Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture

Holy Cow! The Apotheosis of Zebu, or Why the Cow Is Sacred in Hinduism
Author(s): Frank J. Korom
Source: Asian Folklore Studies, Vol. 59, No. 2 (2000), pp. 181-203
Published by: Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1178915
Accessed: 15/12/2010 10:34

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=afs.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Asian Folklore Studies.

http://www.jstor.org
FRANKJ. KOROM
Boston University

Holy Cow!
The Apotheosis of Zebu, or
Why the Cow is Sacred in Hinduism*

Abstract
This essay revisits a debate that took place in the social sciences over the "sacred-cow
controversy" for the purpose of ecological musing. The debate was stimulated largely by
Marvin Harris, whose cultural materialist position reduced the symbolism of the cow in
Hinduism to a set of irrational beliefs. His alternative was to see the cow's sacredness in
terms of a calculus of calories. Needless to say, his work led to criticism from both
anthropologists and humanists. In the first part of the paper, I trace the history of the
controversy, then move on to consider the cow herself from a Hindu point of view.
Finally, I conclude with some theoretical remarks about the need for scholars of religion
to be sensitive to both texts and contexts by blurring the theoretical boundaries between
the fields of religion and anthropology.

Keywords: Hinduism-ecology-cow lore-cultural materialism

Asian Folklore Studies, Volume 59, 2000: 181-203

 The cow from whom all plenty flows,
Obedient to her saintly lord,
Viands to suit each taste outpoured.
Honey she gave, and roasted grain,
Mead sweet with flowers, and sugar cane.
Each beverage of flavour rare,
And food of every sort, were there:
Hills of hot rice, and sweetened cakes,
And curdled milk, and soup in lakes.
Vast beakers flowing from the brim
With sugared drink prepared for him;
And dainty sweet meats, deftly made,
Before the hermit's guests were laid.
-W M. Wilkins, Hindu Mythology

T experiencing an ecological crisis is well

HAT INDIA IS CURRENTLY
and
known in both academic and popular circles (cf HALARNKAR
MENON 1996; HALARNKAR1997; NELSON 1998). The problem is, of
course,one that needsattentionfrommanydifferentpointsof view.In addi-
tion, strategiesto curbenvironmentaldegradationhave to be formulatedin
a mannerthatwould suit the needsand aspirationsof all of India'scitizens,
without giving priorityto any particularethnic group or religiouscommu-
nity.Yetthis is not an easy task,given the communaltension that envelops
Indian societytoday.In his plenaryaddressfor a conferenceon "Hinduism
and Ecology" held at Harvard University in 1997, Anil AGARWAL (2000) sug-
gested that Hindu beliefs, values, and practices, built on a "utilitarian con-
servationism," rather than a "protectionist conservationism," could play an
important role in restoring a balance between environmental conservation
and economic growth. I wish to add that such a utilitarian approach needs
to incorporate not just the Hindu majority but also the other religious pop-
ulations of the country. A utilitarian model of action would, in addition,
need to draw on available symbolic resources to ground ecological awareness
in a system of thought that makes indigenous sense to the people of India.
To this end, an "applied theology" would be extremely useful. By applied
theology, I mean a theology that is aimed at solving problems. Just as anthro-
pologists have developed the sub-field of applied anthropology to move the
discipline beyond the halls of academe, so too must scholars of religion uti-
lize their expertise to lend to the formulation of a theology that could be
used to solve problems on the ground.'
[182]
 HOLYCOW! 183

In this essay I want to explore the possibility of drawing on the cow as

a symbolic resource for creating ecological awareness in India by tracing her
gradual apotheosis. The problem in so doing, however, is that the cow's rich
symbolism in Hindu mythology is obviously limited to the nation's majority.
Nonetheless, all Indians share the need to deal with the environmental cri-
sis, and I would like to propose that the cow's utilitarian function is one that
transcends the particular interests and political agendas of any one religious
community in India. APFFEL-MARGLIN and PARAJULI (2000) develop the
notion of "ecological ethnicity" to draw attention to the fact that people
inhabiting the same biome share concerns that transcend the ideologies of
any given group. Similarly, all Indians rely on products of the cow for suste-
nance and succor, even though some may not accept the belief system that
has elevated her status from a mere animal to a divine entity.2Hindus, on the
other hand, have taken charge of nurturing a rich mythology about the cow's
quintessential importance for Hindu society.Therefore, I wish to present an
overview of the literature on the cow from the dual perspectives of the study
of religion and anthropology in order to raise the possibility of understand-
ing how the complex symbolism of the cow might be used to create an
indigenous ecological consciousness. Such "ecological consciousness," it is
hoped, would benefit everyone concerned with India's environmental prob-
lems. To make this point, I need first to review the role that the cow has
played in academic debates concerning her function in India before sug-
gesting an alternative approach to understanding her utility.

OF SCHOLARSAND COWS
Ever since the publication of Marvin HARRIS'S first article on the sacred cow
in 1965 (1965, 217-28), there has been a wide array of articles and books
written concerning the subject of why cows are perceived to be holy in India.
HARRIS'Sinsistence that the role of the cow is determined by ecological vari-
ables (1966, 51-66)-what Ariel GLUCKLICH (1997, 189) calls a "calculus of
calories"-has led to severe criticism of his culturally materialistic point of
view by scholars in assorted disciplines. As a result of this ongoing contro-
versy, we have a political approach (DIENER,NONINI, and ROBKIN1978;
ROBB1992, 123-56; YANG1980), an economic approach (HESTON 1971;
AzzI 1974), a psychoanalytical approach (DUNDES1997, 98-104), and even
a phenomenological approach that attempts to establish a sui generis model
for studying the "ecology of religion" (HULTKRANZ 1966).3Still others have
dealt more directly with Harris's position through critiques of his theories
(SIMOONS1979, 467-76).4
At present, more than three decades after the initial arguments were
made, the controversy continues "behind the scenes," so to speak, albeit in a
184 FRANK J. KOROM

more subdued manner, with no end in sight. Yet,in my opinion, there seems
to be a distinct sense of drudgery involved in the whole polemical process.
The "sacred-cow controversy,"as it has come to be known, continues within
the halls of academe, and seems to bear little on the averageHindu. As Stewart
ODEND'HALhas suggested,

Given the environmental constraints, I firmly believe that the villager in

India is managing his cattle and plots of land far more efficiently than
by any means anthropologists, sociologists, geographers, or economists
can suggest. It is a source of amusement to me to consider that the typ-
ical Indian villager will remain unaffected by whatever conclusions are
derived from the great "sacred-cow controversy." (1979, 485)

It seems to me that much of the literature on this controversy has taken on

the air of personal vendettas. No longer is there any intent to solve the
bovine puzzle, but rather to move to a level of scholarly discourse at which
the existential problem becomes obscured in favor of academic discourse
itself In other words, it is not the object of the controversy that seems rele-
vant anymore; rather, it is the method of argumentation through which
opinions are being expressed that serve as the common ground for debate.
Given the fact that S. N. MISHRA(1979, 484) has stated "that the sacred-cow
controversy can ever be resolved in a scientific spirit is unlikely," there is cer-
tainly a need to return to what Hindus themselves say and believe, a point
Indologists have made repeatedly.With the current ecological crisis impact-
ing upon India's environment, a reappraisalof the cow as a symbolic resource
for an appreciation of nature is all the more necessary.
All of the approaches mentioned above tell us something about the
nature of the cow (zebu, Bos indicus) in its cultural context. However, they
all fall short of a complete interpretation,in one sense or another, by attempt-
ing to understand and explain the role of the cow from within the narrow
confines of their own respective disciplines. This is not to say, however, that
these approaches are invalid because of this oversight. Each does, after all,
provide a particular way of looking at the problem of why the cow has such
an exalted status in Hindu India. But what they all seem to overlook is the
uniqueness of the cow as a deeply felt religious symbol in India. Nowhere
else in the world has an animal maintained such status in the realm of the
divine. In this essay, I do not intend to refute the numerous positions briefly
alluded to above, nor do I intend to critique them. This is based upon two
premises. First, they reflect specific points of view from within given schol-
arly traditions. I consider these relative truths as opposed to absolute ones, for
in the sociology of knowledge no theory, irrespectiveof its level of empiricism,
 HOLY COW! 185

can be regarded as absolutely true. Because of this, theories must be seen as

interdependent. The value of one theory can only be assessed as a part of the
totality of all related theories. Second, a true hermeneutic approach in the
social and human sciences must feed on the data provided by all disciplines
to live up to Clifford GEERTZ's(1980) unrealized prediction of an academic
climate within which humanities play an important role in "social" inter-
pretation.5
In lieu of the above, my intent here is to present an integrated point of
view concerning the cow that draws on both textual and ethnographic
sources. I would like to look at the development of the cow's status as a
sacred symbol within its religious and mythological context. Viewing her
through this lens will enable me to avoid reductionism and expose the emic
or indigenous understandings of the nature of the cow as a religious symbol
in Hindu thought. It is this insider's view that has often been overlooked in
the past by anthropologists who have focused too narrowly on the functional
and economic aspects of the cow's role in Indian society.6As Frederick J.
SIMOONS (1994, 142) concedes, "Whatevercombination of factors may have
contributed to the rise of the sacred-cow concept, textual evidence strongly
supports the primacy of religious concerns." Thus, I am in agreement with
Gabriella EICHINGERFERRO-LUZZI when she states that spiritual phenom-
ena must be explained in religious terms (1987, 101). My approach, then, is
intended to be one more oblation to add to the fire that fuels the sacred-cow
controversy, which has been smoldering for some years now but could be
revived for the purpose of environmentalist musing. As AGARWAL(2000) has
suggested in a serious yet comical tone, cow dung should become the
emblem of ecological activists in India. I would like to return to dung in the
third section of my essay, but for now let me pursue some of the problems
and prospects of textual sources dealing with the cow.
The cow's long development as a sacred symbol can be traced textually
from the earliest corpus of Hindu literature: the Vedas. It can be argued
viably that historical tracing uncovers the viewpoint of only a small body of
a society's elite members who composed the texts in question. This point of
view, however, is only an assumption, since texts always reflect popular opin-
ion either by opposition to them, or by adapting the beliefs and rituals
expressed therein. The issue has been addressed in detail by Indologists and
historians of religions who employ the historical-critical method of textual
analysis. Nonetheless, it is precisely the reliance on texts, however firmly
embedded in specific contexts, that has led to criticism of this school of
thinking. It has often been said that the historian of religions cannot see
beyond the binding of her books. On the other hand, a reverse argument
could be made for certain social scientists who may ignore texts altogether.
186 FRANK J. KOROM

Of course, neither of these positions can claim predominance over the other,
as I have already suggested. We must therefore see the text/context interface
as a methodological form of what the literary critic Mikhail BAKHTIN(1981)
calls "dialogism," for a true interpretationcan only result if a dialectical rela-
tionship between numerous disciplines exists. Stated plainly, dialogue is a
most crucial aspect of the interpretivesciences. Hopefully my effort will pro-
vide one more point of view to be considered in the sacred-cow controversy,
providing common fodder for interdisciplinary consumption in the great
cattle pen that has served as the arena of bovine debate over the past few
decades.
My essay is divided into three parts. The first section deals with the sta-
tus of the cow in Hindu religious texts.7The second section complements
the first by elaborating on the mythical content of the texts that have led to
the apotheosis of the cow. The third section briefly reviews some of the ritual
uses of the cow and her products, as well as some of the popular attitudes
associated with these. The three sections as a whole suggest a unique posi-
tion for the cow in the Indian Weltanschauung. Taking these aspects into con-
sideration, one would hope, could stimulate new modes of exegesis pertaining
to the milky problem at hand, or, in this case, at hoof

BOVINEAPOTHEOSIS
One can only speculate as to when the cow became a popular image in
Indian folklore. Although there is some evidence that the cow was already a
symbolic motif before the Aryans crossed the Hindu Kush on their way to
the Indian subcontinent (JACOBI1914, 224-25; CROOKE1911, 281), the
scholarly consensus indicates that the extant documentation in the Avestan
texts is too scant to conclude that cattle had any special status in ancient
Persia. This notwithstanding, they were a valued economic commodity
throughout the Persian-speaking cultural zone during the second millenni-
um BCE.We can be certain, however, that the cow had a somewhat elevated
position in the earliest phase of Vedic literature (ca. 1500 BCE).This is not to
say that the cow was inviolable at that time, but only suggests her use as a
symbolic motif during the early Vedic period.8The use of the cow symboli-
cally is no less important than her inviolability, as I would like to suggest in
greater detail below, for pious attitudes surely play a crucial role in the
apotheosis of zebu. Moreover, the "symbolic capital" (BOURDIEU 1977 and
1989) of the cow can, in some sense, have far-reachingconsequences beyond
the domain of economics.
Sir Mortimer WHEELER(1953) and other archaeologists attempted to
account for the sanctity of the cow by accrediting it to the influence of the
indigenous people inhabiting the Indus Valley during the influx of Aryan
 HOLY COW! 187

invaders.9The status of the cow, however, seems to be influenced only tan-

gentially by these non-Aryan cultures, for cattle in general and cows specif-
ically are not represented as frequently as the unicorn on the Harappan seals
dating from the third and second millennia BCE(PFEIFFER 1977, 209-13;
BROWN 1964, 245; see also ALLCHIN and ALLCHIN 1982, 210). During the
Vedic period, as already mentioned, the cow plays a more important role as
symbol. In fact, cattle, collectively represented, are depicted in the Vedic lit-
erature more often than any other members of the animal kingdom.
The early Vedic literary usage of the cow resonates with both sacred and
profane allusions. The economic aspects of the cow are heavily stressed in
the Vedas, as is the role she plays in the yajna (sacrifice). The sacrifice played
a quintessential role in Vedic religion. Its continuance meant the very main-
tenance of cosmic order (rta) in the universe (HOPKINS1971, 17-35).
Indeed, the nature of creation was innate within the sacrifice. Thus creation
as a recurring cosmogonic act was seen as only possible through the suc-
cessful and continuous performance of the yajna. Without maintaining it
properly, the universe could not function. If the sacrifice ended, then rta
would fall out of balance and the universe would regress into a chaotic state.
The cow, then, takes on cosmic proportions by being at the center of the sac-
rifice. Not only were cattle the major sacrificial victims, but their products
were used for oblation (havis) as well. One thing that we can discern from
the portrayalof the cow during this period is that she was identified with the
totality of the universe. The Atharvaveda(10.10.1), for example, calls the cow
the "all-producing and all-containing universe." This mystical relationship
between the cow and the universe is alluded to several times in the R?gveda
(JACOBI1914, 225) as well.
These cosmic associations were an important element in the cow's
eventual sanctification. But such use of metaphor did not foreshadow the
cow's later intimate relationship to the Gandhian conception of nonviolence
(ahimsa), as the Indologist Norman BROWN(1964, 246-47) has suggested.'0
On the contrary, Brahmans, the priestly caste and custodial performers of
the sacrifice, ate readily of the consecrated beef One interesting passage in
the SatapathaBrahmana accredits beef eating to the sage Yajnavalkyawhen
he says, "I, for one, eat it, provided it is tender (armsala)"(BROWN1964, 246;
JACOBI1914, 225; KEITH 1925, 191-92).
The Vedic literature is relatively silent concerning nonviolence directed
toward the cow. Not until the very end of this period do we find even the
slightest allusions concerning the matter. There is only one reference to
ahimsadin the mystical corpus of writings concurrent with this period. In the
ChdndogyaUpanisad (3.17.4), we read, atha yat tapo danam draavamahimsa
satyavacanamiti ta asya daksindh('Austerity,almsgiving, uprightness, harm-
188 FRANK J. KOROM

lessness, truthfulness; these are one's gifts for the priests" [HUME 1977,
213]). Here "harmlessness"or nonviolence is used as a virtue, along with a
number of other traits that suitably qualify as "gifts"to give to priests in pay-
ment for sacrificial duties rendered (BROWN1964, 247). In short, at the close
of the Vedic period, we can surmise that the cow was still being eaten, but
nevertheless served as a powerful symbol.
But with the advent of Buddhism and Jainism at the beginning of the
fifth century BCE, the notion of ahirsad slowly rose in prominence within
Brahmanical circles (BASHAM1959, 48-54). The sacred texts and law books
from this period make ample mention of it. The Bhagavadgita,for example,
mentions the term four times (10.5, 13.7, 16.2, 17.4), but it is not used in a
doctrinal sense, for it is defined as one quality among others. The Manusmrti
explicitly prohibits eating meat for Brahmans, but does not prohibit its con-
sumption by other castes. The text does state, however, that a person who
eats the meat of an animal in this lifetime will be devoured by the very same
one in the next world (5.55). But in the verse (5.56) immediately following
this passage it clearly states that "There is no sin in eating meat" (BUHLER
1886, 177). Elsewhere in the tome, harming a cow is discouraged (4.162)
and slaughtering her (govadha)is considered a crime (11.60).1 The law book
is, however, ambiguous on this point. As BROWNsuggests, it supports ahimsa
in some passages and denies it in others (1964, 247). Other law books are
also ambivalent on the question of the murder of cows. The Arthasistra, for
example, says that selling meat is legal, but cattle are not to be slaughtered
(2.26). In the Sanskrit epic literature as well, we find passages that protect
cows, but condone other sorts of meat for consumption. The Mahdbhdrata
states that he who kills a cow lives as many years in hell as there are hairs on
the cow's body (13.74.4; also see BROWN1964, 247-49).12
After his conversion to Buddhism (ca. 262 BCE), the great king Ashoka
became a staunch advocate of ahimsd, as is attested by his famous "pillar
edicts" (BASHAM1959, 57, 219, 348). Pillar edict IV suggests that he had to
institute laws in order to enforce this decree (NIKAMand MCKEON1959,
31-33). After Ashoka's death, there was a resurgence of animal sacrifice,
which went on as a popular observance until medieval times. By this time
the Brahmanical literature began treating ahimhsaas dogma, but the idea of
practicing nonviolence on a mass scale was still met with popular resistance
by the subaltern classes. It was not until Mahatma GANDHI utilized the cow
as a "poem of piety" (1954, 3) for his nonviolent struggle during the freedom
movement that her position and status as a sacred symbol was firmly
implanted in Indian soil. As he wrote in 1921 to YoungIndia, cow worship is
a "worship of innocence" (GANDHI 1954, 3), which I take to mean a hum-
bleness before all of nature.
 HOLYCOW! 189

At present, however, the epic texts-especially the Mahdbhdrata-as

well as puranas (mythological texts) and a great deal of ancillary literature,
are used to justify the sanctity of the cow as an orthodox position (BROWN
1964, 249). As an aside, let me say that we need only look at the recent resur-
gence of militant Hindu nationalism in India to begin grasping the com-
plexity of the cow as a political symbol (cf VANDER VEER1994, 83-94).
Indeed, the cow has often been the cause of communal violence in the modern
era (e.g., YANG1980),13yet the historical development of the cow as a symbol
of welfare and compassion pervades the history of colonial India. Perhaps it
was the rupture created by colonial rule that facilitated the need to "invent"
(cf HOBSBAWM and RANGER 1983) the cow as a Vedic object of veneration,
one that endures even more vividly today.'4
In summary, it is certainly appropriate to conclude the first section by
suggesting that symbolic notions of the cow date as far back as the earliest
written texts in India. Indeed, the idea may be pushed back to pre-Aryan
times, as Ludwig ALSDORF (1961, 609) suggests.'5But the sanctity of the cow
itself has a distinct social genealogy that must be understood historically to
make sense. In other words, contrary to some pious accounts (e.g., CREMO
and GOSWAMI 1995) that suggest a Vedic origin for cow protection, it was not
until the early centuries of the Common Era (i.e., mid-Epic period) that the
cow began to take on the aura of inviolable sanctity in India. The position
achieves a strong doctrinal grounding during the fourth century CE when
the Mahabhdratais completed, and ahirzsa becomes firmly established as a
doctrine during the post-Epic Pauranik period. From then on it diffused
down to the popular level of piety. What this brief survey suggests is that the
cow had a long period of prestige before its apotheosis because of her exalted
status as a sacred symbol, which I define here in its conventional sense as
anything standing for something other than itself Not until the Christian
era, however, was the cow revered in its own right (BASHAM 1959, 319).16

FIGURATIVE USESOFTHECOW
Metaphor is a powerful device by which humans can create linkages
between different levels of reality and meaning (cf. FERNANDEZ1986,
28-72). For this essential reason, we must delve into the non-empirical ways
in which the cow is thought about in Hindu India if we want to understand
her important role in daily life and religious belief Metaphorical uses of the
cow are deeply ingrained in the Hindu psyche. Classical poetry evokes her
eyes as an image of compassion and piety, while popular practice utilizes her
products in an earthy utilitarian sense.'7The cow is a symbol that reifies faith
and belief in Hindu practice on both the individual and community levels,
thereby providing a common ground for worship. At the turn of the century,
190 FRANK J. KOROM

William CROOKE had already noticed that reverence for the cow is "the most
powerful link which binds together the chaotic complex of beliefs which we
designate as Hinduism" (1911, 279). Seeing it in this way helps us to accept
the notion of the cow as a "key symbol" (cf ORTNER1973) in pan-Hindu
culture, one that unites the diverse backgrounds of regional Hindus into one
core set of beliefs and practices. To put it plainly, it is a central belief that the
cow is good, whole, pure, and embodying all aspects of the cosmos within
her. This idea is often portrayedvisually in popular Hinduism, as is the case
in the mid-twentieth-century Bengali print included here, which depicts the
divine pantheon residing within her and all religious faiths offering her
praise (see Plate 1). Such diverse uses of the cow are grounded in what I call
"allegorical association."
Allegorical association does not mean that the cow merely represents
something, but rather that she connects with it in a mystical sense through
metalinguistic parallelism. A list of Vedic synonyms called the Naighantuka
of Yaska equates the cow with a wide range of things in the manifest uni-
verse. The Sanskritword for cow (go) is listed as a synonym of earth, heaven,
rays of light, speech, and singer, while classical lexicographer Hemachandra
adds sun, water, eye, heavenly quarter, kine, thunderbolt, and arrow in his
Aneadrthasarhgraha(1.6; cf JACOBI 1914, 225). This seemingly diverse clus-
ter of meanings falls within a semantic range united by a common myth of
creation in which all of these things are first produced.
In a Vedic creation myth the cosmic waters from whence all originates
are seen as cows. The divine hero, Indra, is sent to create order (rta) from the
primordial, chaotic waters. They are being held captive in a cave guarded by
Vritra. Indra slays Vritra and the waters gush forth like lowing cows. In the
IRgveda(1.32.2) we read: "Like lowing kine in rapid flow descending the
waters glided downward to the ocean" (GRIFFITH1976, 20). It just so hap-
pens that these cows are pregnant and give birth to the sun (=calf/vatsa). In
this way, water, heat, and light are created. Law and order is established, and
the rest of creation is completed. The earth is set in place and the vault of the
sky is spread as a canopy above it, the heavenly bodies are put into motion,
and the deities as well as the demigods and human beings are given their
own functions (vratas). All things, according to this myth, came into exis-
tence like lowing cows (BROWN1964, 251). Water in India is considered to
be sacred and purifying. All life, of course, depends on water, since it puri-
fies and heals. It provides both physical succor and spiritual purity. Water is
thus holy, and because the cow is associated with its release, it too takes on
this holiness.'8
The cow, as suggested above, is a microcosm of the universe. As a spa-
tial symbol her legs stand implanted at the four corners of the universe. In
PLATE 1: Jagat Matd Go-La.smi, a
mid-twentieth-century poster from
Calcutta depicting the "world
mother cow of good fortune." Based
originally on the story of Rani
Dhanadevi (doing puja while
kneeling in front of the cow) in the
Bhavisya Purdna (narrated around
the border), this visual depiction
narrates a national and political dis-
course not articulated in the text;
namely, that everyone benefits from
the cow. We see Bharat Mata
(Mother India) milking the cow,
while a Hindu and a Muslim stand
behind her. An Englishman and a
Parsi are in front of her, all eagerly
awaiting a glass of milk. Yama, the
god of death, stands with folded
hands in front of the cow, and
emerging from her side is Vish-
varajlakshmi, telling Yama that he
can make no claim upon anyone
who worships the cow. Within the
cow we witness the Hindu pan-
theon.

(Museumof New MexicoCollections,Museumof Intern

192 FRANK J. KOROM

this postureshe encompassesthe fourdirections,whichby definitionincludes

engulfingall space.Firmlyestablishedon her fourlegs (catuhpdda), the cow
is seen as "completeand self-contained"(ZIMMER1962, 13). As such, the
cow representsperfection.This is a time when dharma(duty,law) is seen as
functioningsmoothlyand efficiently.But such a conditionis understoodas
only a temporarystate of affairs,since the Hindu notion is that time is
always moving through repetitivecycles-each of which consists of four
yugas(ages)-one correspondingto each leg of the cow.As eachyugapasses
and dharmadegenerates,one leg of the cosmic cow is lifted until she col-
lapses.This collapseends one majorcycle.The universeis then renewed,
dharma is restored,the cow regains her balance,and the process begins
anew (ZIMMER 1962, 13).
Now, surelyno human being could exist without having some sort of
temporaland spatial frameworkupon which to base one's conceptionof
reality. But different societies construct and perceive space differently.
Psychologiststell us that since people createspace, it is culturallybound.
Therefore,"space"as a phenomenalcategorycan only remainnonexistent
outside of given cultural contexts (HALLOWELL1977, 131-32). For the
Hindu the cow servesthis function.Relatingtime, space,and law to the cow
is a mannerby which to addconcretemeaningto an otherwiseabstractcog-
nitive category.On a theoreticallevel, then, the cow is a constantreminder
of the age and place in which Hindus exist, as well as the moral orderby
which they must live.
Many agrarianculturesthroughoutthe world have creatednarratives
relatingto the originof agricultureand plants.Such storiesconferfecundity
upon the earththroughtheirritualtelling.The earth'sfertilityis often iden-
tified as feminine, and in many cases the earthis describedas mother (cf.
GILL 1987).This is also true in India.But addedto these ideas is the cow's
associationwith the earth.The Atharvaveda containsthe earliestversionof
this myth,but a morecompleteversionis containedin the Visnupurana:

Prthu,son of Vena,havingbeen constituteduniversalmonarch,desired

to recoverfor his subjectsedible plants,which, during the preceding
period of anarchy,had all perished.He thereforeassailed the earth,
which, assumingthe form of a cow, fled from him, and promisedto
fecundatethe soil with her milk.ThereuponPrthuflattenedthe surface
of the earthwith his bow,uprootingand thrustingawayhundredsand
thousandsof mountains.Having made Svayarbhuva Manu, the calf,
he milkedthe earth,and receivedthe milk into his own hands, for the
benefitof all mankind.Thence proceededall kindsof corn and vegeta-
bles upon which peoplesubsistnow and always.By grantinglife to the
 HOLY COW! 193

earth, Prthu was her father; and she thence derived the patronymic
appellation Prthivi (daughter of Prthu). Then the gods, the sages, the
demons, the Raksasas, the Gandharvas, Yaksas,Pitrs, serpents, moun-
tains, and trees took a milking vessel suited to their kind, and milked
the earth of appropriate milk. And the milker and the calf were both
peculiar to their own species. (JACOBI 1914, 225)

This passage suggests that in primordial times the milk of the cow provided
sustenance for all classes of beings and fertilized the soil.'9Only through this
cosmogonic act could food grow on the earth. All beings and things must
thus honor the earth cow by milking her. This primal event serves as a par-
adigm or model for ritual action performed today. In one sense, every time a
cow is milked the creation of plants is being reactualized. Each milker plays
the role of Prthu in the original act of milking the earth. Through reenact-
ment the creation is continually renewed in the repetition of the mythic par-
adigm (ELIADE1959, 1-92).
Many more examples could be drawn from the vast corpus of Hindu
mythology, but these few examples should suffice to illustrate the important
mythological role of the cow as an embodiment of life itself So far, I have
suggested some of the deep associations that intimately merged the symbol-
ism of the cow with some fundamental aspects of Hindu cosmology. We have
seen that the cow representstwo basic categories:space and time. Because of its
association with these, and with primal events such as creation, the cow not
only reflectsHindu realitybut also embodies and defines it. Understanding the
mythical aspects of the cow will aid us, then, in comprehending her ritual
usage today.

RITUAL USES OF THE COW AND HER PRODUCTS

Sri, the goddess of Fortune, who had left the demons for the gods, came
to the cows, desiring to reside in them. They would, however, have
nothing to do with the fickle deity, but in the end they were moved by
her entreaties and consented to honour her: "Do thou live in our urine
and dung; both these are sacred, O auspicious goddess!"
(JACOBI1914, 225)

The modern concern for ritual purity in India has deep roots.20I sug-
gested earlier that the products of the cow were offered as oblations (havis)
for the Vedic sacrifice. The elements of the cow were chosen for this purpose
because of their purity. Pancagavya,the five products of the cow (i.e., milk,
curd, clarified butter, urine, and dung), is viewed by Hindus as the purest
194 FRANK J. KOROM

substance available for ritual use. This is because, as the anthropologist

Edward HARPER,writing about the Havik Brahmans, has reported, cows are
seen as deities or inhabited by deities (1964, 151-52). Because the cow is a
theophany, her feces (gobar) is purer than any other kind, as is witnessed by
the virtually daily cleansing of floors throughout village India with its dung.
In his research on gosalds (cow shelters) in the sacred city of Banaras, cul-
tural geographer Deryck LODRICK confirms Harper's statement by noting
that his informants felt that 330 million gods reside in every atom of the cow
(1979, 242).21When I inquired about the ritual use of cow dung, I was quite
often answered with a question: "How can anything from God (bhagwdn)
be impure (asuddha)?"22
Maintaining ritual purity is an ever-present concern for high-caste
Hindus, and losing it is a fearful danger. Substance pollution is always a
threat, so one must constantly be cautious about contact, consumption, com-
mensality, etc. (cf ORENSTEIN1965). If one's physical and spiritual essence
becomes polluted, then a purification ritual using cow dung can take place
in order to put the individual back at the level of purity that he or she was
prior to being polluted. Thus, ritual status is relative to the degree of the
actor's purity.
Cow dung is always used in some purificatory context. In Bengal, for
example, a diluted cow dung mixture is used to replace water from the most
sacred river in India, the ganga (SIMOONS1974, 26). The ethnographic liter-
ature suggests that such mixtures are used throughout India to clean polluted
areas.23Any human bodily discharge or waste is considered polluting. Thus,
contact with cut fingernails, as well as blood, urine, feces, and spittle, place
one's ritual status in danger. Any area in which these elements might be
found must be purified by the use ofgobar. It is also used daily throughout
India's villages to clean individual houses and places of worship, as men-
tioned above.
Cow dung ash is also considered highly purifying. This is due to the
double effect of fire and dung. Since fire is regarded as purifying by Hindus,
dung that is burnt becomes intensified in quality. Dung offered to a fire is a
sacrifice (yajna), and, as such, its sacred quality is enhanced. This is one rea-
son why Hindu ascetics (sddhus)smear their body with ash. It not only puri-
fies them but aids in their identification with the great ascetic (mahayogi)
Shiva. There is a sense of female power (sakti)gained from ash as well. The
spiritual strength of Shiva's consort is transferred to the individual who is
wearing the ash, since he is portrayed in iconography as smeared with ash.
Cow urine is also seen as a purifying and healing agent. The Visnudhar-
masdstrastates that in the urine of cows dwells the gangajal (Ganges water)
(SIMOONS 1974, 21). Water from this sacred river is used for puia (worship)
 HOLYCOW! 195

everywhere within the sacred city of Banaras. Pilgrims (yatri) take sealed
containers ofgngigdjal along with them when they return home. This is so
that they may use it during daily rituals performed in their homes. But it is
not rare to see a person, even in Banaras where the water is always available,
reach out and wet their hand while a cow is urinating. This hand is then
brought to the lips and then rubbed through one's hair. If this were done
with the urine of any other animal the situation would obviously be highly
polluting, but with the cow, pollution is not even a possibility.24The popular
attitude is in accordance with the aforementioned statement from the
Dharmasastra.Wherever gangajal is used, such as for purification of a well
(SIMOONS1974, 27), urine from a cow may be substituted.
Cow urine is also used as medicine. One ritualformula in the Atharvaveda
(6.57.1-3) provides a cure for removing tumors with galdsa (urine). Maurice
BLOOMFIELD'stranslation of the commentary on the verse explains: "The
practice consists of moistening the tumour with the foam of [cow's] urine,
throwing the urine itself upon it; next, washing it off..." (1897, 489). Cow
urine is also used in the making ofgorochand, a tonic used primarily to cure
"spiritdiseases" (SIMOONS 1974, 27, 33). Usinggorochana is said to drive out
the bhat (spirit) that is causing the disease. HARPERreports that among the
Havik Brahmans, ritual objects such as a yantra (a medal with mantras
inscribed on it to ward off spirits) worn around the neck, are kept pure by
sprinkling it with cow urine (1964, 168).
Cow dung and urine may be used as a mixture, and in this form it is
often taken internally as a cure-all for purificatory reasons. But by far the
most powerful purificatory agent is the pancagavya mentioned earlier. Since
each derivative of the cow is pure in and of itself, the combined effect of the
"five products" is greater than that of any other. The use of pancagavya in
India today is widespread. It is held that this concoction "has the capabili-
ties of cleansing comparable to those of fire and water from the Ganges and
other holy rivers" (SIMOONS1974, 28).
Examples of this type are numerous, and could fill a complete volume.5
The ones already given, however, will suffice for the intended purpose of this
essay. The paradox here is a curious one. In all other contexts, feces and
urine are seen as highly polluting, but yet that of a cow is seen as sacred and
pure. This belief and the behaviors evoked by it, can only be seen as a con-
tinuing part of the process that led to the gradual sanctity of the cow. It is not
possible to understand the symbolic power of the cow and her elements
without placing the whole complex of ideas associated with her in a specific
ritual and mythical galaxy of meaning. Devoid of these dimensions, the cow
would have no special religious connotations. She would be, like the water
buffalo, just another beast of burden.
196 FRANK J. KOROM

If we want to understand the sacred meaning of the Indian cow, and

why it was chosen for apotheosis, we cannot overlook her role in the reli-
gious context. Moreover, seeing her in a symbolic light would enable us to
understand her potential role as a symbol of ecology, which has, by the way,
been the agenda of the International Society for Krsna Consciousness (cf
CREMOand GOSWAMI 1995). The cow is first and foremost a religious sym-
bol. Attempting to explain her sanctity through any other means falls short
of the overall goal, for as some historians of religions tell us, the category of
the sacred is sui generis, and as such is irreducible to other categories of
social behavior. While I do not completely agree with this position,26the sto-
ries, myths, and ritualistic behavior discussed in this essay cannot be pushed
aside as what Harris refers to as mere "irrational,non-economic, and exotic
aspects of the Indian cattle complex" (1966, 51). Instead, mythological asso-
ciations and ritualistic functions must be seen as critical in a study of the cow
in India. Rejecting the rich body of lore associated with the cow as supersti-
tious or magico-religious might just be missing the essence of the sacred-
cow controversy when viewed from the perspective of the average Hindu
practicing his or her daily dharma.27

CONCLUSION
Anthropology has for too long ignored doctrine in its study of the religions
of literate societies such as India. However, in the 1990s, after the publica-
tion of WritingCulture (CLIFFORDand MARCUS1986), a more open climate
for the cultural analysis of texts emerged, signaling the discipline's willing-
ness to return to textual scrutiny. Given the fact that the cow is such a pow-
erful and pervasive image in India, it would be unwise to separate ecology
from theology in this instance. Textual legitimacy is, of course, only one
aspect of any given phenomenon. However, it is a crucial one, for it allows
for the canonization of a given concept or practice. If we are to construct a
holistic understanding of the cow in India, we need to broaden the scope of
study by applying a hermeneutic method to the problem of the cow's apoth-
eosis, which I have outlined above, for no theory can claim precedence over
others in the interpretive marketplace.28Only by seeking out multiple inter-
pretationsof bovine divinity can we hope to derive an overall, multidisciplinary
picture of the cow in India, without excluding data that may be able to shed
some light on the nature of the cattle complex in India.
Understanding the role of the cow from a symbolic perspective, as well
as from an ethnographic one based on participant observation, might allow
us to draw on her historically traceable apotheosis to serve as a powerful
symbol for Indian ecological awareness in the sense GANDHI described when
he wrote that "Man through the cow is enjoined to realize his identity with
 HOLYCOW! 197

all that lives" (1954, 3). Without getting enmeshed in what Stephen ELKINS
(1989-1990) has termed the "politics of mystical ecology," perhaps this
would allow for the development of a nonsectarian approach to confront the
ecological crisis that faces India at present. Of course, this predominantly
Hindu symbol would still need to be translated in a way that would empow-
er all Indians who share the same "ecological ethnicity," be they Hindus,
Muslims, Jains, Parsis, Sikhs, Christians, Jews, Dalits, or indigenous peo-
ples. The cow alone can not save India's threatened environment, but she
may provide a focus for furthermusing on mankind's spiritual relationship to
nature.9

NOTES

* An earlierversion of this
paper was read at the School of American Researchin
December of 1997. My thanksgo out to Arvind Sharma,ChristopherChapple, and Peter
Knechtfor makingcommentson an earlierdraft.All of the usual caveatsapply.
1. In this sense appliedtheologyparallelsthe concernsand interestsof the deep ecology
movement,which seeks "a new metaphysics,epistemology,cosmology,and environmental
ethicsof person/planet"(DEVALL 1980,299). In otherpartsof the world,such as in Thailand
(cf DARLINGTON 1998),the use of religionforecologicalgoals is alreadywell underway.
2. The idea of a "nationalcow" is not new, as is evincedin pre-Independencepopular
posters ofjagat mdtdgo laksmi, the "world mother cow of good fortune," in which we witness
people of all faithspartakingin the productsof the cow.See Plate 1.
3. The politicalapproachis a most intriguingone thatI can not delve into here.But it is
preciselyin the politicalarenathatthe cow'sreligioussymbolismand ritualuse becomemost
forcefulfor rhetoricalpurposes.In additionto the referencescited,SIMOONS(1973) is useful
for understandingthe role of the cow in politics,as is PEREL(1965).
4. HARRIS's position(1965;1966;1978,6-27) is primarilya Marxistone, but as manycrit-
ics havepointedout, it is a misusedapplicationof Marxismforthe purposeof whatFRIEDMAN
(1974) has termed"vulgarmaterialism."Moreover,the controversyemergedat a time when
ecologyand culturewerebeing exploredwithina systemsanalysisparadigm.But as FREILICH
(1967, 40) points out, the ecological approach to culture can devolve into "barrendemography"
and "geographic determinism." On systems analysis in general, see RODIN, MICHAELSON, and
BRITAN (1978).
5. A balanced treatment of the issue based on over twenty years of interdisciplinary
research is geographer Frederick J. SIMOONS's1994 study (see pp. 103-43).
6. This is not to say that the cow did not have any significant economic importance, for
the earliest written evidence suggests the contrary (SRINIVASAN 1979, 17-25). However,
SRINIVASAN(1979, 1) points out that the term cow "is mentioned twice as often in ritual and
mythological contexts as in economic contexts."
7. In this section I draw primarily on the works of ALSDORF(1961), BROWN(1957, 1964),
CROOKE(1911), JACOBI (1914), and SRINIVASAN (1979). But see also EICHINGERFERRO-LUZZI
(1985). In the next two sections I rely on the voluminous mythographic and anthropological
literature, as well as on my own observations.
8. For the most extensive study of Vedic sources in relation to the cow, see SRINIVASAN
(1979).
198 FRANK J. KOROM

9. The theory of Aryan invasion has, of course, been challenged recently by a school
unconvincingly claiming the indigenous origin ofAryans. The debate, however, is beyond the
scope of this paper. For the alternative point of view, see RAJARAM
and FRAWLEY (1995).
10. The relationship between ahimsa and cows in India during the life of Gandhi is
explored further in SCHNEIDER (1948).
11. The Atharvaveda (10.13.56) adds that even kicking a cow is a sin!
12. More on the cow in Manu, Vyasa, and the Mahdbhdrata,can be found in MACKENZIE
BROWN1968, 33, 42-43, 39, 71 and 74, and 166 respectively.
13. For an extended case study of the cow and social conflict in South Asia, see Roy
(1994).
14. HOBSBAWM and RANGER (1983, 4) contend that the invention of tradition is most
apparent under adverse conditions. As they write, invention occurs most frequently "when a
rapid transformation of society weakens or destroys the social patterns for which 'old' tradi-
tions had been designed."
15. "Es bleibt wohl kaum eine andere Antwort iibrig als die, dass sie zu jenen
vorarischen, wenn man will 'ur-indischen' Elementen geh6rt die, durch die arische
Eroberung zunachst verdrangt und fir lange Zeit uberdeckt, allmahlich wieder an die
Oberflache kommen und in ihrer immer starkeren Durchsetzung eben den Wandel des
Ariers zum 'Hindu' bewirken."
16. However, an earlier generation of scholars understood the status of the cow in a more
ancient light. A. B. KEITH, for example, citing the Atharvaveda (12.4.5), asserts that the cow's
sacred character in the text "points to that animal having become in itself an object of wor-
ship" (1925, 192). This conflicting opinion, now revised by the more recent scholarship
drawn upon in this essay, should suggest the earlier complicity of Orientalists in forging a
nationalist rhetoric around the cow. This is an intriguing topic that can not be taken up here.
But see TRAUTMANN (1997) for a detailed study of the dialogic construction of Orientalist
knowledge in colonial India.
17. In addition, popular belief associates cow with mother. As SAX (1996, 64) notes,
"Cows are associated with mothers because they give milk; people refer to them as mothers
in colloquial speech; thus to abuse a cow is like abusing one's own mother." In her analysis
of Vedic similes (upamanas), SRINIVASAN(1979, 37-55) provides a number of ancient prece-
dents for this contemporary understanding (see especially p. 45).
18. For more on this creation myth, see SRINIVASAN1979, 82-88.
19. The notion of fertilizing soil with milk is also related to the "self-milking cow" motif
in the Hindu tradition. For an extensive study of this theme, see EICHINGER FERRO-LUZZI
(1987).
20. I do not wish to make too much of this point here, other than to note that the empha-
sis placed on purity and social hierarchy by DUMONT (1980) has influenced much thinking
about caste structure and ritual performance in India. Although his major contention is over-
stated, there are still those who defend his position on the basis of contemporary ethno-
graphic data (e.g., FITZGERALD1996), while others argue cogently against it in terms of the
multivocalic nature of the concept of purity in antiquity (e.g., OLIVELLE 1998). Whatever the
case may be, there can be no denying that a concern for ritual purity is an important factor in
everyday life among Hindus.
21. See also LODRICK'Slengthier study published in 1981. On this point, BEALS(1974, 39)
writes, "Animals are also ranked in the spiritual hierarchy. Cattle, who serve as the home of
the gods and also give milk and pull plows, stand highest."
22. The Sanskrit textual vocabulary for the purity/impurity dichotomy is quite vast, as is
suggested by OLIVELLE (1998, 192-209). For an anthropological study of the "grammar" of
 HOLY COW! 199

this vocabulary, see ORENSTEIN1968.

23. BABB(1975, 48-49), for example, writes that in Chhattisgarh "Certain substances or
things seem to have the ability to ameliorate pollution directly. Cow dung appears to have this
property, and is widely used as an agent of purification."
24. This is not, of course, the case with Muslims. I remember very clearly an incident in
Banaras during 1981 when I was accompanying a Muslim friend to his local mosque to per-
form namdz. Along the way, we passed through a narrowgali (alley) in which a cow was uri-
nating. Unfortunately for him, some of the urine splattered on his pant leg, and he insisted
that we return home so that he could bathe and change clothes before performing prayers in
his place of worship.
25. DAS (1953) and MARGUL (1968) contain an assortment of other rituals associated with
cows on the popular level.
26. See, for example, the powerful argument against phenomenology by PENNER(1970).
For a recent and cogent critique of the notion of sui generis, see MCCUTCHEON (1997).
27. I am aware that the term dharma has a long and nuanced history in Indian thought
(HALBFASS 1988, 310-48), but here I use it in its general, everyday sense to refer to an indi-
vidual's daily religious duty.
28. Holism, however, may be an ideal not attainable in the lived world. SHRADER-
FRECHETTE (1996, 64) recently has proposed the viable notion of an integrated position she
terms "hierarchical holism," based on three principles: "(1) that it is based on a metaphysical
rather than merely a scientific notion of the biotic community; (2) that it relies on an ethics
that is both anthropocentric and biocentric; and (3) that it includes some second-order ethi-
cal principles capable of adjudicating conflicts among human versus nonhuman interests."
29. Indeed, much of the literature on the cattle complex in India suggests that "cow pro-
tection" may actually be a detriment to the physical environment. Explaining the cow sym-
bolically, then, is a major challenge for humanists, as SCHWABE (1978) has pointed out.

REFERENCES CITED

AGARWAL, Anil
2000 Can Hindu beliefs and values help India meet its ecological crisis? In Hinduism
and ecology: The intersectionof earth, sky and water, eds. A. Sharma and C. Chapple
165-82. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
ALLCHIN,Bridget and Raymond ALLCHIN
1982 The rise and fall of civilization in India and Pakistan. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
ALSDORF, Ludwig
1961 Beitrige zur Geschichte von Vegetarismus und Rinderverehrung in Indien.
Abhandlungen der geistes- und sozialwissenschaftlichenKlasse von der Akademie der
Wissenschaftenund der Literatur in Mainz 6: 557-625.
APFFEL-MARGLIN, Frederique and Pramod PARAJULI
2000 "Sacred grove" and ecology: Ritual and science. In Hinduism and ecology: The
intersection of earth, sky and water, eds. A. Sharma and C. Chapple, 291-316.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
AzzI, Corry
1974 More on India's sacred cattle. CurrentAnthropology 15: 317-21.
BABB,Lawrence. A.
1975 The divine hierarchy: Popular Hinduism in central India. New York: Columbia
University Press.
200 FRANK J. KOROM

BAKHTIN,Mikhail M.
1981 The dialogic imagination: Four essays.Austin: University of Texas Press.
BASHAM, A. L.
1959 The wonder that was India. New York:Grove Press, Inc.
BEALS,Alan
1974 Village life in south India. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
BLOOMFIELD, Maurice, trans.
1897 Atharva Veda.Sacred Books of the East 42. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
BOURDIEU, Pierre
1977 Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1989 Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory 7(1): 14-17.
BROWN,Norman W
1957 The sanctity of the cow in Hinduism. Madras UniversityJournal 28: 29-49.
1964 The sanctity of the cow in India. The Economic Weekly(Bombay). Annual Number
245-55.
BUHLER, Georg, trans.
1886 The laws ofManu. Sacred Books of the East 25. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
CLIFFORD, James and George MARCUS,eds.
1986 Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
CREMO,Michael A. and Mukunda GOSWAMI
1995 Divine nature: A spiritual perspectiveon the environmental crisis. Los Angeles: The
Bhaktivedanta Book Trust.
CROOKE, William
1911 The veneration of the cow. Folk-Lore 23: 275-306.
DARLINGTON, Susan M.
1998 The ordination of a tree: The Buddhist ecology movement in Thailand. Ethnology
37(1): 1-16.
DAS, S. K.
1953 A study of folk cattle rites. Man in India 33: 232-41.
DEVALL,Bill
1980 The deep ecology movement. Natural ResourcesJournal 20: 299-322.
DIENER,Paul, Donald NONINI,and Eugene E. ROBKIN
1978 The dialectics of the sacred cow: Ecological adaptation vs. political appropriation
in the origins of the Indian cattle complex. Dialectical Anthropology 3: 221-41.
DUMONT,Louis
1980 Homo hierarchicus: The caste system and its implications. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
DUNDES,Alan
1997 Two tales of crow and sparrow:A Freudianfolkloristic essayon caste and untouchabil-
ity. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
EICHINGER FERRO-LUZZI, Gabriella
1985 Divieti alimentari e sacralita del bovino in India. L' Uomo 9: 161-70.
1987 The self-milking cow and the bleeding litgam: Criss-crossof motifs in Indian temple
legends. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrasowitz.
ELIADE,Mircea
1959 Cosmos and history: The myth of the eternal return. New York: Harper and Row,
Publishers.
ELKINS,Stephen
1989-1990 The politics of mystical ecology. Telos 83: 52-70.
 HOLY COW! 201

FERNANDEZ, James W
1986 Persuasionsand performances:The play of tropes in culture. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
FITZGERALD, Timothy
1996 From structure to substance: Ambedkar, Dumont and Orientalism. Contributions
to Indian Sociology 30: 273-88.
FREILICH, Morris
1967 Ecology and culture: Environmental determinism and the ecological approach in
anthropology. Anthropological Quarterly40: 26-43.
FRIEDMAN, Jonathan
1974 Marxism, structuralism, and vulgar materialism. Man 9: 444-69.
GANDHI,Mohandas K.
1954 How to serve the cow. Ahmadabad: Navajivan Publishing House.
GEERTZ,Clifford.
1980 Blurred genres: The reconfiguration of social thought. The American Scholar 49:
165-79.
GILL,Sam
1987 Mother earth:An American story. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
GLUCKLICH, Ariel
1997 The end of magic. New York:Oxford University Press.
GRIFFITH,Ralph T. H., trans.
1976 The hymns of the R.gveda.Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
HALARNKAR, Samar.
1997 The rivers of death. India Today 15 January: 118-23.
HALARNKAR, Samar and Subhadra MENON
1996 Gasping for life. India Today 15 December: 38-47.
HALBFASS, Wilhelm
1988 India and Europe: An essay in understanding.Albany: State University of New York
Press.
HALLOWELL, Irving A.
1977 Cultural factors in spatial orientation. In Symbolic anthropology:A reader in the
study of symbols and meanings, eds. J. J. Dolgin, D. S. Kennitzer, and D. M.
Schneider, 131-50. New York:Columbia University Press.
HARPER,Edward. B.
1964 Ritual pollution as an integrator of caste and religion. In Religion in South Asia, ed.
E. B. Harper, 151-96. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
HARRIS,Marvin
1965 The myth of the sacred cow. In Man, culture, and animals, eds. A. Leeds and A. P
Vayda, 217-28. Washington: American Association for the Advancement of
Science.
1966 The cultural ecology of India's sacred cattle. CurrentAnthropology 7: 51-66.
1978 Cows, pigs, wars, and witches: The riddlesof culture. New York:Vintage Books.
HESTON,Alan
1971 An approach to the sacred cow of India. CurrentAnthropology 12: 191-209.
HOBSBAWM, Eric and Terence RANGER
1983 Introduction: Inventing traditions. In Invention of Tradition, eds. E. Hobsbawm
and T Ranger, 1-14. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
HOPKINS,Thomas J.
1971 The Hindu religious tradition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
202 FRANK J. KOROM

HULTKRANZ, Ake
1966 An ecological approach to religion. Ethnos 31: 131-50.
HUME,Robert E. trans.
1977 The thirteenprincipal Upanishads.Madras: Oxford University Press.
JACOBI,Hermann
1914 Cow (Hindu). In The encyclopedia of religion and ethics, ed. J. Hastings, vol. 4,
224-26. New York:Charles Scribner's Sons.
KEITH,Arthur B.
1925 The religion and philosophy of the Vedaand Upanishads. vol. 1. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
LODRICK, Deryck
1979 On religion and milk bovines in an urban setting. CurrentAnthropology20: 241-42.
1981 Sacred cows, sacredplaces: Origins and survivals of animal homes in India. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
MACKENZIE BROWN,D.
1968 The white umbrella: Indian political thought from Manu to Gandhi. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
MARGUL, Tadeusz
1968 Present-day worship of the cow in India. Numen 15: 63-80.
MCCUTCHEON, Russell
1997 Manufacturing religion: The discourseon sui generis religion and the politics of nos-
talgia. New York:Oxford University Press.
MISHRA,S. N.
1979 Comment on: Questions in the sacred-cow controversy, by F. J. Simoons. Current
Anthropology 20: 484-85.
NELSON,Lance, ed.
1998 Purifying the earthly body ofgod: Religion and ecology in Hindu India. Albany: State
University of New YorkPress.
NIKAM,N. A. and Richard McKEON, eds. and trans.
1959 The edicts ofAsloka. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
ODEND'HAL,Stewart
1979 Comment on: Questions in the sacred-cow controversy, by F. J. Simoons. Current
Anthropology 20: 485.
OLIVELLE, Patrick
1998 Caste and purity: A study in the language of the dharma literature. Contributions
to Indian Sociology 32: 189-216.
ORENSTEIN, Henry
1965 The structure of Hindu caste values: A preliminary study of hierarchy and ritual
values. Ethnology 4: 1-15.
1968 Toward a grammar of defilement of Hindu law. In Structureand change in Hindu
society, eds. M. Singer and B. S. Cohn, 115-31. New York: Wenner-Gren
Foundation for Anthropological Research.
ORTNER,Sherry
1973 On key symbols. American Anthropologist75: 1338-46.
PENNER,Hans
1970 Is phenomenology a method for the study of religion? Bucknell Review 18: 29-54.
PEREL,Anthony
1965 The political symbolism of the cow in India. Journal of Commonwealth Political
Studies 7: 179-203.
 HOLYCOW! 203

PFEIFFER, John E.
1977 The emergenceof society:A prehistoryof the establishment.New York:McGraw-Hill
Book Company.
RAJARAM,Navaratna S. and David FRAWLEY
1995 Vedic'Aryans"and the origins of civilization. Quebec: World Heritage Press.
ROBB,Peter G.
1992 The evolution of British policy towards Indian politics 1880-1920: Essayson colonial
attitudes, imperial strategies,and Bihar. New Delhi: Manohar.
RODIN,Miriam, Karen MICHAELSON, and Gerald M. BRITAN
1978 Systems theory in anthropology. CurrentAnthropology 19: 747-53.
RoY, Beth
1994 Some trouble with cows: Making sense of social conflict. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
SAX,William
1996 Hinduism: Reverence for the natural world. In Can humanity survive? The world's
religions and the environment, ed. J. Veitch, 51-68. Auckland: Awareness Book
Company Ltd.
SCHNEIDER, Burch H.
1948 The doctrine ofahimsa and cattle breeding in India. Scientific Monthly 67: 87-92.
SCHWABE, Calvin W
1978 Holy cow-provider or parasite? Problem for humanists. Southern Humanities
Review 13: 251-78.
SHRADER-FRECHETTE, Kristin
1996 Individualism, holism, and environmental ethics. Ethics and the Environment 1(1):
55-69.
SIMOONS,Frederick J.
1973 The sacred cow and the Constitution of India. Ecology of Food and Nutrition 2:
281-96.
1974 The purificatory role of "The Five Products of the Cow" in Hinduism. Ecology of
Food and Nutrition 3: 21-34.
1979 Questions on the sacred-cow controversy.CurrentAnthropology 20: 467-93.
1994 Eat not thisflesh: Food avoidancesfrom prehistoryto the present. Madison: University
of Wisconsin Press.
SRINIVASAN, Doris
1979 Concept of the cow in the Rigveda. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
TRAUTMANN, Thomas
1997 Aryans and British India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
VANDERVEER,Peter
1994 Hindu nationalism:Hindus and Muslims in India. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
WHEELER,Mortimer
1953 The Indus civilization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
WILKINS,W .J.
1978 Hindu mythology. Calcutta: Rupa and Company.
YANG,Anand
1980 Sacred symbol and sacred space in rural India: Community mobilization in the
'Anti-Cow Killing" riot of 1893. Comparative Studies in Society and History 22:
576-96.
ZIMMER, Heinrich
1962 Myths and symbols in Indian art and civilization. New York:Harper and Row.