Introduction to National Animals in Nepal and India
When it comes to assigning a national animal, a country often reflects its cultural and religious values. Two distinct cases showcasing the approach are found in Nepal and India. In Nepal, the cow, a sacred animal in Hinduism, holds a significant position, whereas in India, the constitution is silent on the matter and the national animal remains undefined. This article delves into the reasons behind the choice of the cow in Nepal, the silent stance in the Indian constitution, and the challenges to assigning a national animal in both countries.
The Case of Nepal: Divine Cattle
!Nepal is a country where almost 93-94% of the population adheres to Hinduism. Hence, the choice of the cow as the national animal aligns with the cultural and religious beliefs of the majority. Under the autocratic rule of kings, the cow was declared the national animal without much public participation. This divine status of the cow in Nepal is not just about its practical use but is deeply rooted in religious reverence. Cows are considered sacred in Hinduism, and there is a complete ban on the slaughter of cows and calves. Even with the shift towards a secular state, this cultural and religious tradition persists.
Challenges to Change
There have been attempts to change the national animal status, primarily from Christian and Muslim communities who wish to adopt an animal that holds less religious significance in their faiths, such as the one-horned rhinoceros. However, these attempts have not borne fruit because of the overwhelming Hindu majority and the deep-seated reverence for the cow. This cultural and religious influence makes it challenging to alter the status quo.
India: The Silence in the Constitution
!India, on the other hand, is a more diverse country with nearly 20% of the population being Muslim and 2.3% being Christian. The Indian constitution, much like Nepal's, does not explicitly mention a national animal. This silence can be attributed to the desire to avoid creating a national animal that might divide the multi-ethnic and multi-religious nation. The idea was to keep the issue out of the realm of politics and avoid making it a contentious issue in a country where multiple religions and cultures coexist.
Role of Hindu Nationalists
Hindu nationalists in India often argue for making the cow a national animal. They believe that a national referendum could be held to gauge public opinion. However, such a move would be highly contentious, as it could potentially divide the nation along religious lines. The proposed referendum would not only face opposition from religious minorities but also challenge the secular fabric of the country. This perspective highlights the delicate balance between religious fervor and national unity.
Conclusion: Cultural and Religious Diversity in National Animal Selection
The choice of a national animal in both Nepal and India reflects the country's cultural and religious landscape. While Nepal's deep-rooted religious beliefs have led to the cow's recognition as the national animal, India's secular constitution remains silent on the matter, reflecting its diverse and inclusive approach. The challenges and considerations in making such a decision emphasize the complex relationship between religion, culture, and national identity.