Savarkar Objected To Cow Worship, Treated It Only As A Useful Animal : Grandnephew Tells Pune Court
Regarding the cow as a deity is an insult to both humanity and divinity, Savarkar's book stated, as per his grandnephew.
Continuing his deposition before a special MP/MLA Court in Pune, Satyaki Savarkar on Tuesday (August 4) admitted the fact that his granduncle Vinayak Savarkar had always regarded a cow as a 'useful' animal and in fact in one of his books, he had clearly written that a cow is plainly an animal and regarding it as a deity or goddess would amount to an insult not only to humanity but also to the very concept of divinity.
Satyaki is presently being cross-examined in a criminal defamation case, which he filed against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi alleging that he had defamed Savarkar by delivering an objectionable speech in London. He is being cross-examined by Gandhi's counsel Milind Pawar.
On Tuesday, when Satyaki entered the witness box before Special Judge Amol Shinde, a book titled विज्ञान विनष्ठ विनबंध (Essays based on Scientific Reasoning), was brought on record by Pawar. To this, Satyaki admitted that the book is actually written by Savarkar and he also admitted to the contents of the book, wherein Savarkar has made various comments and criticised the very idea of 'worshipping' cow as a goddess, and that he advocated protection of cow only because it has been useful to humankind.
Satyaki also admitted that Savarkar wrote that a cow is as useful as dog, horse or a donkey to the mankind and thus, just like the three animals are often protected, cow too must be only protected and not worshipped.
"The category of gods consists of beings—whether real or imagined—who are superior to human beings, whose virtues, powers, and noble qualities are more highly developed than those of man. Such beings are called Gods or Goddesses. Animals, on the other hand, belong to a category inferior even to human beings. Above mankind stand the Gods; below mankind stand animals and insects. The cow is plainly an animal. To regard as a deity an animal that does not possess even as much intelligence as the dullest of human beings is an insult not merely to humanity but to the very concept of divinity. One may perhaps regard as divine a symbol that embodies qualities nobler than those of mankind. But to elevate to the status of a deity an animal which possesses no superiority over man except pointed horns and a tufted tail, and which is esteemed only because it is useful to human beings, is to degrade not only humanity but even divinity itself, reducing it below the level of an animal," Savarkar wrote.
"The animal becomes a god, while a godlike human being is treated as an animal. What better example can there be of how, under the stamp of religion, sheer inconsistency, irrationality, and folly come to appear as wisdom, virtue, and sanctity, and how human reason itself is destroyed? Even if the degradation of humanity resulting from treating an animal as a deity were merely philosophical or symbolic, that alone would be objectionable. But the consequences of this excess are far more serious", Savarkar argued in the book.
Further in his book, Savarkar gave instances wherein during the Muslim/Mughal invasion, the cows were used as 'shields' by them whenever there was a confrontation with Hindu armies and to avoid killing cows, the Hindu armies, he said, retreated from the battlefield, which he argued cost a lot to the nation. Similar were the instances wherein Hindu armies retreated from the battlefield merely on threats by Muslims of desecrating or demolishing temples or killing Brahmins.
"To avoid the sin of the destruction of ten temples, a handful of Brahmins, or a few cows, the nation itself was sacrificed. To avoid the sin of cow slaughter, national destruction was allowed to take place. A single animal was regarded as being more valuable than the nation itself. The loss of national freedom caused no such anxiety as the possible destruction of one temple. Even if only one such incident had occurred in history, such religious naïveté would deserve to be condemned as worse than irreligion itself.... When enemies had come to destroy Hinduism itself and overthrow Hindu sovereignty, the Hindu armies should have cut down every cow that stood before the enemy ranks. As atonement for each cow thus killed, they should have washed their hands in the blood of the hundreds of invaders hiding behind those animals. For, by sparing those few cows on the battlefield and thereby allowing Hindu independence itself to be strangled by Muslim power, every battle that was surrendered in order to save a single cow, a single temple, or a single place of pilgrimage ultimately resulted in the fall of one Hindu kingdom after another and the establishment of successive Muslim empires over the land." Savarkar wrote.
Pawar further pointed out from the book wherein Savarkar stated that science plainly said that the cow is a useful animal to mankind; therefore, so long as it continues to be useful, it should not be killed. But when, under particular circumstances, it ceases to be useful and instead becomes harmful, then even slaughtering the cow may become necessary.
"To proclaim that cow protection is a religion, that it brings both worldly and spiritual merit, that the cow is itself a deity, or even that all the thirty-three crore Gods reside within the cow, and to compose endless verses around such notions, does not truly ensure the protection of the cow. On the contrary, such beliefs foster blind sentimentality within the nation. In the name of devotion to the cow, devotion to the nation itself is weakened. Human welfare is sacrificed before the cow, and the very purpose for which cow protection originally existed is defeated. However useful the cow may be, it nevertheless remains an animal. It is argued that if people are taught to regard the cow as a deity, they will care for it more devotedly; therefore, cow worship should be regarded as a religious duty. But this belief is itself a foolish misconception. Instead of promoting wisdom, it contributes to the intellectual degradation of society," Savarkar's book reads.
Consuming Cow Urine & Cow Dung Is Abuse, Not Religious Practice
Savarkar further argued that while one may metaphorically call a cow a Gaumata or Mother Cow, the same must not be understood in a literal sense. He thus criticised the practice of considering 'sacred' the substance from the cow and further consuming the said substances - cow dung and cow urine.
"Going even further, people declare as sacred those very substances from the cow which, even in the case of one's own mother, would never be considered fit for consumption. They solemnly eat cow dung and drink cow urine. Is this a proper religious practice—or an abuse? It is said that cow urine cures this disease or that disease, and that cow dung is an excellent manure. Then let patients suffering from those diseases drink cow urine as medicine. If cow dung is a good manure, then spread it upon the fields. Why should it be put into the human stomach? Even if devotees of the cow publish lengthy treatises describing the medicinal properties of cow dung and cow urine, such claims would at most justify their use as medicines were required for particular illnesses. But how can they justify the proposition that drinking cow urine and eating cow dung are acts of religious merit? How can the ritual drinking of Panchagavya, prescribed as a rite of purification and sanctification, possibly be defended?" Savarkar questioned.
The truth is that once people, through naïve religious sentiment, transformed an ordinary animal into a deity, it became easy to believe that removing the cow's hoofprints from one's doorway was auspicious, that passing the cow's tail over one's eyes brought blessings, that worshipping the cow was itself a religious duty, and finally—to carry the absurdity to its highest point—that even its dung and urine were sacred, he pointed out.
"Thus people came to believe that eating cow dung and drinking cow urine purified the soul, washed away sins, and earned merit both in this world and the next. Such is the extent to which this naïve religious credulity has been carried. Even today, thousands of educated people perform the ritual without asking why it should be performed or what useful purpose it serves. If anyone dares to ask such questions, he is immediately denounced as irreligious. But true religion can never fear inquiry. Any custom that cannot withstand rational examination deserves to be reformed or abandoned. This explanation seems all the more plausible because, apart from the ritual use of Panchagavya or the ceremonial tasting of cow dung and cow urine, the expressions 'to eat dung' and 'to drink urine' continue in ordinary speech even today as terms of abuse—not as marks of sanctity," Savarkar stated.
Images Of 33 Crore Hindu Deities Within Cow Ridicules Religion
Savarkar further objected to the portrayal of images of Hindu Gods and Goddesses residing within the body of the cows, stating that it ridiculed the Hindu culture and only illustrated how Gods are 'crammed' within a cow's body.
"Those among our cow-devoted brethren who may have been offended by our article on the cow should calmly consider this: if anything truly ridicules Hindu culture, it is not our article but those widely circulated pictures purporting to show how the thirty-three crore deities reside within the body of the cow. During the pilgrimage to Pandharpur, third-class railway compartments become so overcrowded with pilgrims that they are packed to capacity. Similarly, according to these illustrations, the body of the cow is crammed with Gods. Vishnu, Brahma, the Moon, the Sun, Yama—one occupies the throat, another the teeth, another the nose; each deity is shown squeezed into whatever space can be found. Along the spine, the crowding is said to be so great that whenever even an orthodox Hindu, irritated by a mischievous cow that kicks while being milked, strikes it once across the back with a stick, at least a dozen Gods must surely be bruised!" Savarkar argued.
True Gokul Is In America Not In India
Referring to the poetic descriptions of the cattle of Gokul found in the Bhagavata Purana, Savarkar wrote that the same has become a living reality in America, where one sees vast green grazing lands; one more magnificent animal after another; tall, well-proportioned, well-built cows without a single tick upon their bodies; cows with large eyes, udders as full as water pots, rich milk yield, healthy mothers with their calves, and herds numbering in the hundreds. There are competitive exhibitions of superior cattle, contests among powerful bulls roaring with vigour, and enormous reservoirs of pure milk, curd, butter, and cream, resembling veritable oceans of milk.
"Truly, if the Gokul described in the Bhagavata exists anywhere on earth today, it is in America, where—even though people eat beef—the cow is cared for simply as a useful animal. And what institutions flourish in India, where the cow is regarded as a Goddess and where even drinking its dung and urine is considered a meritorious act? Principally cattle shelters (Panjarapoles) and slaughterhouses. Therefore, our earnest appeal to all organisations engaged in cow protection is this: become keepers and breeders of cattle, not merely worshippers of cows. Employ scientific methods to discover how mankind may derive the greatest possible benefit from this animal. Improve the breed of cattle as America has done; increase milk production; improve their health; protect cattle; and increase the nation's livestock wealth." Savarkar wrote.
Cows As Useful As Dogs, Horses & Donkeys
In his book, Savarkar further compared the usefulness of a cow to that of a dog, horse and even a donkey and argued that despite the three animals being as useful as a cow, they are not treated as God but are only protected as animals.
"At the very least, the horse and the dog have been as ancient, faithful, and indispensable companions of mankind as the cow. Indeed, during the age of hunting—long before settled agriculture and cattle-rearing—the dog and the horse were man's closest and most loyal associates. The cow has nourished mankind with its milk, but the dog has, on countless occasions, saved human life itself. It is the companion of children; the helper in hunting; the guardian of the home. It lies at the threshold, content with scraps of bread. Though often driven away or treated harshly by everyone in the household, it remains loyal. Merely calling "Come!" is enough for it to rush forward and lick its master's feet. So humble in disposition, so grateful that it would lay down its life in times of danger, it has faithfully served everyone—from the poorest farmer to the greatest emperor. And what honour has mankind bestowed upon such a faithful servant? Its very name has become an insult, and its species has been treated as untouchable," the book mentions.
If treating dogs, horses and donkeys as God would indeed be absurd, then why should it not likewise be considered absurd to treat the cow as a deity merely because it is a useful animal? Savarkar questioned, further adding, "The horse, the dog, and the donkey each possess valuable qualities that the cow does not; conversely, the cow possesses certain qualities that they do not. But the fact remains that these animals continue to be properly cared for without being worshipped as Gods. Their preservation and proper maintenance arise naturally from their usefulness to mankind. Likewise, the cow too would certainly be cared for because of its usefulness even if it were not regarded as a deity."
Put Bell Around Cow's Neck Like Collar To Dog
The book authored by Savarkar gave a clear message to those worshipping cow to become 'keepers and breeders' and not simply worship the cows and also to employ scientific methods to increase the usefulness of the animal to the mankind.
"Protect cattle. Increase the nation's livestock wealth. But do not mix this practical work with sentimental superstition by turning an animal into a deity and worshipping it. If you wish to honour the cow, then put a bell around its neck. But do so in the spirit in which we place a collar around the neck of a faithful dog—not in the spirit in which we place a garland around the neck of a God. This is not merely an isolated misconception about religion. It is only one example of the hundreds of irrational religious notions that are destroying the intellectual vitality of our people. We have chosen the example of the cow simply because it illustrates this larger problem," Savarkar wrote.
Background:
The defamation complaint asserts that Gandhi has repeatedly defamed Savarkar on various occasions over the years. One specific incident highlighted was on March 5, 2023, when Gandhi addressed the Overseas Congress in the United Kingdom.
The complainant, Satyaki Savarkar, has claimed that Gandhi intentionally made wild allegations against Savarkar, knowing them to be untrue, with the intention of harming Savarkar's reputation and causing mental agony to the complainant and his family. He states that the defamatory speech was delivered in England, but its impact was felt in Pune as it was published and circulated throughout India.
Satyaki, in his complaint, has submitted several news reports and a YouTube link to a video of Gandhi's speech in London as evidence. He has claimed that Gandhi falsely accused Savarkar of writing a book in which he described beating up a Muslim person, which Savarkar never wrote and such an incident never happened.
Satyaki argued that Gandhi made these false, malicious, and wild allegations with the specific objective of defaming Savarkar and harming his reputation.
The criminal defamation application filed by Satyaki demands maximum punishment for Gandhi under Section 500 (Punishment for defamation) of the IPC and seeks imposition of maximum compensation as per Section 357 (Order to pay compensation) of the CrPC.
Case Title: Satyaki Savarkar vs Rahul Gandhi
Previously -
Savarkar Wrote Book Questioning God's Existence & Religious Beliefs : Grandnephew Tells Court