Oped»
Killing time
- NOTE OF DISSENT
NOV 29 - There has been a huge hue and cry over the animal sacrifices at Gadhimai. The media, both at home and international, spoke of large numbers of animals being sacrificed there. The number ranges from just over 100,000 to half a million. The Gadhimai Mela came just days after Thanksgiving Day in the U.S. where millions of Americans across the country partook of the Thanksgiving dinner whose speciality is thought to be turkey meat. No one would even imagine banning the slaughter of turkeys since they were raised to be killed for the Thanksgiving dinner. And none would count the number of turkeys sacrificed (killed) to cater to the appetite of those who follow a tradition that dates back to the 17th century.
The Old Testament speaks of Abraham about to sacrifice his favourite son Isaac when he was stopped by the Divine. Animal sacrifice in one form or the other — a euphemism for killing — has been going on in one form or the other since the dawn of history. Animal lovers — one also hopes that they are vegetarians — have rightly sought to prevent cruelty to animals, all animals. But there is more than a token of hypocrisy in their present opposition to the Gadhimai sacrifice, especially from those who oppose the sacrifice merely to abide by the dictates of those organisations and institutions that are selective in mounting such opposition.
Killing of men, women, children, infants, animals, reptiles or insects (all of God’s creations, if one believes in God) to rid oneself of sins is not the right thing. But there are people who believe in such a practice, and they do so sincerely. And therein lies the conflict between those who support the tradition and those who oppose it. There are many in Nepal who do not believe in animal sacrifice or, for that matter, any kind of sacrifice that involves killing. But many of them do not raise any eyebrows when those who believe in animal sacrifice carry on their sacrifices. But animal rights advocates have been very critical of the tradition in Nepal not only during the Gadhimai Mela but also during Dashain when a large number of animals are slaughtered. Animals are also slaughtered in non-Hindu festivals. Animal rights advocates worth the name would do well to ensure that they themselves are not a party to the killing of any animal whether in a slaughter house or in any place of worship. Anyone who eats any kind of meat is indirectly helping in denying the right of the animal or the bird to live.
There are some monks belonging to a certain religion that forbids killing of animals of any kind who come out openly to purchase meat for their own consumption. Their argument is that while they and their religion do not permit killing, it is permissible to eat meat when the animal or bird or reptile is slaughtered by others. It is a strange logic, but one that you and I can see anywhere at butcher shops in the city. If even leaders of a religion that forbids killing can get around using their own brand of logic, how can one condemn others who sincerely undertake the sacrifice because of their faith and belief?
There are so many aberrations in every walk of life in this country that nothing seems to work according to logic. Animal rights advocates who are needed and should be active in different areas become active only when animal sacrifice associated with religious practices come to the fore. Are they mere hypocrites or are they being financed by groups that want to slander the religion that permits such sacrifices to take place?
The Gadhimai Mela sacrifices may not have pleased a large number of people who label themselves as civilised. Killing in any form, as a civilised person may be aware, is not permissible but goes on around the world. Refinements may be needed in carrying out the sacrifices in temples and other places in the country, such as bringing about instant death to the animal or bird and ensuring that unnecessary pain is not inflicted. The use of very sharp instruments may be one of the answers. This would lessen the cruelty to the animals. But such
cruelty is not confined to the sacrificial altars.
Animal rights advocates would be doing the animals and birds a favour if they were to go out and ensure that the butchering of thousands birds and animals that take place every day in the city to cater to the carnivorous appetite of the ever-growing Kathmandu Valley population. Do they have any idea of the number of animals and birds butchered every day? Are they quite content that the animals and birds slaughtered do not suffer cruelty at the hands of the butchers? And this happens not once a year, but every day of the 365 days in the year (the ekadashi and aunsi that were meatless days in the erstwhile Hindu Nepal are meat eating days in the present secular Nepal). And in addition, the central and local authorities do not even bother to ensure that the meat sold in the market is medically fit for human consumption. Animal rights activists would do well to rise up and visit areas where animals are mercilessly slaughtered and prevent this from happening. They would be doing the animals a much greater favour this way.
Many of our ancestors born and brought up in the country used to offer animal sacrifices, but parents of many of us stopped the practice long ago; and most of the present generation do not do this. And this was not because of any concerted opposition to animal sacrifice mounted by varied groups (they did not even exist in this country then), but because most of us realised the futility of the practice. And even today, the best way to stop animal and bird sacrifice is through the spread of education, an area in which all governments present and past and all political parties claim to place top priority; but when in actual practice it comes to allocating budgetary funds, the educational area continues to suffer as it did in the past. The world is a complex mix of everything; and as the Bard said, there are many things in heaven and
earth than are dreamt of in anyone’s philosophy.
Headlines
Advertisements
