Editor’s note: In our previous Big Story on the targeting of meat-sellers, we looked at who eats and sells meat in India. 

Researched by: Sara Varghese & Prafula Grace Busi

First, some hard data

Here’s the big picture of meat consumption in India in numbers:

• A Pew survey released in July showed that 39% of Indians call themselves vegetarian—including 44% of Hindus. 
• A 2018 analysis put the number of vegetarians at only 20%—and claimed that only a third of privileged, upper-caste Indians are vegetarian. 
• Also this: According to an older 2011 survey, only 40% of Muslims eat beef, compared to 26.5% of Christians and 2% of Hindus.
• And this: “The government data shows that vegetarian households have higher income and consumption—are more affluent than meat-eating households. The lower castes, Dalits (formerly known as untouchables) and tribes-people are mainly meat eaters.”
• FYI: The most authoritative data is much older—based on a mammoth eight-year study. The Anthropological Survey of India (ASI) completed in 1993 “covered every rite, custom and habit of every single community in the country.” It found that nearly 88% were meat-eaters.

Point to note: Most experts agree that survey data on meat consumption in India tends to underestimate meat consumption because it depends on self-reporting. For example, the number of Hindus who admitted to eating beef went down in national surveys between 1999 and 2012. But that may be because of cultural stigma as beef is increasingly “caught in cultural political and group identity struggles in India.” 

Hence, equally important: The Pew survey also found that consumption of meat is deeply connected to religious identity. Example: 72% of Hindus believed that one cannot be Hindu if they eat beef—mirrored by 77% of Muslims who said a person cannot be Muslim if they eat pork. This would also explain why many people don’t report eating meat—or certain kinds of meat. 

Meat and money: Even though meat-eating is associated with lower castes, Down To Earth notes, “Eating large quantities of meat has become a sign of affluence, modernity and a ‘right’ of consumer choice.” And it is one reason why chicken consumption has risen “phenomenally” in recent years. Poultry is simply cheaper. Also fueling the rise: a demographic shift toward youth who in turn have spawned a fast food culture.

The Ugadi drama: Jhatka vs Halal

Unlike the north, the battle in Karnataka isn’t over eating or selling meat per se. It’s about ‘Hindu’ vs ‘Muslim’ meat. 

Jhatka vs halal: These are two different methods of killing animals. Halal is the method prescribed by Islamic law:

“The animal is killed by slitting the throat with one continuous motion of a sharp knife. The cut must sever at least three of the trachea, oesophagus and the two blood vessels on either side of the throat. However, the spinal cord must not be cut. Once cut, the animal must be allowed to bleed out and be dead completely before processing further.”

Some say this method is merciful as the animal quickly loses consciousness due to massive blood loss. Hindu groups claim ‘jhatka’ is more humane:

“‘Jhatka karna’ refers to the instantaneous severing of the head of an animal with a single stroke of any weapon, with the underlying intention of killing it with minimal suffering. In this method of butchering, an animal must not be scared or shaken before the slaughter and killed by the single strike of a sword or an axe to sever the head.”

Point to note: This isn’t a Hindu tradition as such—but a traditional practice of Sikhs and meat-eating Buddhists. 

About Hosa Tadaku: Ugadi is the beginning of the Hindu new year in Karnataka. The day after marks the festival of Hosa Tadaku—when non-vegetarian Hindus make meat offerings to the gods. It is typically a lucrative time for meat-sellers. 

The war on halal: This year, Hindutva kicked off a campaign to boycott halal meat during Hosa Tadaku—saying it violates Hindu sentiments: “Each time Muslims cull an animal, the face is turned towards Mecca, and some prayers are uttered. The same meat cannot be offered to Hindu gods.” Also this:

“The right wing activists have appealed to the Hindus not to buy halal meat as it is already offered to Allah by the Muslims and offering such ‘stale meal’ would be a disrespect to Hindu Gods and Goddesses.”

The other justification: Rightwing groups openly frame the campaign against halal as a weapon in economic warfare. Calling for a boycott during Hosa Todaku, Sri Ram Sene leaders declared that forcing Muslims to buy only halal meat is a form of “economic jihad”:

“Islamic organisations are trying to make a parallel financial system in the country. It is dangerous for the security of the country. When there are government certifying agencies like FSSAI and FDA for food certification, where is the need for certification based on religion? Halal certification is against the precepts of secularism and gross injustice to the traditional butchers and meat traders.”

A familiar pattern: The state has witnessed a string of ugly incidents in recent weeks:

• In late March, eight groups demanded that all meat shops remove signs certifying their meat as halal. 
• The Bajrang Dal, Vishwa Hindu Parishad and others started street campaigns asking people not to use halal meat (clip here)—and made viral appeals on social media.
• Last week, Bajrang Dal activists vandalised a shop because it did not have non-halal meat. Others stormed a hotel and demanded it stop serving halal meat.
• Hindutva groups teamed up with Hindu vendors advertising '100% jhatka certified' meat.
• The pressure worked in some areas like Mandya—which saw a dip of nearly 30% in customers for halal meat. But vendors in Bangalore don’t seem to have suffered as much.
• And in Mysore, progressive organisations, farmers' and Dalit groups rallied people to buy meat from Muslim vendors.

Not the first time: This isn’t the first time that halal has become the source of Hindutva ire. Back in 2021, restaurants in Delhi were ordered to specify the method of slaughter in their menus—or risk paying a fine. It made everyone unhappy including butchers and restaurant owners—who pointed out that almost none of their customers care about how the animal was slaughtered. More importantly: jhatka meat is both harder to procure—and less tender than halal due to the method of slaughter. 

A big point of clarification: Much of the outrage over halal certification—which can extend to Ayurvedic products—is based on a wilful misunderstanding of the word ‘halal’. The term simply means the product—be it a diaper or a herbal medicine—is made in accordance with Islamic law. It does not indicate the presence of meat. And is often stamped even on Baba Ramdev’s Patanjali products to meet export criteria for the Middle East.

Meanwhile, in Delhi: A Navratri row

The BJP mayors of south and east Delhi ordered meat shops to shut down for nine days. The order said people’s “religious belief and sentiments are also affected when they come across meat shops or when they have to bear with the foul smell of the meat on their way to offer their daily prayers to the Goddess.” And one of the mayors claimed: “During Navratri, 99% of households in Delhi don't even use garlic & onion.”

The actual effect: of these diktats is unclear—and there is confusion over whether local mayors have the authority to issue them. The AAP-led Delhi government and local civic authorities have not issued any such order. But it is part of an emerging pattern—where the state government remains mum but local mayors issue bans in their areas. For example, Uttar Pradesh. Although the Yogi Adityanath government has not issued any order, mayors of Ghaziabad and Kanpur have announced similar orders—which may not have any legal authority.

As for the ‘Hindu’ bit: It is true that upper caste Hindus in the North are expected to abstain from eating meat, garlic, onion etc during Chaitra Navratri—which is underway right now. But claims about the Goddess Durga being offended by meat will be news to Bengalis—who offer meat to her during the other Navratri which typically takes place in September/October. Then there are tribal communities that offer animal sacrifices to Mahishasura—the demon killed by Durga. And then there is the inconvenient fact that a great many Hindus don’t even fast during festivals.

Big point to note: The municipal elections in Delhi were slated to be held this month—and have been delayed by a few months. So this is most likely electioneering in the guise of religion. And local voting blocs often determine where meat bans have the most traction. For example, in Maharashtra, Shiv Sena was the most vocal in its opposition to a meat ban during the Jain festival of Paryushan—first instituted by the Congress and extended by the BJP. The reason: 

“It's not just that 59.8% of Maharashtra’s population eats meat. It's also which of them do so. Maharashtra's Brahmins are vegetarian, and while they dominate the bureaucracy, academia and culture, they stopped wielding political power long back. Neither the Marathas who've ruled Maharashtra since its inception nor Sena chief Bal Thackeray, who ruled Mumbai by remote control since the 1980s, espoused vegetarianism, notwithstanding his loud allegiance to Hindutva.”

The bottomline: The war over meat has little to do with Muslims. It is really a matter of which Hindus wield political power in a certain place and at a certain time.

Reading list

The News Minute and Hindustan Times have details on the anti-halal campaign in Karnataka. The Print explains the difference between halal and jhatka. Scroll has more on how local politics are playing out in the Navratri row. Deccan Herald has an eye-opening column on meat politics in Maharashtra. Mrinal Pande in Scroll and Nayanjot Lahiri in The Print lay out the long history of meat-eating in Hindu scriptures and the Ramayana.