It was to be expected. Several months after Maharashtra has decided to enforce a ban on beef meat (eating, selling, storing), it is, so to speak, open bar for every prohibition.
Bihar is hardly the first Indian State to ban the sale and consumption of alcohol, but its newly elected chief minister Nitish Kumar has now decided to put in place a general prohibition on alcohol consumption. Liquor retailers are generously invited henceforth to deal in dairy products.
Now take the Indian Muslims. Some of their leaders suddenly came up with the brilliant idea of asking a liquor ban on the occasion of Eid el Milad. It just so happens to coincide this year with Christmas Eve, on December 24. And Christmas parties in India are famous for their booze. Whose feelings shall we not hurt then?
And finally, there are the Jains. This small religious community is known for promoting ahimsa (non-violence), to the extent that its members not only do not eat meat, but neither do they ingest anything growing underground, be it potatoes or onions, for fear of hurting worms, insects or any other form of animal life. Every year, Jains observe strict fasting during Paryushan Parva. But last september, following the beef ban in Maharastra, Jains demanded (and obtained) that during the four days of Paryushan, a general ban on meat – any kind of meat – and animal slaughter be imposed in Mumbai, the rest of Maharashtra and several other Indian states. They didn’t go as far as banning potatoes or onions as any politician in India knows full well that an onion shortage is likely to spark violent protests as it is a basic ingredient.
So far this year, Buddhists, Sikhs and Christians have not yet expressed the will to prohibit any kind of food from being eaten by other communities. But why shouldn’t they? An example has been set, in the name of protecting the religious feelings of some, it can be followed by others. But it will entail a heavy cost for the delicate fabric of the very diverse Indian society.
Olivier Da Lage
An eye on India 