Ganesh, Vishnu, Hanuman, Parvati, Krishna are all very popular in south india too, but you'll find that the patronage towards Ram is very less in the south and festivals like Rama navami, etc., aren't that popular here, except among the upper caste. It is why the Ram janmabhoomi movement isn't popular in the south as it is in the north. In contrast, the main deities worshipped are Murugan, Shiva, Ayyappan, Balaji, Ganesh and a host of tribal deities that every family has. So even though south Indians worship all the deities I mentioned above, they also have their own clan gods that each clan has and that clan god is considered as the supreme deity foremost because every good event in the family is done first with the blessings of that clan/tribal deity. It is also why the further interior you go into the villages, you'll find worship of more tribal/indigenous deities than any other popular Hindu god you know. And no, I'm not talking about some isolated village that has no contact with the modern world, every village in south will have their own tribal gods like Ayyanar, Muniyandi, Mariyamman and a lot of female deities. And believe me, those native traditions are not bound by the brahminical version of Hinduism where eating meat is considered impure and sin, meat is offered in a lot of those rural temples, a lot more than what you think is prevalent. The large south indian temples you visited would not have indigenous/tribal gods, you would have to go to villages to see those temples.

Dude I don’t know why you gave me such a long lecture lol. Have you ever been to Tirupati, temples in Kanchipuram, Madurai,Bhadrachalam etc

You are showing me exceptions to the rule.
I don’t deny some obscure villages are doing it.

In fact forget temples or temple surroundings people don’t even eat meat before visiting these temples either. Obviously it is not a hard and fast rule but people who have faith and are religious usually do. South Indians included. That is the norm.

In fact the first thing auto/ cab drivers ask you when you come down from the Tirupati hill to Tirupati city is if you want to go to a non-veg restaurant because meat is banned on the hill.

Don’t spread half information here. I have lived in multi cultural societies all my life and I know what customs most mainstream cultures have. At least the ones on the surface.if some tribes are doing it, I have no idea.

Anyway this isn’t about the morality of eating meat or faith etc, taking an animal to slaughter after decorating it, playing music or whatever around it , creating a celebratory atmosphere and having kids watch the process is barbaric.

If my kids wants to eat a steak or pork, even though they are taboo meats I would let them try it because rather they try it in front of me than behind my back and find out themselves but if they are excited to go to a slaughter house to see the whole end to end process I would be really concerned.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I think the OP has been unreasonably opinionated and putting a religious spin on this ban where it is just an issue of health concerns (animal welfare laws).

Why protest? Such rules bring better regulation over the food industry.

Problem is, given the ruling party's other legislations over last few years seems to be aimed squarely at Muslim citizens, then OP's 'spin' is probably a correct analysis to many observers. We are seeing this increasingly across Europe as well, and it is always dressed up in more diplomatic terms.

 

[street cricketer]

Dude I don’t know why you gave me such a long lecture lol. Have you ever been to Tirupati, temples in Kanchipuram, Madurai,Bhadrachalam etc

You are showing me exceptions to the rule.
I don’t deny some obscure villages are doing it.

In fact forget temples or temple surroundings people don’t even eat meat before visiting these temples either. Obviously it is not a hard and fast rule but people who have faith and are religious usually do. South Indians included. That is the norm.

In fact the first thing auto/ cab drivers ask you when you come down from the Tirupati hill to Tirupati city is if you want to go to a non-veg restaurant because meat is banned on the hill.

Don’t spread half information here. I have lived in multi cultural societies all my life and I know what customs most mainstream cultures have. At least the ones on the surface.if some tribes are doing it, I have no idea.

Anyway this isn’t about the morality of eating meat or faith etc, taking an animal to slaughter after decorating it, playing music or whatever around it , creating a celebratory atmosphere and having kids watch the process is barbaric.

If my kids wants to eat a steak or pork, even though they are taboo meats I would let them try it because rather they try it in front of me than behind my back and find out themselves but if they are excited to go to a slaughter house to see the whole end to end process I would be really concerned.

I find it really cute that you're trying to explain how Tirupati works to someone from a family that makes pilgrimage to Tirupati every year. Tirupati is not even 150kms away from where I live and you can bet I know very well how Tirupati pilgrimage works having been there countless times.

Look, I get it, english isn't first language to all of us but what I'm saying is not really rocket science to find it difficult to understand. Let me try once again. All the temples you're saying are mainstream temples. I'm not talking about them. Tirupati, Madurai, and even Kanchipuram are not villages. I'm talking about the small temples that you find in every village, not any obscure village, which don't have multiple deities. Usually the small temple would be only for a single tribal deity like Ayyanar, Muniyandi, Muneeswaran, etc. I understand that there might not be similar tribal/clan deities in north india or it is less common, but it is very common in the south.

And I repeat, you won't find those tribal deities in the mainstream big temples that you find in Tirupati, Kalahasti, Madurai, Kanchipuram or Rameswaram. These are found in every village in the south and almost every south indian family would have one clan deity.

Read this if you need more information.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grāmadevatā

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_sacrifice_in_Hinduism

 

[guna]

This is stupid as usual by BJP. Let people eat what they want. However, I am not in favor of killing the animal on the streets like it normally happens as the streets and drainages turn bloody. It is very disgusting.

 

[KingKhanWC]

India has no right to enforce anything on occupied land.

Yet another Hindutva extremist government move to hurt the sentiments of Muslims, make their life harder. India should leave and worry about its own Hindu population who eat animals.

 

[PakLFC]

From what I know the people of IoK do not want Pak to interfere in their affairs. That being the case let them fight for their own rights, no reason for Pak to care. It is the people of AJK not IoK that love Pak.

 

[OMB]

This is stupid as usual by BJP. Let people eat what they want. However, I am not in favor of killing the animal on the streets like it normally happens as the streets and drainages turn bloody. It is very disgusting.

Reminds me of Wuhan wet market scenario

 

[Balthazar]

It's a welcome move if it's made illegal but obviously they are targeting only the muslim community. Nothing to do with the animal wellfare.

 

[Giannis]

No surprises, Indian is a colonial state

 

[MenInG]

Pakistan on Wednesday strongly condemned the reported restrictions imposed by Indian authorities on Eidul Azha prayers and sacrifice of animals in Indian-occupied Kashmir, saying they showed "complete disrespect and deep-rooted prejudice" against Muslims.

The Foreign Office's statement came amid reports that residents could not offer Eid prayers due to the continued military siege and restrictions imposed by authorities at major mosques in the region.

"Imposition of restrictions on prayers and religious festivities on one of the most important days of Islamic calendar represents complete disrespect and deep-rooted prejudice by the Indian government for the sentiments of the Muslims of [occupied Kashmir]," the FO said, adding that it was also a flagrant violation of their right to freedom of religion.

The statement urged the international community, United Nations, and other human rights organisations to take notice of the "brutal suppression of the religious rights and freedoms of the Kashmiri people in violation of international laws and conventions".

It stressed that India could not "break the will of the Kashmiris and suppress their aspirations for freedom from illegal Indian occupation" through such measures.

"Pakistan reiterates its support of Kashmiri people for their inalienable right to self-determination as enshrined in the relevant UN Security Council resolutions," the FO concluded.

According to the Kashmir Media Service (KMS), officials barred Muslims from offering prayers in the historic Jamia Masjid, Dargah Hazratbal, Eidgahs and other big mosques by erecting barricades.

Major mosques and shrines including Kashmir's largest mosque, Jamia Masjid Srinagar, were closed, while Eid prayers were allowed only in a few small mosques located in peripheral areas of the Kashmir valley.

The faithful were also unable to sacrifice bovines freely in the territory.

The region's political leadership including Syed Ali Gilani, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Muhammad Yasin Malik, Shabbir Ahmad Shah, Dr Hameed Fayaz, Masarrat Aalam Butt, Aasiya Andrabi, Nayeem Ahmad Khan and numerous other leaders and activists are in house detention or in jails.

Last week, the Indian government had ordered authorities in occupied Kashmir to ban the slaughter of all animals in the Muslim-majority region for Eidul Azha.

A government communication addressed to civil and police authorities in the region on Thursday asked them to stop “illegal killing/sacrifices of cows/calves, camels & other animals”, citing animal welfare laws.

A day later, however, authorities said there was no ban on the sacrifice of animals, with a senior government official saying the earlier communication was “misconstrued”, and the government had been seeking proper transportation of animals and the prevention of cruelty during the festival.

 

[guna]

It's a welcome move if it's made illegal but obviously they are targeting only the muslim community. Nothing to do with the animal wellfare.

Animal sacrifice should also be banned in Hindu Temples. Rules should be same for all.