THE MAHARS : . . . . . . UNTOUCHABLES ? 147
than the Buddhists had gone, and they did go a step further, and proclaimed that not only they shall kill the cow but they shall not kill any animals or destroy any living creature. The origin of the vegetarianism prevalent among the Brahmins is to be found in the strategical move which the Brahmins of the past took as a means of out-bidding the Buddhists.
Along with this, one other thing must be borne in mind. Before the Buddhist times and upto the period of Asoka beef was a food common to all classes, the Brahmins, the Kshatriyas, the Vaishyas and the Shudras. There is nothing repugnant in that. The cow was just an animal as the sheep or the goat or the deer was. Consequently, although the population was divided into four classes, the four classes did not differ in the matter of their food, and particularly all ate beef. The only difference probably was that some ate meat of animals that were slaughtered. This was possible for those who could afford to buy. The rest who were poor were used to eat the flesh of dead animals either because the well-to-do did not care to use it as food. It is quite conceivable also that the village chieftain gave the carcasses of dead cows and dead animals to the men belonging to the broken tribes who had settled on the confines of the village by way of remuneration for the services which they rendered to the settled community. Without doing any voilence to truth, one could say that, before the Asoka period so, far as the eating of the cow’s flesh was concerned, there was no difference whatsoever. All ate cow’s meat. The only difference that existed was this namely that the village people ate slaughtered meat while those living outside the village ate the flesh of the dead cow. This difference must be noted, it had no religious or social significance. It was just the difference of the rich and the poor connotation. After the Buddhist times and especially in the period of Asoka an important change takes place. Cowkilling was either given up voluntarilty or was stopped by the State. The result was a sharp difference arose. The villages ceased to eat beef becasue they lived on slaughtered meat and as the slaughter being stopped thay ceased to eat beef. The broken tribe-men who lived on the border continued to eat the flesh of the dead cow. It was unnecessary to prohibit them because it did not involve the Himsa of the cow. Now, this division namely those who did not eat beef at all and