Jump to content

Tripura HC bans animal sacrifice in all temples with immediate effect


Gollum

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

The latter obviously. The greatest trick the BJP ever pulled was convincing the world that it was a pro-Hindu party. A new credible fringe has to emerge otherwise we are done for. But here we have naive Hindus celebrating these decisions :doh:.

What if this new fringe is much more religious than BJP, and then impose it's ideas by force in whole India, including ban of slaughtering and eating meat? 

 

And off course BJP could not go against this decision, while not only Cow is respected in India, but also vegetarianism is claimed to be the Tradition of India. BJP has it's roots in North West India. It will loose their support if BJP starts supporting it. 

 

And as I said before, it is still not clear to me if the Judges were Religious Vegetarians or the Secular Vegetarians? You can challenge it only if the judges were Secular Vegetarians. But if they are themselves the religious vegetarians, then things will become very complicated for you as it will then become an internal fight for you. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

(1) According to my research, Jhatka is not humane way of slaughter. Both Jhatka and Halal are not humane. It should be made compulsory to use stun gun before slaughtering. And after stunning, it does not matter how you slaughter while then animal feels no pain. 

I approve of this idea, I am sure we can be flexible enough to implement the same once we have the resources. Stun gun + jhatka...way to go in future. 

Quote

(2) I am unable to understand if the Judges were religious Vegetarians or Secular Vegetarians. 
Both of these two categories can ban the slaughter. 

Please make it clear. 

Dude how to find out? Those guys aren't my buddies, there are so many judges in India LOL. I don't even know for sure if my relatives/colleagues are veg or non-veg, never mind the other question. Doesn't matter, they are appointed to do a job and failed miserably, critique their judgement. Waise I have made my points in previous posts above, won't repeat them. I support the right of my fellow countrymen to consume meat......my background and ideology have nothing to do with this, freedom of choice though not absolute (IMO) certainly makes a strong case here. 

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, beetle said:

All killings of animals other than for food should be banned .

Strict rules should be followed to make sure there is minimum pain and trauma to the animals used for food.

 

 

 

This is hypocrisy of the fascist extent, apne vicharon ko dusron par thop dena. Non veg eaters have no frickung rights to protest animal sacrifice. Only vegans can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After Sabarimala, now Maa Tripureswari Temple, the Judiciary is killing the diversity of traditions within Hinduism

 

Certain men in black robes have taken it upon themselves to be the reformers of the Hindu community

 
 
Quote

On the 27th of September, the Tripura High Court banned Pashubali (animal sacrifice) at Maa Tripureswari Temple. The Tripureswari Temple, also known as Tripura Sundari temple, is one of the 51 Shakti Peeths, and is located in the ancient city of Udaipur in Tripura. The shrine is also known as Matabari among the local people. Being a Shakti Peeth, animal sacrifice was being practised at this holy shrine.

In the judgment banning the ancient tradition of the temple, it became quite evident that certain men in black robes have taken it upon themselves to be the reformers of the Hindu community. In doing so, they seem to have exceeded the mandate granted to them by the Indian Constitution. Now, we are at a point where the Constitution is whatever the judges deem it to be based on their personal whims on a given day. A particular worldview is being forced down our throats without our consent. This is the embodiment of tyranny.

The Court ruled, “The right of offering an animal for sacrifice is not an integral and essential part of the religion, protected under Article 25(1) of the Constitution. As such, no right of the freedom of professing any religion by the State can be said to have been violated. State has no religion other than constitutionalism and the expression ‘person’ under Article 25 has to be in reference to natural person. Withdrawal of such practice would not tantamount to any change, fundamental in character of the religion.”

The Bench observed, “Which religion or community mandates infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering on an animal? Which religion prescribes that physical or mental pain or suffering should not be eliminated in the pre-slaughter stage? Which religion would want its followers not to treat animal with compassion, care or a humane approach? And above all, which religion would allow itself to be shackled to dogma, superstition and unfounded beliefs so as not to reform and be in tune with the changing times in pursuit of Constitutional goals and morality.”

Such pearls of wisdom only flow from the Court when the practice in question belongs to the Hindu faith. They are nowhere to be found when barbaric Islamic practices are to be presided upon. The questions that the Court poses would mean that the consumption of all meat would have to be banned completely. One cannot argue for the right to eat anything that one pleases and at the same time, decree that the religious sacrifice of animals to our Gods and Goddesses be banned.

It is hypocritical of the highest order and infringes upon basic norms of decency. The judgment is a tyrannical imposition of a certain worldview upon the Hindu community. There are certain sects and traditions within Hinduism that demand the sacrificial offering of certain animals to Gods and Goddesses.

The rhetorical questions posed by the Court only serve the purpose of moral grandstanding, nothing more. The entire purpose of it was to present themselves as holier than everybody else in the room, nothing else. I could quote Hindu scriptures and Hindu beliefs but that wouldn’t matter. It certainly didn’t in the Sabarimala Verdict. The case was decided the moment a PIL was filed in that regard in the Court. Presentation of evidence, arguments in favour and against, all of this was a charade to give people the impression that due process was followed.

There is scriptural sanction for animal sacrifice. It’s a known fact that certain forms of worship cannot be conducted without the sacrificial offerings of animals. However, people who have no respect for our beliefs and have absolutely no regard for scriptures until and unless they conform to their worldview will continue to ignore such facts in the face of the obvious.

To the Judiciary and everyone who is not fond of Pashubali, I say, leave us alone. I ask of you what the devotees of Sabarimala have been asking for a year. We are not imposing our beliefs on you, do not impose yours on us. Hinduism has a diversity of traditions. We hear people boasting about the diversity of traditions within Hinduism all the time. And yet, whenever it so happens that their words are put to the test, suddenly their voices are found to be not so raucous.

While people boast of the diversity within Hinduism, the same is being culled day by day, one tradition at a time. The Judiciary is not realizing the immense damage that it has caused to its own reputation. What happened in the aftermath of the Sabarimala Verdict was an open revolt against the Judiciary. It was an entire community refusing to bow down to the tyrannical verdicts of the Indian Judiciary. If its crazy edicts do not stop anytime soon, we will soon see a nationwide revolt against it.

For the state to function effectively, the men who represent it must respect the cultural practices and traditions of the people they govern or preside over. Else, it will lead to a breakdown in the society like the one we observed in the aftermath of the Sabarimala Verdict. All the devotees ever wanted was for them to be left alone to practice their religious faith. But certain people in their hubris decided to trample upon them.

The Bharatiya Janata Party, too, needs to stand up to Judicial Tyranny. The leaders of the BJP visited the Temple on numerous occasions during the elections. Now, it’s their duty to protect the sacred traditions of the Temple. One can only hope that the state government will refuse to implement the order. The judgment also reveals that it’s high time for the Central government to pass a law to explicitly protect Hindu Traditions from Judicial Tyranny. It was one of their manifesto promises.

Last year, it was the Sabarimala Temple under attack. This year, only a day before the anniversary of the Sabarimala verdict, it is the Tripureswari temple under attack. This has got to end. According to reports, the Tripura government will appeal against the verdict in the Supreme Court. One can only hope that better sense prevails. Otherwise, if all the traditions that make our civilization unique are banned, there will be nothing worth preserving at all.

Black Coffee Enthusiast. Post Graduate in Psychology. Bengali.

yell eric cartman GIF by South Park

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

This is hypocrisy of the fascist extent, apne vicharon ko dusron par thop dena. Non veg eaters have no frickung rights to protest animal sacrifice. Only vegans can do.

Main premise of her post is wrong, bali meat in those temples is fed to people, not discarded. Wish people research these kind of subjects before coming to conclusions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The target ain't some minor temple, it is a shakti peeth...like Kalighat, Kamakhya, Amarnath, Srisailam, Kanchi Kamakshi Amman, Bakreshwar.

Quote

The temple is considered to be one of the 51 Shakti Peethas; legend says that the right leg of Sati fell here. Here, Shakti is worshipped as Tripurasundarī and the accompanying Bhairava is Tripuresh. The main shrine, a cubical edifice with a three-tier roof with a finial, erected by Maharaja of Tripura Dhanya Manikya in 1501 AD, is constructed in the Bengali Ek-ratna style.

Every year on the occasion of Diwali, a famous Mela takes place near the temple which is visited by more than 0.2 million pilgrims.

500+ years no problem, everything went on fine. God knows how many invaders this site survived. 

cruzeiro GIF

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gollum said:

The target ain't some minor temple, it is a shakti peeth...like Kalighat, Kamakhya, Amarnath, Srisailam, Kanchi Kamakshi Amman, Bakreshwar.

500+ years no problem, everything went on fine. God knows how many invaders this site survived. 

cruzeiro GIF

Its OK @Gollumdada. Hindus must reform any practices which isnt progressive and respect life. You know that every life on the planet is Hindu  on concept of Punarjanm/rebirth.

 

Why kill Hindus in temple :cantstop:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strangely, the types of people who selectively accuse the RSS of trying to homogenize Hinduism are absent in fighting this case. 

 

The reality is that "liberalism" and "secularism" are philosophical offshoots of Christianity. They cannot tolerate the actual diversity of Hinduism, as homogenizing is inherent to their DNA. The idea that temples have different traditions across India, which is seemingly the textbook definition of diversity, is haraam to these people. 

 

One can see this in the West as well. The idea of diversity is not diversity of thoughts, but superficial diversity skin-deep. Diversity is good so long as all black, white, brown, yellow, red, blue, purple people all say the exact same thing as approved by the "liberal" clergy.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, mishra said:

Its OK @Gollumdada. Hindus must reform any practices which isnt progressive and respect life. You know that every life on the planet is Hindu  on concept of Punarjanm/rebirth.

 

Why kill Hindus in temple :cantstop:

Bro, Hinduism isn't homogeneous, shaktism is a core branch of our faith. Question of respecting life is impossible because we can't impose vegetarianism on all (leaving aside plant has life debates), it isn't economically, socially or environmentally feasible...let Jains worry about their religion. Adi Sankara couldn't enforce change of this practice in that part of the country, who are these black robed idiots? Who are they to interpret our religion? NE Hindu culture is already under attack because of demographic invasion from BD and missionary activities, why punish them further? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Bro, Hinduism isn't homogeneous, shaktism is a core branch of our faith. Question of respecting life is impossible because we can't impose vegetarianism on all (leaving aside plant has life debates), it isn't economically, socially or environmentally feasible...let Jains worry about their religion. Adi Sankara couldn't enforce change of this practice in that part of the country, who are these black robed idiots? Who are they to interpret our religion? NE Hindu culture is already under attack because of demographic invasion from BD and missionary activities, why punish them further? 

Agree with your point about imposition. Why do you want to stop Hindus like say @beetle ji to have access to temple and “a say “ in its practices?

After all, if asked, Indian judges are to protect basic right to practice religion to every Hindu. 

Practices of a temple , if not inclusive , could be scrutinised and abolished by law unless constitution changes

PS: Read the very first sentence in your op. You will find the question asked in PIL will automatically will lead to the decision. Blaming judge is not correct

Edited by mishra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/29/2019 at 5:14 PM, Gollum said:

LINK

A division bench was hearing a PIL signed in 2018, seeking whether the animal sacrifice in state temples is a secular act and whether prohibiting the practice would infringe the fundamental right to follow and propagate religion. 

WTF, why are they interfering with centuries old Hindu traditions followed there? This doesn't make sense, people consume the meat after sacrifice, don't waste them. How many goats and chickens are slaughtered in India every minute? They don't interfere with Bakrid rituals do they? Millions of goats/bulls/sheep are slaughtered by Muslims as part of religion, Indian Christians slaughter tens of thousands of Turkeys during Christmas...Hindus sacrifice very little, why are they always the target? Yeh kya secularism chudaap hai bhai log? Pehle jallikattu, ab yeh...should Hindus stop practicing their religion in India? Should Hindu traditions be wiped out? 

 

Tripura HC Bans Animal Sacrifice In Hindu Temples; Refuses To Consider Bakr-Eid Argument

Animals Have 'Fundamental Right To Life': Tripura HC Bans Animal/Bird Sacrifice In Temples [Read Judgment]

 

Many BJP/RSS (Hindi belt upper caste, Jains, Iyengars etc) supporters who swear by vegetarianism and low IQ Hindus may like this stupid judgement but they don't understand the culture and Shaktism traditions of Eastern part of India. This is a deathblow to a centuries old practice, wonder what the wider game plan is? Do they want to push Hindus to the edge there and make them ripe for conversion? *ing shithead judges.

 

Sabarimala in south, Ayodhya up north, North East, govt control over temples.....trend is obvious. What next, Kamakhya or Kalighat? 

 

 

 

 

 

In my village we sacrificed a goat yesterday only on the auspicious first day of Navratri. 

 

Yaha ban kar ke batao fir batate hain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, maniac said:

I don't want to create the equivalence that why is this not being applied to other cultures because it is a good decision as animal sacrifice is barbaric act and I agree with this decision.

 

Now time to grow some balls and apply this to bakri-Eid etc as well. About time.

In whose version of Hinduism is animal sacrifice considered a barbaric act? Brahmins and upper castes'?  That defeats the very purpose of respecting diverse beliefs. This is a concept coming out of western christian egilitarianism which makes all homogenous and confirming to one sets of beliefs. 

 

The basis of the judgement is that is animal slaughter a basic tenet of a religion to be respected or tolerated? While Bakr-id sacrific is considered essential part of Islam and hence allowed, they considered it is not part of Hindu religion. Whose version of Hindu religion is it? This is total BS. Either bring in UCC or don't facking discriminate. Why do we have activist Judges judging Hindu rituals while others are protected by minority rights!  FGM is allowed as it was considered essential to Bohra rituals of those Muslims. Why not do the same for different sects of Hindus? It is because Hindus like you, are not united and welcome to respect others' beliefs.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ You are making it a theological discussion. One can ask which verse of Gita says sacrificing animals will please god when it’s exactly the opposite mentioned in most places.

 

Anyhow, its about infringement of rights of Hindus who cant tolerate practice that is carried out by few locals. Its similar to Right of Dalits having access to temple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mishra said:

^ You are making it a theological discussion. One can ask which verse of Gita says sacrificing animals will please god when it’s exactly the opposite mentioned in most places.

 

Anyhow, its about infringement of rights of Hindus who cant tolerate practice that is carried out by few locals. Its similar to Right of Dalits having access to temple.

I don't see Hindus shoving the dead goat in the face of others who don't participate in this ritual. 

In fact this is done in the separate premises and things such as hygiene etc as well as sensitivities of others are kept in mind too. 

It isn't as if vegetarians are forced to suffer through it while they are quietly doing pooja in the mandir. 

 

And those who are calling it barbaric well Go fck yourself. 

Edited by Stradlater
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

I don't see Hindus shoving the dead goat in the face of others who don't participate in this ritual. 

In fact this is done in the separate premises and things such as hygiene etc as well as sensitivities of others are kept in mind too. 

It isn't as if vegetarians are forced to suffer through it while they are quietly doing pooja in the mandir. 

 

And those who are calling it barbaric well Go fck yourself. 

So, just for sake of argument, You are okay to resolve practice of allowing Dalits seeking blessings of God in a separate queue via different side of a temple?

 

Answer should be No. same queue for everyone as temple cant give special rights to choosen few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

In whose version of Hinduism is animal sacrifice considered a barbaric act? Brahmins and upper castes'?  That defeats the very purpose of respecting diverse beliefs. This is a concept coming out of western christian egilitarianism which makes all homogenous and confirming to one sets of beliefs. 

 

The basis of the judgement is that is animal slaughter a basic tenet of a religion to be respected or tolerated? While Bakr-id sacrific is considered essential part of Islam and hence allowed, they considered it is not part of Hindu religion. Whose version of Hindu religion is it? This is total BS. Either bring in UCC or don't facking discriminate. Why do we have activist Judges judging Hindu rituals while others are protected by minority rights!  FGM is allowed as it was considered essential to Bohra rituals of those Muslims. Why not do the same for different sects of Hindus? It is because Hindus like you, are not united and welcome to respect others' beliefs.

 

That is the beauty of Hinduism as it is not about a predesigned set of rules like the Abrahamic faiths. I feel sacrificing innocent animals is a barbaric act be it Hinduism or Xtianity or Islam or any other religion. 

23 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

The basis of the judgement is that is animal slaughter a basic tenet of a religion to be respected or tolerated? While Bakr-id sacrific is considered essential part of Islam and hence allowed, they considered it is not part of Hindu religion. Whose version of Hindu religion is it? This is total BS. 

 

I am not here to discuss the hypocrisy of the actual judgement. I don't think I have a different viewpoint there about the hypocrisy.

 

I do accept that there should be uniformity to such rules when it comes to an important topic like abuse of animals and not selective targeting.

 

However I don't want this to be a kindergarten contest like "well he does it and gets away with it" kind of a deal. If this practice has been stopped at least in 1 place I am fine with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to modern Secular point of view, all religious beliefs are respected and people have full liberty to act upon them. No judiciary or government is allowed to interfere in it. 

 

Nevertheless, criticism of any practice of any group is fully allowed. In West, the sacrifice on Bark-Eid day is not forbidden, but it has been severely criticised by the people. And Muslims have to answer this criticism which is normally difficult for them to answer. 

 

If some one wants to end this practice in Tripura, then only method should be criticism and educating people. 

Edited by Alam_dar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mishra said:

Agree with your point about imposition. Why do you want to stop Hindus like say @beetle ji to have access to temple and “a say “ in its practices?

Not going to point out names.

This is a Tripura issue, I am sure most of you don't visit Tripura to pray, neither your ancestors, possibly nor will your future generations. You may go as tourists (even then you may avoid the bali walleh temples or those altars) but doubt you will have the same attachment to the deity. Those people have been following those  traditions and rituals for centuries and it is an integral part of the version of Hinduism they follow. Hinduism isn't a homogeneous religion, different rituals in different places and you have to respect that. Hindus in Punjab, Bihar,TN needn't concern themselves with the practices in a far away place.....let all follow their own rituals.

 

I am consistent in my stance, doesn't matter which state's Hindus get affected, be it Sabarimala (Kerala), Rajasthan, NE or Bihar (say chhath puja). As long the rituals are reasonable I am ok with that, some regulation will be understandable but ban? The bali meat is fed to many homeless people, likewise the coconuts they break in Bengaluru's temples are donated to the hungry...as I asked in other post will they next ban smashing of coconuts citing noise pollution? I will have more issues with pouring milk, honey, curd on idols...that is wasteful because it goes to the drain...that warrants reform but still devotees should take the initiative. Here the decision has been imposed by the milords, against the wish of devotees...straightaway ban. 

Quote

After all, if asked, Indian judges are to protect basic right to practice religion to every Hindu. 

I don't understand, please elaborate, will help if you talk in context of this decision.

Quote

Practices of a temple , if not inclusive , could be scrutinised and abolished by law unless constitution changes

Who said inclusivity is a problem in these kind of temples? I lived in Bengal for most of my life, been to these temples thousands of times, inclusivity never a concern. If you have concerns/questions, ask me.

Quote

PS: Read the very first sentence in your op. You will find the question asked in PIL will automatically will lead to the decision. Blaming judge is not correct

Of course we have to blame the judges. Who the hell are they to decide what is essential or non-essential in Hinduism? Are they experts on these matters? Do they know all scriptures and every tradition and ritual there is in all sects? Is either of them a greater authority on Hinduism than Adi Sankara, Ramakrishna and Vivekananda? Banning bali has infringed the way those folks practice their version of this giant umbrella religion called Hinduism. If you can't empathize with your fellow Hindus just because they practice it differently I don't know what to say man. Not often that I disagree with your viewpoints but here it appears we see it differently. 

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...