Book Title: Madhuvidya
Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

View full book text
Previous | Next

Page 571
________________ In the second part of this edict the king asks his subjects not to indulge in certain social entertainments (samāja) which he does not approve, for he sees many objectionable things in such festivities. Ashoka does not elaborate this point, but it will be a reasonable guess to suppose that by prohibiting such festivities the king wanted to put a stop to the suffering caused to animals on such occasions. In the last part of this edict the king announces that he had ordered almost a total ban on killing animals for the royal kitchen. Whereas, formerly, many animals used to be daily slaughtered for preparing curry (supa), now, since the edict had been issued, only two or at most three animals were being killed for this purpose. Since the king has shown honesty in making a public admission of this exception. there is no reason to doubt that the small number of animals mentioned by him (two or three) is correct. It should thus be clear that the Buddhist king shows, both in precept and practice, great regard for the sanctity of animal life. The question arises, does the king in all his efforts to save animal life show any special regard for the cow? Does he specifically ban cow-slaughter? The answer to the question has to be a plain 'No'. Professor Alsdorf (op. cit., p. 59) points out that the cow does not find a place in the fairly long list of animals which are declared inviolable by the king in his Pillar Edict V. The explanation sometimes offered of this omission, namely, that the cow has not been listed among these animals since it was even otherwise not killed in those days, will hardly stand scrutiny. On the other hand, the king's declaration : "I have made inviolable ... all the quadrupeds which are neither useful nor edible" shows that if a cow (or a bull) was edible or useful for therapeutic and other purposes, the king had not made it inviolable. It is possible that owing to the various measures taken by Ashoka--ban on animal slaughter for sacrifices, ban on objectionable social festivities, almost total prohibition of meat-eating in his own household, and his repeated exhortation to abstain from injury to animals -- Cow-slaughter was considerably reduced in his days. But this must have been true of other animals as well. The king in this respect made no distinction between a cow and a goat and had not issued a total ban on cowslaughter leaving other animals to their own fate. M. A. MEHENDALE Madhu Vidya/546 Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only www.jainelibrary.org

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762