Guest guest Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 Even if Gandhi had advocated that all stray dogs should be killed, is it not obvious that he could have been wrong in some of his assertions just like any other person? Gandhi had massive differences in his ideals with many of his contemporary associates, including Nehru, Tagore, Subhash Bose and Charlie Andrews. Two books which address these differences very well are Romain Rolland's biography of Gandhi and Bhikhu Parikh's very short introduction to Gandhi(of Oxford University Press). Gandhi never had much time for saving wildlife, Nehru did. And Subhash Bose, although he advocated violence against the British was very fond of dogs, horses and monkeys.(Did not like cats though). Also there may be things attributed to Gandhi that are unsubstantiated. For example, his quote(very popular in the West), " " The greatness of a *nation*and its *moral progress can be judged* by the way its *animals are treated.* " I am yet to come across an original source written by Gandhi himself that substantiates this. And this quote is not in his autobiography, at least I have not come across it during the many times I have read it. So before attributing(or not) anything that Gandhi might have commented on stray dogs, it is important to ascertain the originality and veracity of the quote. If someone can send me an original reference for " the greatness of a nation by the way its animals are treated " quote, I shall be very grateful. On 3/15/09, AG BABU <agbabu wrote: > > The problem with some of us including the known Gandhians is that we miss > the woods for the trees. The controversy regarding Gandhiji’s ‘endorsement’ > of killing the stray dogs was well debated during his own time and the > doubts adequately cleared by the Mahatma himself. Gandhiji asked and probed > in his own way for a better management protocol -not only for the dogs but > the cows too. > > He wrote:” Cows we cannot protect, dogs we kick about and belabour with > sticks, their ribs are seen sticking out and yet we are not ashamed of > ourselves and raise a hue and cry when a stray dog is killed. Which of the > two is better – that 5000 dogs should wander about in semi-starvation > living > on dirt and excreta and drag on a miserable existence, or that 50 should > die > and keep the rest in a decent condition?” > > And this was exactly what he clarified at a time- when ABC stray dog > management was not even thought of; but the great visionary was quite > confident that some definite management plan for curbing the number of > these > animals would come up so that these animals should not suffer in the name > of > Ahimsa. > > The problem with the Trivandrum Corporation in Kerala is that it is on the > brink of facing punishment on contempt of court charges for having > deliberately misled the Hon. High Court of Kerala in filing an affidavit > saying that the City Corporation is implementing the ABC Rules 2001-while > they were actually killing hundreds of dogs. > > The Corporation is now regularly giving press releases stressig on an > inflated number of the stray dog population in the city (and rabies bites) > to add more panic among the public. In a dramatic move they have opened a > rabies clinic in the General Hospital and are pumping lakhs of rupees for > advertisements and short films to make the public more panicky. Well known > film stars are hired for the promotion of a particular brand of rabies > vaccine at the cost of the tax-payer’s money. They have hired even some > members among the State Animal Welfare Board to openly come out for the > killing of strays. One such gentlemen, a retired Central Govt. bureaucrat > once presented this “Gandhian” view during an Animal Welfare Seminar- > sponsored by the State Animal Husbandry Directorate- and waxed eloquently > on > killing all stray dogs in the state. > > This time, it seems, it is a ‘Gandhian’ they have roped in to bail > themselves out from the admonishment of the court. > > In the meantime the Corporation has admitted in writing to a query as per > R.T.A.Act that there were no rabies cases reported in the city. > > So these fellows are really mad and using every trade and trick they could > think of to wriggle out of the court case, the “Gandhian strategy” is just > one among these. > > I invite the attention of all animal lovers to the so called > ‘controversial’ > writings of our Mahatma in *Young India.* > > Please compare it with the ravings of the sponsored Goebbelsian propaganda > moguls from the capital city of Kerala > > *Gandhiji’s writings on the stray dog issue, in his paper Young India. ** * > > *A mill owner in Ahmedabad, Ambalal Sarabai, had 60 stray dogs killed > outside his mill. Being a Hindu he felt remorse over his actions and went > to > Gandhiji. When Gandhiji approved of his deed a huge controversy arose. The > Ahmedabad Humanitarian Society and many other people asked him how he, the > apostle of Ahimsa, could approve of the killing when religions like > Hinduism > and Jainism prohibited the taking of life. It is then that he used his > paper > Young India to explain what true Ahimsa really meant. *** > > *Letter to Gandhiji*: > > “You advocate the destruction of stray dogs. Do you include in the category > the very useful village dogs?” > > *Gandhiji’s reply:*** > > “Most certainly I do not. The village dogs are the cheapest and most > efficient police we have for protecting villagers against thieves at night > and intruding dogs and other animals during the day. But I have not > advocated an indiscriminate destruction of even stray dogs. Many other > remedies have to be adopted before that drastic measure is resorted to. > What > I have insisted upon is a municipal by-law authorizing municipalities to > destroy unowned dogs. This simple legislation will prevent dogs from cruel > neglect and put the Mahajan upon their mettle. It is the indiscriminate and > thoughtless charity which has to be resisted. That charity that feeds dogs > and indeed men who choose to become beggars harms the beggars and the > society which encourages such false charity.” > > *Letter to Gandhiji*: > > “You say that if we can neither take individual charge of roving dogs nor > have a pinjrapol for them, the only alternative is to kill them. Does that > mean that every roving dog should be killed, although it may not be rabid? > Don’t you agree that we leave unmolested all harmful beasts, birds and > reptiles, so long as they do not actually harm us? Why should the dogs be > an > exception? Where is the humanity of shooting innocent dogs wherever they > are > found roving? How can one wishing well to all living beings do this?” > > *Gandhiji’s reply*: > “The writer has misunderstood my meaning. I would not suggest even the > destruction of rabid dogs for the sake of it, much less that of innocent > roving dogs. Nor have I said that these latter should be killed wherever > they are found. I have only suggested legislation to that effect, so that > as > soon as the law is made, humane people might wake up in the matter and > devise better management of stray dogs. Some of these might be owned, some > might be put in quarantine. The remedy, when it is taken, will be once for > all. Stray dogs do not drop down from heaven. They are sign of idleness, > indifference and ignorance of society. When they grow into a nuisance, it > is > due to our ignorance and want of compassion. A stray dog is bound to take > to > his heels if you do not feed him. The measure I have suggested is actuated > no less by a consideration of the welfare of dogs than by that of society. > It is the duty of the humanitarian to allow no living being aimlessly to > roam about. In performance of that duty it may be his duty once in a way to > kill some dogs.” > > This is what Gandhi said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 As you quite rightly say, Trivandrum Corporation have given lots of hype about stray dogs and in particular about rabies, and with all the publicity about the rabies clinics it only emphasises their anti-dog propaganda. Yet in response to recent questioning under the RTI as to how many rabid dogs had been picked up under their 'Sureksha programme', since 6/7/2006, their answer was NIL. --- On Sun, 15/3/09, AG BABU <agbabu wrote: AG BABU <agbabu " Gandhiji " hired by Trivandrum Corporation aapn Sunday, 15 March, 2009, 6:30 AM The problem with some of us including the known Gandhians is that we miss the woods for the trees. The controversy regarding Gandhiji’s ‘endorsement’ of killing the stray dogs was well debated during his own time and the doubts adequately cleared by the Mahatma himself. Gandhiji asked and probed in his own way for a better management protocol -not only for the dogs but the cows too. He wrote:†Cows we cannot protect, dogs we kick about and belabour with sticks, their ribs are seen sticking out and yet we are not ashamed of ourselves and raise a hue and cry when a stray dog is killed. Which of the two is better – that 5000 dogs should wander about in semi-starvation living on dirt and excreta and drag on a miserable existence, or that 50 should die and keep the rest in a decent condition?†And this was exactly what he clarified at a time- when ABC stray dog management was not even thought of; but the great visionary was quite confident that some definite management plan for curbing the number of these animals would come up so that these animals should not suffer in the name of Ahimsa. The problem with the Trivandrum Corporation in Kerala is that it is on the brink of facing punishment on contempt of court charges for having deliberately misled the Hon. High Court of Kerala in filing an affidavit saying that the City Corporation is implementing the ABC Rules 2001-while they were actually killing hundreds of dogs. The Corporation is now regularly giving press releases stressig on an inflated number of the stray dog population in the city (and rabies bites) to add more panic among the public. In a dramatic move they have opened a rabies clinic in the General Hospital and are pumping lakhs of rupees for advertisements and short films to make the public more panicky. Well known film stars are hired for the promotion of a particular brand of rabies vaccine at the cost of the tax-payer’s money. They have hired even some members among the State Animal Welfare Board to openly come out for the killing of strays. One such gentlemen, a retired Central Govt. bureaucrat once presented this “Gandhian†view during an Animal Welfare Seminar- sponsored by the State Animal Husbandry Directorate- and waxed eloquently on killing all stray dogs in the state. This time, it seems, it is a ‘Gandhian’ they have roped in to bail themselves out from the admonishment of the court. In the meantime the Corporation has admitted in writing to a query as per R.T.A.Act that there were no rabies cases reported in the city. So these fellows are really mad and using every trade and trick they could think of to wriggle out of the court case, the “Gandhian strategy†is just one among these. I invite the attention of all animal lovers to the so called ‘controversial’ writings of our Mahatma in *Young India.* Please compare it with the ravings of the sponsored Goebbelsian propaganda moguls from the capital city of Kerala *Gandhiji’s writings on the stray dog issue, in his paper Young India. ** * *A mill owner in Ahmedabad, Ambalal Sarabai, had 60 stray dogs killed outside his mill. Being a Hindu he felt remorse over his actions and went to Gandhiji. When Gandhiji approved of his deed a huge controversy arose. The Ahmedabad Humanitarian Society and many other people asked him how he, the apostle of Ahimsa, could approve of the killing when religions like Hinduism and Jainism prohibited the taking of life. It is then that he used his paper Young India to explain what true Ahimsa really meant. *** *Letter to Gandhiji*: “You advocate the destruction of stray dogs. Do you include in the category the very useful village dogs?†*Gandhiji’s reply:*** “Most certainly I do not. The village dogs are the cheapest and most efficient police we have for protecting villagers against thieves at night and intruding dogs and other animals during the day. But I have not advocated an indiscriminate destruction of even stray dogs. Many other remedies have to be adopted before that drastic measure is resorted to. What I have insisted upon is a municipal by-law authorizing municipalities to destroy unowned dogs. This simple legislation will prevent dogs from cruel neglect and put the Mahajan upon their mettle. It is the indiscriminate and thoughtless charity which has to be resisted. That charity that feeds dogs and indeed men who choose to become beggars harms the beggars and the society which encourages such false charity.†*Letter to Gandhiji*: “You say that if we can neither take individual charge of roving dogs nor have a pinjrapol for them, the only alternative is to kill them. Does that mean that every roving dog should be killed, although it may not be rabid? Don’t you agree that we leave unmolested all harmful beasts, birds and reptiles, so long as they do not actually harm us? Why should the dogs be an exception? Where is the humanity of shooting innocent dogs wherever they are found roving? How can one wishing well to all living beings do this?†*Gandhiji’s reply*: “The writer has misunderstood my meaning. I would not suggest even the destruction of rabid dogs for the sake of it, much less that of innocent roving dogs. Nor have I said that these latter should be killed wherever they are found. I have only suggested legislation to that effect, so that as soon as the law is made, humane people might wake up in the matter and devise better management of stray dogs. Some of these might be owned, some might be put in quarantine. The remedy, when it is taken, will be once for all. Stray dogs do not drop down from heaven. They are sign of idleness, indifference and ignorance of society. When they grow into a nuisance, it is due to our ignorance and want of compassion. A stray dog is bound to take to his heels if you do not feed him. The measure I have suggested is actuated no less by a consideration of the welfare of dogs than by that of society. It is the duty of the humanitarian to allow no living being aimlessly to roam about. In performance of that duty it may be his duty once in a way to kill some dogs.†This is what Gandhi said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.