couch, Shesha. When the time for cre-
ation comes, a lotus sprouts from
Vishnu’s navel and opens to reveal the
god Brahma, who begins the process of
creation. This process reverses at the
onset of the cosmic dissolution, with
Brahma being reabsorbed into Vishnu’s
body. Despite their differing symbols, all
of these models share the conviction
that the universe has come from a single
source and thus that the entire cosmos
is an organic whole.
Although there are many models for
the origin of the cosmos, there is wider
agreement about its geography. The uni-
verse is generally considered to have
three tiers, and each of these tiers can
have multiple levels. The visible world is
considered the middle tier, sandwiched
between the heavensof the upper world
(often numbered as seven) and the
realms of the underworld. Some of the
latter are hells, whereas some of these
lower worlds are simply considered to
be alternate realms of existence. The vis-
ible world is often described as a series
of concentric landmasses (dvipas) sepa-
rated from each other by seven oceans
(the saptasindhu), each composed of a
different substance. The innermost of
these landmasses is Jambudvipa, whose
center is the mythical Mount Meru,
often identified with Mount Kailasin
the Himalayas. In traditional cosmology
Mount Meru stands at the center of the
universe and is compared to the central
calyx of a lotus. Mount Meru is sur-
rounded by mountain ranges, with a dif-
ferent region in each of the cardinal
directions. The region south of Mount
Meru is the land known as Bharata, the
traditional name for the Indian subcon-
tinent. Bharata is said to be superior to
the other three regions of Jambudvipa
because only in Bharata are religious rit-
uals correctly performed. In its mythic
geography, therefore, India is consid-
ered the center of the universe and the
best possible place to live to pursue reli-
gious life. For further information see
Cornelia Dimmitt and J. A. B. van
Buitenen, Classical Hindu Mythology,
- See also cosmic time.
Cow
Animal revered by almost all modern
Hindus, although there is one small
Hindu community in the state of Kerala
that eats beef. Aside from this anomaly,
reverence for the cow is one of the few
unifying beliefs for almost all Hindu
communities. Demands for a complete
ban on cow slaughterhave become a
time-honored way for political groups to
generate support from the orthodox
Hindu community, although these
demands carry far more weight in
northern India, where a significant
Muslim minority has few scruples
about slaughtering and eatingbeef.
Organized calls for such a ban began as
early as the 1880s with the growth of
tension between the Hindu and Muslim
communities. This sentiment, generally
called the Cow Protection Movement,
has continued to the present day.
Demands for a complete ban on cow
slaughter have regularly surfaced since
1947, when India gained independence,
and this is one of the loaded causes of
Indian political life. Reverence for the
cow goes to such lengths that one of the
charitable acts performed by pious
Hindus is to contribute to goshalas,
institutions for old and infirm cows.
There is considerable speculation
and some disagreement about the
source of these feelings about the cow.
Some arguments have stressed the cow’s
value in an agricultural society, as a
source of both draft animalsand repro-
ducible wealth. Other arguments have
stressed the cow’s ability to transform
agricultural waste into milk products
and dung, a common fuel in much of
northern India. Still others have noted
the way that feelings about the cow are
imbued with the symbolism of mother-
hood, since both are said to provide
milk for a child’s nourishment. This last
point is probably the most important,
since it is very clear that conservative
Hindu feelings for the cow are based pri-
marily on high emotional content rather
than on rational considerations of costs
and benefits.Cow