It is generally believed that BJP victory in the three assembly elections was on the plank of Bijali, Sadak, Pani (BSP). Whatever be the truth of that, the so-called Hindutva agenda is starkly visible in these states with the BJP Governments firmly in power. MP has a unique distinction of having a 'World Renouncer', Sadhvi as the chief commissar of the state. And true to the Sadhvi spirit, she has been bringing in the clerical presence in the matters of state. Right from the word go, i.e. her swearing in ceremony, she has brought in Hindutva into her style of functioning and polices. Not only that her Sadhu brethren were the guests of honor at the swearing ceremony, she also lost no time in banning liquor and non vegetarian food in the three 'holy' cities and to back it up she is now giving a 'cow tilt' to MPs economy by giving primacy to establishing Goshala (Cow sheds)(Feb 2004) Many a previous RSS-VHP campaigns around giving the status of mother to cow went un responded so far. With Sadhvi Uma finally the 'Cow mother' is getting a new place in Indian society. In a society where the young mothers are facing increasing deprivations 'Cow mother' will be given the place of honor in the second Laboratory of Hindu Rashtra, Madhya Pradesh.

Why is cow a holy animal, why has she to be given a place above other animals which are equally if not more useful is a long story. Overall cow is the major emotional symbol of the upper caste Hindutva politics, next only to Lord Ram. Lord Ram has been milked heavily for electoral purposes, Ram Janmbhumi campaign was acknowledged even by Advani as having given a fillip in the politics, and now its cow's turn to swell the quantum of the electoral milk for this politics.

One recalls, just a couple of years ago Prof. D.N. Jha a historian from Delhi university had been experiencing the nightmares of 'threats to life' from anonymous callers who were trying to prevail upon him not to go ahead with the publication of his well researched work, 'Holy Cow: Beef in Indian Dietary traditions'. It is a work of serious scholarship based on authentic sources in tune with methods of scientific research in History. The book demonstrates that contrary to the popular beliefs even today large number of Indians, the indigenous people in particular and many other communities in general consume beef unmindful of the dictates of the Hindutva forces who confer the status of mother to her. Currently 72 communities in Kerala-not all of them untouchable perhaps-prefer beef to the expensive mutton and the Hindutva forces are trying to prevail upon them also to stop eating the same.

Jha breaks the myth that Muslim rulers introduced beef eating in India. Much before the advent of Islam in India beef had been associated with Indian dietary practices. Also that it is not tenable to hold that dietary habits are a mark of community identity.

A survey of ancient Indian scriptures, especially Vedas shows that amongst the nomadic, pastoral Aryans, who settled here, animal sacrifice was a dominant feature of theirs' till the emergence of settled agriculture. Cattle were the major property during this phase and they offered the same to propitiate the gods. Wealth was equated with ownership of the cattle. Many a gods like Indra and Agni are described to be having especial preferences for different types of flesh-Indra had weakness for bull's meat and Agni for bulls' and cows'. It is recorded that the Maruts and the Asvins were also offered cows. In Vedas there is a mention of around 250 animals out of which at least 50 were supposed to be fit for sacrifice. In Mahabharata there is a mention of a king named Rantideva who achieved great fame by distributing food grains and beef to Brahmins. Taittiriya Brahman categorically tells us: 'Verily the cow is food' (atho annam via gauh) and Yajnavalkya's insistence on eating the tender (amsala) flesh of the cow is well known. Even later Brahminical texts provide the evidence for eating beef.

In therapeutic section of Charak Samhita (pages 86-87) flesh of cow is prescribed as a medicine for various diseases. It is also prescribed for making soup. It is emphatically advised as a cure for irregular fever, consumption, and emaciation. The fat of the cow is recommended for debility and rheumatism.

With the rise of agricultural economy the massive changes occurring in the society changed the perceptions of people at large. At the time there were ritualistic practices, with which Brahmins were identified. Even Manusmirit did not prohibit the consumption of beef. Buddha attacked these practices, which involved the sacrifices. There were sacrifices, which involved 500 Oxen, 500 male calves, 500 female calves and 500 sheep to be tied to the sacrificial pole for slaughter. Buddha pointed out that aswamedh, purusmedha, vajapeya sacrifices did not produce good results. According to a story in Digha Nikaya, when Buddha was touring Magadha, a Brahmin called Kutadanta was preparing for a sacrifice with 700 bulls and 700 goats. Buddha intervened and stopped him. His rejection of animal sacrifice and emphasis on non-injury to animals assumed a new significance in the context of new agriculture, which required cattle.

The emphasis on non-violence by Buddha was not blind or rigid. He did taste beef and it is well known that he died due to eating pork. Emperor Ashok after converting to Buddhism did not turn to vegetarianism. He restricted the number of animals to be killed for the royal kitchen.

So where do matters change and how did cow become a symbol of faith, reverence and assumed the status of 'mother hood'. Over a period of time mainly after the emergence of Buddhism or rather as an accompaniment of the Brahminical attack on the Buddhism, the practices started changing. The threat posed by Buddhism to Brahminical value system was too severe. In response to low caste slipping away from the grip of Brahminism, the battle was taken at all the levels. At philosophical level Shankar reasserted the supremacy of Brahminical values, at political level King Pushyamitra Shung ensured the physical attack on Buddhist monks, at the level of symbols King Shashank got the Bodhi tree destroyed. One of the arsenals of rise of Buddhism was the protection of cattle wealth, which was ideally, needed for the agricultural economy. In a way while Brahminism 'succeeded' in banishing Buddhism from India but it had to also to transform itself from the 'animal sacrifice' state to the one which could be in tune with the times while preserving their own interests. It is here that this ideology took up cow as a symbol of their ideological march. But unlike Buddha whose pronouncements were based on reason, the counteraction of Brahminical ideology took the form of a blind faith based assertion. So while Buddha's Non-Violence was for the preservation of animal wealth for the social and compassionate reasons the counter was based purely on symbolism. The followers of Brahmincal ideology accuse Buddha for 'weakening' India due to his doctrine of non-violence. But he was not a cow worshipper or vegetarian in the current Brahmincal sense.

Despite the gradual rigidification of Brahminical 'cow as mother' stance, large sections of low castes continued the practice of beef eating. The followers of Buddhism continued to eat flesh including beef. Since Brahmanism is the dominant religious tradition, Babur the first Mughal emperor in his will to his son Humayun, in deference to these notions, advised his son Humayun to respect the Cow and avoid cow slaughter. The issue came back with the construction of Hindutva ideology and politics in response to the rising Indian national movement, and asserted the demand for ban on cow slaughter. In post independence India RSS repeatedly raised this issue as a mass campaign but without any response to its call till 1980s.

While one must respect the sentiments of those who worship cow and regard her as their mother, but to initiate the state sponsored step to promote these emotional symbolisms is travesty of democracy. Madhya Pradesh correctly needs Bijali, Sadak Pani. Cow, bullocks and buffalos do need a tender caring; the ecology has to be respected. But can it take precedence over human problems? As such there is no tussle between communities as for as dietary habits and respect for other's tradition and faiths are concerned. While adhering to one's own faith, one should be tolerant to others faiths and beliefs. The measures as being initiated by the Sadhvi do smack of imposition of her own belief systems on the state as a whole and that too at the expense of state exchequer.