Leaders and cadres of Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) supported Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s recent remarks on beef consumption by consuming beef kabab in public at a demonstration outside the office of Deputy Commissioner here on Tuesday.
“We too ask the very same question that Chief Minister recently asked: I will eat beef if I want and who are you to question me? Siddaramaiah correctly upheld the real Indian culture and tradition. It is our right to eat what we like,” R. Manasayya, CPI(ML) leader, said during the agitation.
Terming the opposition to beef eating as ‘rubbish’ and ‘communally motivated’, he claimed that beef had been the part and parcel of Indian food culture right from the beginning. They said that even the Hindu religious texts, including Vedas and Manusmriti, upheld beef as holy dish to be consumed by everyone who wanted to attain salvation.
“There are several shlokas in Vedas and Manusmriti that uphold beef as a pure and holy dish and advised people to eat it for attaining salvation. Our mythology clearly shows that Agastya, Vasistha and several saints were beef-eaters. Reformers such as Buddha and Basaveshwara also ate beef. In modern India, Swami Vivekananda, Ambedkar, Kuvempu and other thinkers were also beef-eaters. Beef had been the favourite food for majority of population in India at any given time and we are continuing it,” Mr. Manasayya said. “It is a historical fact that Hinduism gave up beef eating in order to prevent the agrarian population from converting from Hindu fold to Buddhism and Jainism,” he claimed.
Taking serious exception to the remarks of K.S. Eshwarappa, Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council, Mr. Manasayya demanded his resignation. “He [Mr. Eshwarappa], in view of Chief Minister’s remarks on beef, has said that Siddaramaiah was not a human being. He logically meant that beef-eaters, who constitute over 60 per cent of the country’s population, are not human beings. He should immediately be sacked, if he himself does not resign, and book criminal case against him for hurting the sentiments of the majority.”
He also condemned “some maths” for unleashing attacks on rationalists on the issue and invited them for a public debate.
