Amid demand to make cow national animal, a look at what Muslim members told Constituent Assembly in 1948

AMid calls from sections of the moslem community of interests to adjudge the moo-cow a subject animal, records of the Constituent Assembly debates from 1948 show that two Muslim members had asked the makers of the Constitution to clearly state the government’s position on cow slaughter, with one of them even suggesting that a ban should be directly included in Fundamental Rights.Several organisations among Muslims are demanding that the cow, considered sacred by large sections of Hindus, be given the status of India's national animal. The current national animal is the tiger. The cow has no such official status for now, but demand for it has historically come from Hindu nationalist groups and BJP legislators.The Muslim section's push has come ahead of Eid-ul-Azha, the festival during which the sacrifice of animals, including goats and cows, is traditionally observed. Maulana Arshad Madani, president of the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind's faction named afer himself, made the demand that he said he had even made at an All-Faith Conference in Mumbai in 2014, that the cow be declared national animal, and that strict legal provisions be enacted against its slaughter and trade.The discussions in November 1948 show that two Muslim members of the Assembly — Syed Muhammad Saadulla and Z H Lari — did not oppose clarity on the issue. In fact, both argued that if the state intended to prohibit cow slaughter, it should say so openly and clearly rather than leave room for ambiguity.Also read | Why some Muslim organisations want the cow to be declared India's national animal ahead of Eid"I do not want to obstruct the framers of our Constitution, I mean the Constituent Assembly, if they come out in the open and say directly: 'This is part of our religion. The cow should be protected from slaughter and therefore we want its provision either in the Fundamental Rights or in the Directive Principles'," Sadulla was quoted as saying by news agency PTI.Debate around cow protection clauseThe debate was held to consider an amendment moved by Pandit Thakur Dass Bhargava, which said, "The state shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds of cattle and prohibit the slaughter of cow and other useful cattle, specially milch and draught cattle and their young stock'."Another member, Seth Govind Das, suggested changes to widen the definition of the cow by including bulls, bullocks and young stock.‘I do not want to obstruct’During the discussion, Saadulla referred to the Quranic principle “La Ikraha fiddin”, meaning there should be no compulsion in religion.He said he would not stand in the way if the Assembly directly declared cow protection to be a religious matter."We are not here to obstruct the attitude that the majority community is going to adopt. But let there not linger an idea in the mind of the Muslim public that they can do one thing, though in fact they are not expected to do that," he said, as per news agency PTI.At the same time, he said he could not support the proposal if the justification was presented mainly on economic grounds.Saadulla also rejected the suggestion that Muslims slaughter cows to hurt Hindu sentiments.“Fortunately or unfortunately, Muslims are meat-eating people. The price of mutton is so high that many poor people cannot buy it. Therefore, on rare occasions, they have to use the flesh of a cow. From my own knowledge, it is only the barren cows that go to the butcher,” he said.Referring to Assam, he added, “Speaking for Assam, it is the hill people who are the worst culprits in this respect. In Shillong, there is only one Muslim butcher against 70 from the hill people who deal in beef… in the name of economic front, I cannot lend my support to the motion moved by Pandit Bhargava. I am sorry that for the reasons given already, I am compelled to oppose the amendment of Seth Govind Das.”Z H Lari also addressed the Assembly during the debate and said the matter should not be left unclear.“I have come here not to oppose or support any of the amendments but to request the House to make the position quite clear and not to leave the matter in any ambiguity or doubt,” he said.Why the provision was not put in fundamental rightsBhargava, while replying to the debate, said he did not want non-Hindus to feel they were being forced to accept something against their will if the matter became part of Fundamental Rights.“So far as the practical question is concerned, in my opinion, there will be absolutely no difference if the spirit of the amendment is worked out faithfully, wherever this amendment is placed,” he said.He explained the proposal in three parts: improving agriculture through scientific methods, improving cattle breeds, and protecting cows and useful cattle from slaughter.BJP's demand, traditionallyThe demand for declaring the cow the national animal is not new, and it has come from within the BJP mainly. Protecting the cow has been a stated part of the BJP's agenda, with the party's 2014 manifesto pledging to protect the animal as part of preserving India's cultural heritage, in line with a long-standing campaign by its parent body RSS for stricter legislation against cow slaughter.But criticism from Muslim leaders and opposition parties remains that the BJP's stance on beef is inconsistent. While the party has introduced strict cow slaughter bans in several states, particularly in northern and central India, it has taken a more permissive approach in Goa and some northeastern states including Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Meghalaya, and Tripura.(With inputs from PTI)