Culinary habits of citizens being meddled with by Indian state
On the 3rd of March 2015, the Maharashtra government had got the presidential assent to its bill prescribing harsh punishments not only for killing the cow and its progeny but even for having possession of the meat in any form. The Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976 provided for a total ban on the slaughter of cows, including the male or female calf of a cow. (Anand Teltumbde, The Holy Cow, 4 April 2015: 10.)
The recent beef ban law which has been implemented in Maharashtra raises certain issues regarding curtailing the freedom and liberty of individuals by the Indian state. The ban makes the slaughtering of buffaloes and consumption of beef in the state illegal. Cow slaughter had been banned in the 1990’s itself. The issue of cow slaughter is prominent in India due to the religious connotations associated to the cow by a majority of Hindus. On the other hand, beef is a widely consumed meat by Muslims and Christians not only in India but also around the world. Dalits or lower castes also consume beef which is a relatively cheaper source of protein for them. Evidence from earlier times suggests that even upper caste Hindus used to consume beef regularly. The argument which is put forth is that in order to counter the spread and influence of Buddhism, a ban on consumption of beef by Hindus was imposed. Over time it came to be considered a degrading activity which was actively being associated with shame and disgust. Nussbaum in her book ‘Hiding from Humanity’ makes a forceful argument that disgust and shame are ways in which we hide from our humanity, that is, they assist us in hiding from the animalistic features of our humanity, our vulnerability as well as our mortality. In some sense, these emotions embody human desire to be invulnerable. (Ratna Kapur, Book Review: Hiding from Humanity, 2003: 318). This leads to the debate whether religious beliefs of a particular community should influence the dietary practices of other communities especially in a country like India which is considered to be secular.
Religious beliefs have been constructed by society itself over the ages. According to Mead all human products are socially constructed. They are social objects which arise out of social acts. They are joint endeavours of people with common interests and beliefs. "Things" human beings produce-whether baseball bats or burlesque shows, household pets or religious platitudes-exist always in relation to a social world. Human perception of things involves taking a social attitude towards them and to see something as others do in order to embrace it or to turn away from it in disgust, to find in it a source of consolation. All of this entails a social consciousness or socialized consciousness. Experiences are shaped by culture and beliefs of a particular society which a person is part of.
Experiences and emotions conform and lay the foundation to an age's forms of knowledge. Individual’s emotions are modelled on social experience and they are common to a plurality of individuals, specific to a particular society. Emotions are neither personal characteristics of individuals nor universal attributes of human nature, but “certain ways of feeling, thinking and acting” which individuals would not have had “if they lived in other human groups.”
Louis Coser believed that according to men social actions follow no law but are arbitrary, no action is taken to check them. Due to this, men clashed with each other in pursuit of individual interests. The development of the field of sociology helps men to recognize invariable laws of development and order in human affairs (Lewis Coser,
Masters of sociological thought: ideas in historical and social context, 2015: 4). Then men learn to utilize these laws for their collective purposes. There is still a need to monitor that the collective purposes of a large number of individuals or the majority do not harm the religious sentiments of other communities. The beef ban issue in particular in recent times pits the interests of one community against the other. There is a need to balance the interests of different groups in society to ensure peace and harmony. Religious sentiments of Hindus as a collective community should not endanger and curb rights of others. Ideologies are ideas of ruling class i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time it’s ruling intellectual force. The Hindutva ideology of the ruling party i.e. BJP can also play a role in shaping the mind set and attitudes of people. The Ghar Wapsi movement can also be taken as an instance where the RSS and VHP made attempts to convert people back to Hinduism. They believe that most of the population was converted to Muslims and Christians through the incentive of money. People can be swayed by ideologies and ideas put forth by leaders and members of society. Checks need to be put in place so as to ensure that it does not lead to violent conflicts between different groups while managing these human affairs in a dignified and civilised manner through dialogues. Durkheim believed that it was not the consciousness of the individual which directs his behaviour but common beliefs and sentiments of society which transcend the individual and shape his consciousness.
The imposition of beef ban raises the question whether the state has any right to intervene in the eating habits of any particular community. India being a secular nation, the imposition of restrictions of food habits due to religious practices of one community is uncalled for. This is an intrusion into the rights of freedom and liberty of citizens of the country. The huge hue and cry and mob lynching in various places also raises questions of religious tolerance in Indian community. This issue has also been used by politicians to garner support against the other communities. With support of the masses, political victories are tried to be made like getting a bill passed which would render such actions of the other community illegal and a punishable offence in courts of law. Appeal to emotions is widely used by politicians to get popular support to get bills passed on issues about which people are filled with resentment. Once the bill gets passed, it becomes a law. Law refers to an institutionalized complex system of norms that are intended to regulate social interactions and integrate society. As Weber points out, politics and law are interrelated because the legality of rational domination needs formal procedures along with a system of law. Law is substantively irrational when legal decisions are influenced by concrete factors of a case on basis of ethical, emotional or political considerations rather than general rules. As in the issue of the beef ban, laws were passed without taking into consideration the larger implications which it would have on society as a whole. The author also puts forth the argument that shame and disgust should never be a criterion for criminalizing any activity. Nor does she think that it should be an aggravating or mitigating factor in criminal trials. This is not because she thinks that all emotions, which she distinguishes from bodily appetites and objectless moods, should play no role in the law. Instead, emotions should be evaluated to determine their reasonableness. Disgust, however, is an unreliable emotion, and particularly for the purposes of the law. This does not mean, though, that humans should seek to eliminate all their feelings of disgust (David Benatar Book review : Hiding from Humanity, 2004 :1 ) Emotions should not form the basis of legal judgements.
The modern society is liberal in nature. India being a democratic and secular state provides people with an opportunity to voice their opinions freely. In this same tangent, the citizens should have the liberty to choose what they eat. Preferences of the majority community should not make the minorities forego their culinary habits. Religious intolerance is not the way forward but the path towards doom. The culinary habits which are followed by people due to religious or other beliefs should not be meddled with by the Indian state. The Indian state should be welfare oriented towards all it’s citizens. Each and every citizen should have equal amount of respect, dignity and freedom for their views, religious beliefs and way of life. A good way to proceed in a liberal society is one based on a recognition of the equal dignity of each individual and community, and the vulnerabilities inherent in a common humanity. If we cannot fully achieve such a society, we can at least look to it as a paradigm, and make sure that our laws are the laws of that society and no other. After all, every community needs to live in the same country and conflicts will make a peaceful way of life difficult to sustain.