Why is our Hindu / Indian tradition under constant attack

Tradition has been the whipping boy by so called Western imperialists, atheists, Communists, Maoists, NGO's, Church and the liberal media...Can we put a halt to this!! Enough is enough!!

Why can't we allow jallikattu?? This festival is there for centuries!! One fine day some Tom, Dick & Harry decide that this is crass cruelty to a Bull and stop the event!! How about killing animals?? Are they going to stop meat eating altogether?

Earlier there were attempts to change the tradition in Sabarimala by allowing menstruating women to enter the Sanctum Sanctorum of the hallowed temple!!

We are allowing emotions to get pent-up!! They may explode one day which may be dangerous to the unity & integrity of our country!!

Let us debate this!!




Source of Image: Twitter

The child marriage was banned.
Child marriage was outlawed in 1929, under Indian law. However, in the British colonial times, the legal minimum age of marriage was set at 15 for girls and 18 for boys.
That was a good thing.

Similarly, Dowry was banned.
This Act may be called the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Again a good thing.

We can list a number of things were changed from what is called "tradition" for the good of the society.

Casteism, abuse of Women, and Widows, should be banned.
It is good thing.

Under Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the properties of a Hindu male dying intestate devolves, in the first instance, equally on his sons, daughters, widow and mother and include the specified heirs of predeceased sons or daughters. The widow of the deceased is entitled to inherit equally with sons and daughters.

That too righted the wrong.
So not all traditions are worth holding on.

prasad1 said:

The child marriage was banned.
Child marriage was outlawed in 1929, under Indian law. However, in the British colonial times, the legal minimum age of marriage was set at 15 for girls and 18 for boys.
That was a good thing.

Similarly, Dowry was banned.
This Act may be called the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Again a good thing.

We can list a number of things were changed from what is called "tradition" for the good of the society.

Casteism, abuse of Women, and Widows, should be banned.
It is good thing.

Under Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the properties of a Hindu male dying intestate devolves, in the first instance, equally on his sons, daughters, widow and mother and include the specified heirs of predeceased sons or daughters. The widow of the deceased is entitled to inherit equally with sons and daughters.

That too righted the wrong.
So not all traditions are worth holding on.

Click to expand...

There is a lurking fear that only Hindu traditions can be tossed, hurled & abused....Why not NOT A SINGLE MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN tradition touched?

vgane said:

There is a lurking fear that only Hindu traditions can be tossed, hurled & abused....Why not NOT A SINGLE MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN tradition touched?

Click to expand...

hi

we dont have gutts.....we dont have single authority/hierchy in our system....JIS KA PASS DANDI..USKA BAINS.....EVERYTHING

GRANTED.....see we have sri ganesh pictire in beedi packet.....never asked/nobody questioned...

vgane said:

Let us debate this!!

Click to expand...

There are a lot of "non-violent" traditional practices in TB community that are not followed now. Would you want all of them to be reinstated? If yes, then would you advocate adhering to traditions at all costs? If no, what is your yardstick?

vgane said:

There is a lurking fear that only Hindu traditions can be tossed, hurled & abused....Why not NOT A SINGLE MUSLIM OR CHRISTIAN tradition touched?

Click to expand...

Not only jallikattu, there has been systematic targeting of many hindu customs and practices over the last decade - sabarimala, dahi handi, gandhimai etc. Next in line will be the pooram festival and then sorimuthu ayyanar festival etc etc. One by one all will fall because of few reasons. One, even though all of these may come under the hindu umbrella, they are local practices and customs and there is no unified protest from hindus against intrusion by various secular bodies. Second, many of these practices are pagan practices and the indian courts strangely accept only abrahimic definition of religion. That is, their position is constitutional protection to a practice is applicable only if a practice is proscribed by religious scriptures. Third, there are enough "useful idiots" among hindus who don't even know that they are being played.

So, now you know why only hindu practices are being targeted. A hindu in North does not care about jallikattu just like how a tamil hindu does not care two hoots about dahi handi. Reason 1: minority with no unified voice. This weakness is not seen in islam or Christianity. Reason 2: no constitutional protection. Many pagan practices may not have scriptural origins. Again not a problem for islam or Christianity. Reason 3: self evident.

It won't be long before the secular bodies start coming after avani avittam and ammavasai tharppanam. After all, they too can be opposed citing casteism or irrationality. One would hope the useful idiots atleast would regain some sanity.

auh said:

There are a lot of "non-violent" traditional practices in TB community that are not followed now. Would you want all of them to be reinstated? If yes, then would you advocate adhering to traditions at all costs? If no, what is your yardstick?

Click to expand...

The issue is should the govt or law decide whether an individual or community can follow a practice? What is the yardstick for allowing or disallowing a practice? Should that yardstick be applied uniformly? Should the yardstick be different depending on whether the practice is religious or secular?

It is absolutely legal for a villager to slaughter animals and treat his fellow dwellers to a sumptuous feast for any secular purpose. But if he were to offer the meat to god ( correction.. pagan god) first before providing the feast , then it is illegal. Do you support this position? Will it be amiss if we were to think that selective opposition to the latter but keeping mum about the former practice is fake compassion for animals?

People's food habit is a personal choice allowed by law. Cannibalism is banned and abhorred in all societies.
Animal sacrifice in the name of God, is ignorance or deception or both.
Majority of the members on this site are Hindus, and we can only talk about that society.

Even though there was some protest at some Dargah to change the entrance requirements. There is a movement to change the triple talaq.
So we can not lament that only Hindu "culture" (or ignorant part of practice) is being changed. Then again we have a Hindu-oriented party with massive majority in the Central Government.

There are enlightened Hindus who want these changes in Hindu Practice. I do not know that other religions can claim that.

“The problem with the word culture is that the idea of culture is often confused in daily use,” says social scientist Shiv Visvanathan. “What is the culture that we are talking about here? A sport that is anyway in decline in most parts of the state--a masculine, casteist sport at that. So what are we fighting for here? Are we fighting for something that is part of the agrarian society, a show of masculinity or is it just a case of identity politics?

The law anyway has an element of culture embedded in it. Its decisions do take into consideration and reflects living conditions, lifestyles etc, which are all a part of culture. But it is not meant to be based on identity politics,” he says.

The past few years have seen progressive discourse on many issues that have for years been put out of the reach of debate in the name of culture and tradition. Women have moved court against the system of triple talaq and polygamy. The Centre is pushing for a Uniform Civil Law--a move which has again been opposed in the name of religion and tradition. In October last year, the Supreme Court allowed women entry into the Haji Ali shrine in Mumbai. The fight for women to enter the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, where entry is banned for women, has also reached the courts.

All these movements are indicative of a society poised for change--a society where reason and basic rights are respected more than traditional practices that might be rooted in ignorance, blind faith and inequality. To give in to the demand to reinstate any one of these practices, will not only weaken the rule of law in the country, but will also give others the scope to push for other such regressive traditions. And then, where does one stop the slide back in time?

http://www.hindustantimes.com/edito...n-t-hold-up/story-lHa4OgQ7WSStNRJPuJ5cyK.html

கால பைரவன்;372569 said:

The issue is should the govt or law decide whether an individual or community can follow a practice? What is the yardstick for allowing or disallowing a practice? Should that yardstick be applied uniformly? Should the yardstick be different depending on whether the practice is religious or secular?

It is absolutely legal for a villager to slaughter animals and treat his fellow dwellers to a sumptuous feast for any secular purpose. But if he were to offer the meat to god ( correction.. pagan god) first before providing the feast , then it is illegal. Do you support this position? Will it be amiss if we were to think that selective opposition to the latter but keeping mum about the former practice is fake compassion for animals?

Click to expand...

I think the idea of 100% vegetarianism is illogical, and hence the next best thing is to treat animals giving their due. Hence, even though humans exploit them in many ways, they are ill treated in the name of culture / tradition / veeram etc. Cockfights and bullfights are a symbolism of the male chauvinistic society and of the tribal periods. What significance does a jallikattu serve in this time? Would you please elaborate?

auh said:

There are a lot of "non-violent" traditional practices in TB community that are not followed now. Would you want all of them to be reinstated? If yes, then would you advocate adhering to traditions at all costs? If no, what is your yardstick?

Click to expand...

These practices were discarded by the Tambra community themselves...Not by any Government order....We have Government interfering with anything related to Hindus...This is what I am objecting...Can they stop the flow of blood during Bakrid?

Let us examine PETA...As per Rishi Bagree "10000 Crocodiles are killed for manufacturing Hermes Bags and Prada accessories but PETA wont object as they get hefty donations"

PETA is based out of US & look at what they have actually done to animals!! It is a sham organization!!

[h=1]PETA, Organisation Behind Jallikattu Ban, Responsible For Deaths Of 34,000 Animals Since 1998[/h]



Indian students calling for a ban on PETA at Marina Beach in Chennai. (STR/AFP/Getty Images)

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), an organisation which claims that “animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on or use for entertainment” and claims to work for their “welfare and rehabilitation”, was reportedly responsible for the death of around 2,000 domestic animals in it’s care in 2011.

A 2012 report by a non-profit organisation has revealed that PETA has “killed” 34,000 animals at its headquarters in Norfolk, Virginia since 1998.


Source: petakillsanimals.com

An investigation by Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services revealed in 2010 that the organisation lacks the infrastructure to house the number of animals it claims to have “rescued” at any given time. Among other things, the investigating agency found that around 99.3 per cent of the 2,317 dogs and cats brought to PETA’s shelter in the last six years (ending 2010) were euthanised (killed).
In a controversial interview given to Newsweek in 2011, the organisation said that it would rather give animals a “painless” death than have them “tortured, starved, or sold for research”. In 2012, Jane Dollinger, PETA’s media officer, had informed The Daily Caller that many animals under the organisation’s care died because of ‘injury, illness, age, aggression” or because “no good homes exist for them.”
Contradicting this, a report prepared by Centre for Consumer Freedom (CCF), which also runs the website petakillsanimals.com, said that “laziness, and not a lack of funding or volunteers, is to blame for the death rate”. According to the report, PETA employees make little to no effort to find homes for the animals in it’s care despite its $37.4 million budget. The report is available here.
According to CCF, PETA hasn’t slowed down its slaughterhouse operation. The organisation, a CCF executive said back in 2012, is “more concerned with funding its media and advertising antics than finding suitable homes for these dogs and cats”.
According to The Daily Caller, two employees of the organization were arrested in the United States in the year 2005 after police caught them throwing dead bodies of animals into a North Carolina dumpster after killing them in the back of a PETA-owned van.

http://swarajyamag.com/insta/peta-o...onsible-for-deaths-of-34000-animals-since1998

auh said:

I think the idea of 100% vegetarianism is illogical, and hence the next best thing is to treat animals giving their due. Hence, even though humans exploit them in many ways, they are ill treated in the name of culture / tradition / veeram etc. Cockfights and bullfights are a symbolism of the male chauvinistic society and of the tribal periods. What significance does a jallikattu serve in this time? Would you please elaborate?

Click to expand...

I asked some specific questions for a purpose and would have appreciated some direct answers. My point is there should be consistency in how the law is applied. One can't simply allow a certain treatment of animals if it is for secular purpose but deny the same treatment just because a pagan god is involved. That is what I brought out with an example. That is tyranny of secularism.

I have no problem with govt initiatives for Ethical treatment of animals. But it should be based on strong first principles. Few NGOs and activists cannot be allowed to run riot just to suit their whims and fancies. You are using the words such as "exploitation" and "ill-treatment" very loosely. They are okay for arguments here but for legal purposes they should be clearly defined. There are already elaborate sets of rules that govern treatment of animals. Various identification marks including marking animals with hot iron rod, even creating indentations in body parts are allowed. The domesticated animals employed for secular purposes, not to mention animals killed in slaughter houses, suffer a great deal more than the bulls that participate in jallikattu. So the compassion argument falls flat. What we are witnessing is simply activism against a certain cultural activity.

Reducing jallikattu to chauvinism is a judgment call on your part but once again a legal hurdle cannot be created just because it is unpalatable. I know tradition has become such a dirty word for the "enlightened". But it is important for the vast majority of people. Therefore if you are impinging on the rights of people, there should be a strong case for it. There is not. That is all.

hi

chicken/cows can kill for meat.....its PETA says...jallikkattu is only harmful.....there are many cruelties are happening against

animals...but nobody cares....

There is an union minister who fights for the cause of cruelty to stray dogs in the capital.

She is referred to as kutte-billi wali minister.

Locals curse her when bitten by stray dogs who are a menace.

Some littering ones make them multiply.

The voice of the voiceless -- the magnificent bull – has been lost in the sea of pro-Jallikattu protesters in Tamil Nadu. And the most contentious question remains unanswered by those who swear by the bull-taming sport: can torture of animals in the name of tradition be allowed?
From a legal and ethical standpoint, the answer would be no. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act clearly prohibits display of animals for entertainment and for anything that causes them harm.
The broad definition covers all animal sports from bull-taming, to bull-cart racing in Maharashtra and Punjab and to bird fights in north-east and the provision has been re-enforced by the Supreme Court in its ruling in May, 2014.
The SC clearly declared bulls as non-performing animals, nullifying the environment ministry regulation allowing Jallikattu.
The apex court’s order was primarily based on the report of the statutory Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI), based in Chennai, on what the animals have to face for months before the Jallikattu events are held over three days during the post-harvest festival Pongal.
Now, the AWBI office is under heavy police protection and officials are scared to move out of their homes fearing attacks by pro-Jallikattu protestors.
“We are virtually under house arrest,” said an AWBI member who was not willing to be named given the surcharged atmosphere in Chennai.
The report, which became the basis for the SC’s landmark order, found the bulls to be under artificially induced stress and were given hormonal injections days before the race.
“The bulls were found to be disoriented by substances such as alcohol; having their tails twisted and bitten; being stabbed and jabbed by sickles, spears, knives and sticks; and being punched and jumped on and dragged to the ground,” the report said.
Gauri Maulkehi, who argued the case for the Jallikattu ban in SC, said that before sending the bulls to the arena, they are provoked, tortured, starved and inflicted with pain to make them violent. “As a result, they suffer from severe forms of physical and mental injuries and even death.”
Between 2008 and 2014, the AWBI recorded the death of three bulls in Jallikattu events with suspicion of number to be higher on account of after-race deaths. The races also resulted in death of 43 and grievous injuries to about 300 people, according to AWBI.
Facts have taken a backseat as emotion clubbed with political exigency has taken over all rationale. In the post-Jayalalithaa era, Jallikattu is being used as a tool by political parties to show their might.
A year ago, when Jayalalithaa was alive, a similar demand for allowing Jallikattu by promulgating an ordinance was made, but there were no massive protests.
The difference this year is that Tamil Nadu has a new chief minister in O Pannerselvam and MK Stalin is the new face of the opposition DMK, both keen to ride the bull into the people’s hearts. They have come together in the name of Tamil pride and tradition.
And most importantly, bulls don’t speak our language and there is no way of ever knowing the pain and trauma they go through. A country which professes to worship the cow can definitely show the same respect to the bull.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/analysis/not-just-a-cock-and-bull-story-the-pain-of-the-jallikattu-heroes-is-real/story-BNA7JaH36GYMzXxAH2IUmO.html


I can understand that Tamil's feels defeated. They have lost The water fight with Karnataka, they have no minister at the center They are playing the victim card. They have rallied for the wrong cause.

They have wrapped themselves in the cloak of "culture" thinking that will spare them, and maybe give them some respect.

The title of this piece is wrong.
Jallikattu is local to Tamil Nadu, that too to only a section of them. Brahmins did not participate, and Dalits were banned.
To call it Indian Culture is misleading.
If it is Diwali I can understand as Hindu, or even Indian festival.

My view is that cruelty to animals is wrong. But consider this. Many cultural practices come out of the natural tendencies of people but keeping in view the overall society. We humans have animal instincts as well and if not properly channeled might cause disturbance in society. So I guess sports like jallikuttu is a way of venting out the machismo which if forbidden may result in wrongful venting of that machismo.

Tradition and culture cannot be dismissed easily. They evolve over time keeping in view the overall harmony. But I agree that not all cultural practices serve a good purpose. Some are cruel but overall I think one need to think twice or even thrice before trying to abolish any cultural practice.

sravna said:

My view is that cruelty to animals is wrong. But consider this. Many cultural practices come out of the natural tendencies of people but keeping in view the overall society. We humans have animal instincts as well and if not properly channeled might cause disturbance in society. So I guess sports like jallikuttu is a way of venting out the machismo which if forbidden may result in wrongful venting of that machismo.



Tradition and culture cannot be dismissed easily. They evolve over time keeping in view the overall harmony. But I agree that not all cultural practices serve a good purpose. Some are cruel but overall I think one need to think twice or even thrice before trying to abolish any cultural practice.

Click to expand...

Beating up Wife and children, or Kicking the dog after a drunken bout may be "venting out" the machismo. Should it be allowed?

If the same guys are not allowed to torture the bulls will kill Human beings so they should be allowed this inhumane practice? The same argument was promoted to kill all whales in the ocean. Till the world body intervened to save them. The Indian Tigers would disappear, except a world body thought of Save the Tiger project. Some times in the name of Culture, ignorant people destroy their own environment. Like setting uncontrolled fires in the woods, has to be regulated.

The growing resentment among the youth over the present political system and the repeated failure of politicians in addressing issues that are quintessentially “Tamizh” has led to the collective anger now being displayed. People see themselves having no voice at the national or state level with elected representatives playing second fiddle and coming across as subservient to their party leaders.

After watching helplessly the interests of Tamil Nadu being ignored on a plethora of issues like Cauvery, Mullaiperiyar, river basin fracking, the Koodankulam nuclear power project, to name a few, the youth have found in Jallikattu a common cause for the uprising. This looks like a beginning for the disillusioned younger generation to try and wrest for themselves bargaining powers from the establishment. Jallikattu came as a unifier that helped cut through urban-rural and many such divides and shout out: Enough is enough.

The protest, reminiscent of the 1965 anti-Hindi agitation that rocked Tamil Nadu, has also sent across a message to the politicians, media, ruling class and elite to not take the sentiments of the “other” subaltern communities for granted.
Coincidently, the Marina Beach also hosted the Tamil protestors in 1965.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/analysis/jallikattu-protests-are-an-uprising-against-a-failed-political-system/story-tJIsgWFZRyhmpvKBWav6HO.html

Irrespective of the legislative, judicial or political outcome, there is no doubt that the protestors have won the day. But this triumphal moment also calls for introspection. Jallikattu enthusiasts should ensure that the sport is regulated and animals are protected from harm. In a welcome sign, environmental groups, keen on preserving native breeds of bulls, are already in the fray. Hopefully they will take the lead in this matter. More importantly, the democratic character manifest in the upsurge should be reflected in jallikattu itself by making it more inclusive with the participation of the high and the low, the dominant and the oppressed.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/Catching-a-sport-by-its-horns/article17069540.ece?homepage=true

I like the approach of TN CM .He like Narasimha rao will turn out to be a winner.

He rushed to delhi without ego unlike JJ, hobnobbed with modi sarkar and got a solution.

He can similarly approach karnataka and kerala to resolve cauvery and mullaiperiyar issues.

All this could not happen with JJ in power.

Now tamilnadu has come to know that nothing much comes out of rushing to court over every issue.

Thge brahmin brains [Javdekar,Prasad,Rohatgi helped in finding the ordinance solution.

Are legal brains of TN so bad that they could not advise their own govt.?

They were only boycotting courts without any constructive activity

True! Why there is attack on Hindu culture, tradition & way of life??

The great game in Jallikattu

By Sankrant Sanu


Some months ago, I had written about Project Thessalonica, an evangelical project that systematically aims to attack Hindu festivals and institutions. Tamil Nadu is a major battleground for the Church where it is has been able to establish deep institutional control. The battle for Jallikattu has to be seen in that light.


What is Project Thessalonica?


“Project Thessalonica aims to stop or limit Hindu activity by converting people, who form the pillars of Hindu culture, festivals, traditions and activity…They are making environmental groups raise the voice so that Ganesh processions, Kumbh Melas and Jagannath Rath Yatras are limited…”[1]


Native festivals are part of a social ecosystem that binds people to native traditions. This is one reason native festivals have always been attacked as part of establishing Christian dominance. Let us look briefly at the timeline for the Jallikattu ban.


In 2006, a judge in the Madras High Court suo moto banned Jallikattu, even though she was hearing an entirely different case and no one had petitioned against the ban.
As, The Hindu reported, based on the lawyer Shaji Chellan’s interview [2]:


“Pointing out that he had actually filed a writ petition seeking permission for rekla (bullock cart) race at Thaniankootam in Ramanathapuram district, the lawyer claims that Justice R. Banumathi (now a Supreme Court judge) expanded the scope of the case on her own and banned rekla race, oxen race and jallikattu.


‘…High Court had already allowed similar writ petitions and granted permission for rekla race in other districts. To my rude shock, Ms. Justice Banumathi took a differing view and questioned how could such races be conducted against the provisions of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act,’ he recalls.”


Not only did the Judge on her own add Jallikattu to the case, she also overturned the precedence of earlier judgments to ban multiple festivals in one go. The judgment itself was passed, without any notice, and without allowing anyone in favor of Jallikattu to plead.


Mr. Chellan says the judgment was passed immediately after lunch break on the day of admission itself without notice being issued to any party.


Who was this judge, and how did she manufacture a judgment out of thin air? The Judge is Justice R Bhanumati, and according to an article in VigilOnline, she is a Christian.[3] However, that does not automatically imply any kind of bias, unless such bias is evident in her work. Apart from unilaterally banning Jallikattu, without any petition to do so, Justice Bhanumati appears to have passed harsh judgements on other Hindu matters as well.


Justice Bhanumati ruled against the right of Podhu Dikshidhars, traditional Hindu priests at the fifth-century Natarajar Temple at Chidambaram to manage their own affairs.
“In February 2010, she justified the government takeover of the administration of the famous fifth-century Natarajar temple in Chidambaram saying, ‘Administration of temple is purely secular and the state can intervene and regulate the administration if the secular activities of the institution are mismanaged.’ The judgment, however, was overturned by the Supreme Court earlier this year.”[4]


The Supreme Court found reason to overturn her judgment in the Natrajar temple case. Another exceedingly harsh judgment was passed by Justice Bhanumati against a Hindu Sadhu,
“Making it clear that he would not be eligible for any remission or early release, she said in the judgment that he would serve his second life term after completion of the first life sentence. The order was meant to keep the godman in jail forever. He died in jail in February 2011.”


In yet another case, Justice Bhanumati ruled against grandparents, who sought custody of a child, who was allegedly being converted into Christianity by the other grandparents, when her Hindu parents died.[5]


Without trying to impugn on the motives and judgment of Justice Bhanumati, there is at least prime facie evidence that her extraordinary intervention to ban Jallikattu, without any petition, may be part of an intolerance towards Hindu festivals and institutions, reflected in Project Thessalonica.


While a regulation was passed by the TN government to circumvent the Madras High Court ban in 2009, the Congress Party’s role in this has been equally dubious. In 2011, Congress’ Environment Minister, Jairam Ramesh, banned the use of bulls in sports, with an eye to ban Jallikattu.


“Chairperson, Humane Society International, Nandita Krishna said that by its historic verdict, the Supreme Court has vindicated Ramesh’s position and upheld the ban. ‘I must particularly mention and thank Ramesh who, as Minister for Environment and Forests, banned the use of bulls as performing animals in 2011’.[6]”


While the UPA government was still in power, the Supreme Court, in its subsequent order in 2014 banned Jallikattu altogether[7].


Waking up late, it was not until January 2016 that the BJP government was able to pass a notification reversing the earlier one from 2011, promulgated by Jairam Ramesh of the Congress, and allowing Jallikattu to take place. However the Supreme Court, despite a heavy case backlog of nearly 50,000 pending cases, over a thousand of which are pending for over 10 years[8], decided that it must urgently protect bulls from their owners and stayed the regulation.


In May 2016, the Congress Party, in its manifesto in Tamil Nadu, perhaps with an eye on evangelical support, specifically included upholding the ban on Jallikattu.[9]


The Congress which is criticising the Narendra Modi Government for the ban on Jallikattu, had in its manifesto for the Tamil Nadu Assembly Election in May 2016 had declared that it would ban the Jallikattu. “The party supports the ban on Jallikattu,” said the Congress manifesto.


“Tamil Nadu Assembly elections 2016: Congress releases manifesto, promises ban on Jallikattu”, the dailies had carried banner headlined reports the day after the manifesto was released by Mukul Wasnik, AICC general secretary.


Former PM Manmohan Singh, in a letter to NG Jayasimha, managing director, Humane Society International, a NGO based in Secunderabad had said that he was for banning the bull fight. “The Humane Society Internationale India has a worthy objective and certainly we have to work to discourage bullfights which provide a cruel form of entertainment. I wish you all success in achieving your objective,” said Manmohan Singh in his letter dated December 15, 2015.


Note that Human Society International is another foreign-funded NGO, just at PETA, both of which were major advocates for the ban.
The case against Jallikattu was pleaded by Congress leader Abhishek Singhvi, who called the sport “wanton torture[10]” leading the Supreme Court reinstated the ban in July 2016.


Other questions that arise


Apart from the role of the Congress Party, the part played by the Courts and the nexus between the Courts and foreign-funded NGOs also comes under scrutiny. The Supreme Court judge, KS Radhakarishnan received the PETA man of the year award for his 2014 judgment banning Jallikattu.


The language used in the judgment is also instructive[11]: “international community should hang their head in shame, for not recognizing their rights all these ages, a species which served the humanity from the time of Adam and Eve.”


First, we should be clear that the Supreme Court is a colonial institution. While English Common Law is based on centuries of English traditions, the Indian Constitution and Laws have little or no relation with Indian traditions. Indeed they are antithetical to these. The Supreme Court operates only in English, a grave injustice in a land where less than 10% people know English with any degree of proficiency. It also looks upon the Indian tradition with colonized eyes. As such it is easy prey for the “rights” discourse pushed by foreign-funded NGOs.


Second, it is important to understand why attacking Hindu festivals and traditions is important to the Conversion War. Unlike Book religions, which coalesce around Church or Mosque, driven by monotheistic zeal of insider and outsider, native traditions have no such glue. The glue that there is, is present in festival and ritual, and the same festival will have diverse expressions throughout India. Where it is Pongal in one, it is Lodhi in another and Makar Sankranti in a third area. Attacking these festivals is an attempt to cut these bonds; a rootless people are a much easier target for the conversion war.


Third, Jallikattu is not just a sport, it is an ecosystem that sustain indigenous bovine breeds and values male calves that may otherwise be slaughtered. The fight against Jallikattu has a veneer of animal rights, but the reality is the ban will create slaughter and extinction. This is a result of the lopsided ideological “rights” discourse that the West generates, quite different from the natural harmonious native balance that it seeks to destroy. There is a good thread on this here.
As far as PETA goes, its endorsement of the veal-eating Pope Francis as “Man of the Year” should be enough.
Acknowledgments. Thanks to @a_r_j_u_n and @vivekbabaji for links on Twitter and an unattributed picture with a timeline sketch.


References-
1. http://heritagefoundation.org.in/Download/articles/can_hindusim_project_thessalonica.pdf
2. http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Madurai/Lawyer-reminisces- the-day-
3. jallikattu-was- banned-first/article17039812.ece
4. http://www.vigilonline.com/index.ph...-control-over-temple&catid=86:judiciary-watch
5. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...man-SC-judge-from-TN/articleshow/40221484.cms
6. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1949713/
7. http://www.ndtv.com/south/jairam-ramesh-welcomes-ban-on-use-of-bulls-for-jallikattu-event-560633
8. https://awbi.org/awbi-pdf/sc_judgement_jallikattu_7-5-14.pdf
9. http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=137291
10. http://www.dailypioneer.com/nation/we-support-ban-on-jallikattu-cong-2016-may-manifesto.html
11. http://www.timesnow.tv/india/video/...anton-torture-says-abhishek-manusinghvi/54391
12. http://www.livelaw.in/former-sc-judge-k-s-radhakrishnan-awarded-peta-man-year-award/


Sankrant Sanu
Sankrant Sanu is an entrepreneur, author and researcher based in Seattle and Gurgaon. His essays in the book “Invading the Sacred” contested Western academic writing on Hinduism. He is a graduate of IIT Kanpur and the University of Texas and holds six technology patents. His latest book is “The English Medium Myth.” He blogs at sankrant.org .