|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | COMMENTARY | SNAFUspheres | |||
|
April 23, 1998
SPECIALS
|
How readers responded to Varsha Bhosle's earlier columns
Date sent: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 07:22:47 -0700 Again Varsha you are so right. In the Western world, there are very few Indian Brahmins or their children who don't eat any kind of meat. Today's factory farms produce cattle only for consumption, whether you kill a chicken, fish or a cow -- the cruelty factor is the same. Indians are notorious for mistreating a living cow or a bull. Look around and see how our dudhwallas treat their animals, I don't think they are treated like God. The BJP has run out of steam to bring any real changes into people's lives. Look at the hungry, the illiterate and homeless. We are then coupled with a swelling population. First solve the problems of toilets in the cities, don't worry about the cow. Those who have not visited a slaughterhouse in the USA or Europe, should do that for a crash course in humane disposal of animals. Maybe we can incorporate some of the ideas into our Indian abbatoirs. Eat thy beef and don't sell your "Gopala" theory, we need McDonalds and KFC to show us what hygiene and a clean way of serving food is. Unfortunately Singh's Tandoori may be juicy but his cleanliness is in question; especially on a hot day in front of a Tandoori oven you can see his hands busy scratching himself. Maybe we should incorporate within religions that people should not piss or shit around temples, mosques, churches etc.
Date sent: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 18:18:58 UNK Since Ms Bhosle has cited the Vedas, Gita, Gandhiji, Lord Krishna and Hinduism in support of her theory on cow slaughter, I request her to enlighten us by answering the following points: 1. The statement Gandhiji made on his choice between cow slaughter and Swaraj. 2. The reasons given by our scriptures (the Mahabharat, Bhagvatam, Ramcharitra Manas) for the incarnation of Sri Ram and Krishna. 3. The Sanskrit words used by the Vedas, one of which describes the cow as the one that CANNOT be killed. 4. Any book or sect of Hinduism (Vedic, Jain, Buddhist, Sikh, Arya Samaj, Shaivites, Vaishanav) that extols the virtue of cow slaughter. 5. The only condition put forward by the ruler of Sanjan for admitting the Parsi refugees when they came to India. 6. The aims of the Khalsa as illustrated by Guru Gobind Singhji in his famous poem.
Gopi Maliwal
Hongkong
Date sent: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 15:27:52 -0400 I enjoyed reading the piece, and found the arguments very well articulated. Ms Bhosle mentioned that she "has accepted Ram Janmabhoomi." It would be very interesting to read about her views on this issue. Sanjay
Date sent: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 09:59:55 +0800 The lady is still wet behind the ears. Editor please note:- Give her a few years reporting the crime beat in Bombay before you allow her to write such columns. Her grasp of issues is pathetic. Andy R
Date sent: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 13:58:30 EDT First of all, the title of the article, "Why is Varsha afraid of cow slaughter" is misleading. Poor editorial job, or was is deliberate: a commie act of spreading lies? I consider myself a BJP supporter, but can never agree to ban on beef eating. Such issues are frivolous and have nothing to do with Hinduism. I respect those who are vegetarian. But I also want them to respect those who eat beef or pork. Eat anything to be strong and healthy. I have seen second generation Indians in the US who are physically much stronger than their parents. Good diet helps. I would rather have a beef eating Hindu who would be a world champion, than a vegetarian who is a loser and who considers turning the other cheek as Hinduism. I would plead with those misguided BJP supporters not to let this issue be the one to differentiate between Hindus and others. Well done Varsha.
Date sent: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 17:19:06 -0700 If VB can get into the Opposition mode, doesn't it apply to everyone else too? Can't everyone have an independent mind? In one of her earlier articles, she questions "pinko" HKS Surjeet on wearing his turban. Couldn't he have joined the party because he supports certain portions but not all of the party's agenda? He might be religious but perhaps he was attracted to the party's commitment to let thuggery be the way of life in India. That doesn't mean he needs a hair cut. Arvind
Date sent: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 12:12:48 +0530 Well, the article is just too good. Clearly demarcates where the line for fighting for Hinduism be drawn. Answer to her last question, I am in the same ranks as her. Vikas Sukla
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 17:09:50 -0700 Probably pressurised, Varsha has been bogged down by hurling this article on the faces on Hindutva-vadis just to prove that she is impartial. In fact there was no need for such justification. How can beef eating be justified just because our ancestors during the period of the Vedas and Upanishads did that? Hinduism continuously became evil and cleansed itself by fresh ideas over the ages. Emergence of Buddhism and Jainism was a result of this process of improvisation. After learning the good effects of vegetarian meals, why should we go back to that black period and start eating meat? However, I agree with Varsha that due to the very good utility of cows, they became domestic animals and that is why we stopped eating beef. This utility is not lost yet. Some early humans ate humans, dogs, cats. Should we then follow that example? And if the people from the West treat it as a bad practice, don't they show hypocrisy? The fact remains that no principle can be stretched too far. There should be no attempts to see non-beef eating Hindus as hypocrites or backward. The State should not make any laws in this regard. However, if the minority community wish to antagonise the Hindus by killing cows, they should be willing to face the antipathy from Hindus.
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 16:51:04 -0700 I only take objection to your 'yuck' in "I'll be stuck with, yuck, only bhindis and karelas!" There is nothing wrong in eating vegetables, (and that's not to say that there is anything wrong in eating non-vegetarian food). Arun
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 17:34:54 -0500 (CDT) The usual bigoted column befitting a 'Nazi' (I think her favourite word). I have absolutely no respect for this entity that calls itself a writer.
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 17:04:06 -0500 I agree with her idea, but not to the way she writes. As usual this article is also not so good (I mean the content, the language, words, remarks about others etc etc). Hard to believe she has lots of fans. But then I know the world is like that... "YOU ARE UNIQUE, LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE!" Paul P Mallier
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 11:18:43 -0700 I find the tone and the language of Ms Bhosle extremely offensive. I am sorry that these kind of vague rantings aren't fit for someone claiming to be a journalist (or whatever this lady's role may be on your site.) While I may agree with her contention that everyone has a right to decide what one eats or doesn't eat, her views are quite poorly expressed. Mind you, even then no one has absolute rights in any society as all such rights are defined based on local circumstances. Will any society allow cannibalism to people who can afford to buy poor people from third world countries to eat? She makes some vague references to certain writings in the Upanishads and Mahabharata. Does she understand Sanskrit? If no, then which other translation has she used to draw her inferences? How can you quote a reference even though you haven't even read the original source (or its translation) yourself? Little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I am sorry to say that Ms Bhosle has a long way to grow and learn how to express her views positively and in a polished way.
R K Singh
USA
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 09:51:49 "The beauty of Hinduism lies in this very practicality -- of an individual's considering the odds of his own temporal actions." She says it all, right there. Only wish it were that simple...
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 04:52:53 -0400 Holy cow -- this is exactly what I think of both beef eating Hindus and *Hinduism* as a whole. Living in North America I frequently get the "but I thought you Hindus don't eat beef/meat." But, first of all, what is a Hindu? Is it a religion? No, I don't think so. It's just an expression for a way of life in the subcontinent. Yes, I do think that every Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Jain and Jew in India, living in the style of an Indian (whatever that may mean) is a Hindu. It's just a way of life, which has changed and moulded with the change in times. As Varsha put down in her article -- this is what makes it an enduring philosophy. And the best way to let grow, is be democratic, let it change with the people and for the people. Raghu
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 18:21:39 +0900 While you are absolutely right, it must also be remembered that meaningless slaughter for money can put us in a real tough position wrt. livestock. Take the case of the Al-Kabeer Katalkhana in Hyderabad, it can process too many animals in a day. That way we will be depleted of cows and buffalos which form a very important part of our (Indian) life -- economically, not religiously. People should have the right to eat what they want to, but merely for making a fast buck slaughter should be discouraged. What do you say? Uday
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 16:21:34 -0700 I read the column with astonishment and dismay. Varsha Bhosle, that trumpeter of militant Hindutva, destruction of mosques and the whole shooting match, really hasn't a clue what Hinduism and Bhagavad Gita are all about, does she? She sums up the Gita, thus: "In the Gita, Krishna's ensuing argument may be boiled down to a Machiavellian one-liner: the end (of establishing a dharma-sanstha) justifies the means (massacre of kinsmen): Let the arrows rip and leave the consequences to Me. Which, incidentally, Arjun did. The beauty of Hinduism lies in this very practicality -- of an individual's considering the odds of his own temporal actions." Really? And here, silly ignorant Gentoo and Gita-reader that I am, I thought it was just the opposite: it is the means, and not the end that count. And dharma-samsthaapana (what exactly is a dharma-samstha and where does it appear in the Gita? Does it have something to do with confining dharma to an institution as in mental?) is the exclusive province of God, not of Man, or so I thought till I was vouchsafed the Gospel according to Bhosle came along. Obviously, it is time to upgrade. Sleep well, Thomas Babington Macaulay. You have triumphed beyond the grave, producing convented neo-nationalist mouthpieces that are functional illiterates in the essence of their own religion. Bapa Rao
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 00:22:55 EDT It was an informative article. Nonetheless, it was not impeccable. This was due to the lack of knowledge about Islam on the writer's part, I presume. Ms Bhosle wrote: "Gou-hatya as paap and sooar-khana as haraam are two faces of the same counterfeit coin." She labels the latter as a belief of mad fundamentalists of Islam. It is not correct. Either the author/editor lacks the knowledge about Islam's stand on this issue, or you just didn't bother to verify your author's parroting before putting it on the web. Before you inform others, learn yourself first. Without learning, I think, educating/informing others is nothing less than creating a cult. This is how cults are produced. Islam proscribes pork eating. It is not the belief of any mad fundamentalist of Islam. I hope you will learn from this mistake. Azhar
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 21:46:57 -0400 In trying to oppose the ban on cow-slaughter you have made a most erroneous, yet common, comparison, that between the Koranic injunction against eating pigs and the Hindu custom of cow protection. There are a few important distinctions which you must keep in mind before making this comparison. 1. Hindus are reluctant to KILL cows (let alone eat them) for HUMANITARIAN reasons, because we revere the cow as 'mother.' Muslims are not forbidden to KILL pigs, they are just forbidden to eat them. Furthermore, the Koranic injunction is based upon the perception of pigs as disgusting, vile creatures. Hindus, on the the contrary, due to their custom of respecting all life (not just cows) have divinised the 'pig' (more precisely, the boar) as an animal fit for God himself to incarnate as... the second incarnation of Vishnu (although I myself have no love for the animal, I assure you). 2. For practical and 'sentimental' (yes, that's right) reasons, you should not compare a person's attitude towards a pig and and her attitude towards a cow. It is like comparing a person's attitudes towards a roach and and her attitude towards a beautiful butterfly. Get the point? 3. And you are wrong in asserting that a Hindu who zealously advocates a ban on cow-slaughter be categorised along with the 'mad Muslim fundamentalist.' It is not the Islamic injunction against killing pigs which makes Islam a violent, intolerant, and exclusivist ideology, nor does following this diktat render a Muslim a 'mad Muslim fundamentalist.' In similar fashion just because Hinduism (or at least the overwhelming consensus in Hinduism) advocates the protection of cows does not make Hinduism a violent, intolerant, and exclusivist ideology. Nor does assuming such a position make a Hindu a fundamentalist in the same fashion as a 'mad Muslim fundamentalist'. 4. Finally, as an aside, please, please, please try and refrain from comparing the Bhagavad Gita and Machiavelli. For further enlightenment, please refer to point #2. Amit Rajesh Nishar
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 20:49:16 -0400 Good article. However, I feel it is necessary to the para which says : "sumptuous feasts abound with the meat of pigs, deer, sheep, fowl and young buffalo calves roasted on spits with ghee dripping on them." The Atharvaved mentions the sacrificial cow as "destined for the Gods and Brahmins." And in the Brhadaranyak Upanishad, Sushrutha, the father of Indian medicine, describes beef as being pavitra for health. So much for Hindu vegetarianism itself, let alone holy cows." One more thing: You say that, "And lest someone be inspired to enforce prohibition on Hinduism grounds, the Mahabharat indicates that Lord Krishna liked his booze binges with Arjun... " and then you quote -- "By the scriptures, the slaying of cows is a lesser sin (upapaatak) than the drinking of alcohol (mahapaatak)." Give the para or the verse numbers when you say that a book says this and that. Anyway this is what I read here: http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/essays/BB3.html 1. Beef contains high levels of cholesterol and saturated fat and is frequently contaminated by chemicals and disease. Beef may be one of the more unhealthy foods in the market today. 2. Many scientific studies have found a high correlation between the consumption of red meat -- which is high in saturated fats and cholesterol -- and heart disease, stroke, and colon and breast cancer. This study was in the US. However I feel this is equally applicable to India. I don't think that this qualifies for a "Ban on Beef." The public can be educated and let them make their own choice. Chinmay V P
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 02:59:00 PDT Your article is simply brilliant, but I personally differ with you completely. I would rather give up beef eating than see the BJP and company demolish mosques or any other religious places. And as for the Common Civil Code, I don't see any big deal in it. It is good if the country can have it. But you can have different codes and still do justice to women and have a peaceful society. Do you know that Singapore has a different personal law for every community and it is one of the most peaceful countries? Harpreet Singh
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 21:36:05 -0700 No Varshaben, you are dead wrong! Just as avtar means descending to human level from the perfect level for a limited purpose, Hinduism allowed occasional beef eating, soma drinking of humans and non vegetarianism of kshatriyas in the prime of civilisations. Since then unfortunately, the world has not progressed in civilisation -- though it has advanced in technology, but Hinduism has progressively continued to reveal its unending divinity. Even in the worst of India's material demise, the world has always found solace in ultimate truth from Hinduism. Mahavira and Buddha were the natural culmination and product of Hinduism, and I cannot imagine Hinduism without Jainism and Buddhism. It seems like many Indians, Varsha Bhosle has been swapped by the material power of the world and therefore associates prosperity, order, power, technological advancement etc. with meat eating. That's a bankrupt idea of a tired Indian, not Hindu. In the long run it will be evident that all advancements and achievements are associated with truth and meat eating advocacy in a society is not truth. One fourth population of vegetarians is a great sign of civilisation which is even better than Buddhist countries's achievements even though Buddhism is the latest and better version of eternal Hinduism. The secret of distinction of humans from all other animals is compassion which forced human brains to develop in defending their weak dependents. That generated a greater consciousness and passport to great original concepts which brought immeasurable joys from spirituality and immense wealth from science, wherein also lies the genuine peace for human kind. It is the untidiness of Indians among other historical factors that Hindus -- the originators of unsurpassed compassion and the highest consciousness -- are late in sharing the prosperity which sprang from their contributions to the world.
Rasik Sanghvi
New York, NY
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 10:39:06 -0600 Varsha Bhosle's articles are getting increasingly crass and repulsive. I'm really surprised about her inconsistent stand on issues. Of late, she has been ranting against the VHP and RSS with regard to their advocacy of a ban on cow slaughter. While I can understand her feelings and carnivorous orientation, I strongly object to her use of profanities such as "bullshit" in the same vein as the Rigveda and Bhagvad Gita. I cannot fathom the reasons for her rhetoric against the Jain community. I detect a pattern in this. Is it because she was cheated by some petty trader in her childhood or is it because of the Marathi chauvinist ideology of Bal Thackeray that she ascribes to? She seems to be a cheerleader for Thackeray and a critic of the RSS. The failure of the Hindutva forces to gain an absolute majority in the Lok Sabha stems from the antics of Marathi chauvinists like Thackeray and his ilk. Coming back to the point, it is ridiculous on Bhosle's part to justify cow slaughter by falsely quoting from the Rigveda. Animal sacrifice was a distortion in Hinduism and was abolished after the advent of Buddha and Mahavira. Her criticism of the VHP's noble act of rescuing cows from Britain which were destined for the slaughter house is inhuman. To put it very frankly, it is none of her bloody business. If she wants to eat beef, let her go ahead but please spare us from your crazy diatribes and pernicious arguments. Cow slaughter is abhorrent to Hindus to whom India belongs and it should be banned. As it is, we're facing a tremendous assault on our religion and culture in the form of cable television etc, and I feel that encouraging McDonalds to come in and make hamburgers of our cattle is intolerable. By the same token, will Varsha Bhosle now want us to take to the barbaric "sport" of bull fighting in order to attract Western tourists without whose dollars we're going to die?
Date sent: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 09:30:31 -0700 (PDT) The subtle message in Varsha's article is "Think before you accept." Indians in general have (never) questioned their actions (strangely embedded in their religious beliefs), which sometimes are more harmful and have the society's sanction! Most of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad's philosophies are merely populist and aimed at achieving political mileage. In general, they lack religious sanctions. However, given India's illiteracy level, "anything" with a religious connotation sells. Amazingly, this "web" has not spared the educated and learned who continue to openly support the VHP's (vehement) actions. In this context, Varsha uses the "Mad Cow" example to criticise VHP's hogwash philosophies and to explain how "Logon ke aank mein dhool jhonka ja raha hai." The hypocrisy associated with the VHP's propaganda is evident from Varsha's eye-openers -- "The VHP has never had the presence in any animal rights issues except that of the holy cow," and "The Sangh Parivar will have us believe that Hindutva asks for protection of cows as a religious tenet." According to her, neither the Vedas, Upanishads, Ramayan, or the Mahabharat prescribes nonconsumption of beef. In fact, meat (including beef) was a common dietary item and relished too! Therefore, for the VHP to attribute the act of eating beef as unholy is simply ridiculous! Similar to other religions, several practices within Hinduism are questionable! Over the years, some have (deeply) been etched into our beliefs and followed blindly without questioning its sanctity. According to me, the consequences of one's action/s are a larger detriment of one's beliefs. Therefore, practicality and flexibility become the two most important attributes of a strong religion. Finally, since the VHP and the RSS have (suddenly) "smelled" success, it can substantially influence the Indian government's policies and decisions. The fact that most present ministers have their roots in these organisations, emphasis on religious issues cannot be ruled out. Consequently, what Indians will eat, wear (Sushma Swaraj on television newsreader's dress code), breathe, and watch will dominate decision-making rather than focusing on larger issues of mass consequence. Indians please wake up! Your time has arrived...
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 18:07:09 -0400 I have been an RSS activist myself. I fully endorse Varsha Bhosle's views about Hinduism in 'Good God! Thou ate beef?' Worth putting in practice. She has proven by solid examples they had been indeed in practice ever since the cradle of Hinduism rocked! Sanjay Vaze
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 18:05:52 -0400 (EDT) Totally agree with Ms Bhosle -- I too, cannot imagine anything worse than having to eat bhindis and karelas! Keep 'em coming!'
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 16:56:45 -0400 I think the end of the world is near!!! Even in my wildest dreams, I could not imagine agreeing with Varsha, however, this is the second time back to back where Varsha's made perfect sense. Although arguing from the Hindu religious books is unnecessary to make the case against beef prohibition, it sure drives through a persuasive point against the loonies who're still clinging onto their antiquated and obsolete beliefs. You did a wonderful job once again, Varsha!!
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 15:17:56 -0400 It was indeed appalling to read Varsha Bhosle's article. All her articles have an anti-Islam/Muslim tinge to it. Furthermore, I am shocked that Rediff has allowed the word "Mosies" to be published -- it is absolutely derogatory. This just shows that in India, they are communal people who are not interested in her future. People like Bhosle are a danger to India's secular credentials which is the foundation of her future success, God willing. At the most, Bhosle needs to learn how to show respect Islam. I ask Rediff to stop publishing Bhosle's articles and keep up their otherwise spectacular effort.
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 16:29:36 -0400 Bravo Miss Bhosle! One may not agree with everything you say. You certainly do have a mind of your own. Gopi
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 13:29:40 -0700 I am afraid this time I have to disagree with you. Yes, I agree that competition is very much needed, but at the cost of what? Look at what happened to Thums Up! It was my favourite drink and had 70+ % of the market share, and got sold out because the marketing bills of Coke and Pepsi were many times more that the whole Parle company! How can you make Thums Up run with Coke and expect it to win! This was the case with a good domestic product, I just can't think what is going to happen to bad products! We relaxed imports on gold, and guess what? -- India is #1 importer of that yellow shit! In fact now that useless metal ranks second on our import bills! So much for our precious foreign currency reserves! Look at what has happened to those Asian tigers. They are at the mercy of the IMF, World Bank (read United States), and we are yet not! We can decide our policies for ourselves, as our industries are still our own, and our economy is not on the whims of the USA. I am not an expert in these economic matters but I do believe that all those people like you who talk about reforms, are neither. Its just the media which has been bombarding us for last 5 years to make us believe that economic liberalisation is the solution to all evils. Oh, btw, liked your "Good God! Thou ate beef?" Keep it up! Makarand
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 19:16:46 EDT For the first time I agree with Varsha. She is not the 100% Hindu fanatic I thought. And further her language is more refined. Great going, Varsha! S Subramanyan
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 15:12:10 -0400 Eating beef, chicken, fish... All that's fine. But does Varsha Bhosle need to talk like this about the vegetables we eat? "Someday, some loony-tunes may give in and I'll be stuck with, yuck, only bhindis and karelas!" C'mon, Varsha, after all this is the kind of stuff we veggies live on. If you don't like it, fine.. but don't call it 'yuck'!! I guess you have a lot of growing up to do!
Date sent: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 15:10:57 -0400 Varsha's article on beef-eating mania is awesome. Truly enjoyed it. |
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
CRICKET |
MOVIES |
CHAT
INFOTECH | TRAVEL | LIFE/STYLE | FREEDOM | FEEDBACK |
|