You can be deist, atheist, agnostic, theist, pantheist, monotheist, polytheist – anything while being a true-blue Hindu. This openness to multiple views – and hence an acceptance of change – has what made Hinduism the most enduring religion in the world.
That is why it greatly pains me, when I see our right-wing politicians trying to copy the western conservatives on socio-religious obscurantism.
To take the example of the American democracy, there are indeed wedge issues in Christianity as followed there – like gay marriage and abortion. But these or other such issues are not present in Hinduism. More generally, some monotheist religions might prescribe limiting individual rights – of women, of homosexuals, of religious minorities.
Now of course I am aware that the Manusmriti and other Hindu texts also have some illiberal views. But that is the beauty of Hinduism – we can selectively adopt, or indeed fully reject, ancient texts without becoming un-Hindu.
For example, if we consider the debate about the rights of homosexuals. Mr. B P Singhal – brother of VHP’s Ashok Singhal, and a BJP member, was all over TV debates shouting curses at gays and lesbians along with some Christian and Muslim extremist leaders. Now of course, Mr. Singhal has been considered an extremist even within the BJP, and the pseudo-liberal mainstream media is more than happy to find an extremist to caricature the Indian right.
Yet, what did his rants achieve?
He presented an ossified face of the BJP, and to some extent indeed Hinduism. The true Hindu view – based on non-violence – would never condone coercion against somebody who they may or may not agree with. Indeed, S Gurumurthy hinted that Hindus who feel that homosexuality is wrong would socially ostracize them, not imprison them. While I may not agree with the ostracizing bit in this case, this way is a million times better than the criminalization of consensual sex between adults. Indeed, once again it takes us to the fundamental distinction between state and society that must never be forgotten.
Therefore, every time “Hindu” groups – no matter how fringe – use violence against M F Hussain’s paintings, or against women drinking, or against couples celebrating Valentine’s Day – they to impose one view of Hindu culture and society, which is something intrinsically un-Hindu. Hence, if you think some behavior is unacceptable protest against it. Isolate it. Refuse to patronize with your pockets anything connected with it. Let us see who wins in the free market of protest and patronage.
It is often mentioned that a free society is not really free unless it offers individuals the right to offend, and I completely agree. After all, if everything that you say and do is all amiable to everybody, you do not really need the state to enforce your free speech rights. But what is often not mentioned, is that a free society should also give you the right to be non-violently intolerant.
If MF Hussain has the right to draw Hindu goddesses copulating with animals (and I do believe he has the right, or at least should have had the right as an Indian citizen), I should have the full right to organize campaigns against any past or present sponsors of Hussain’s art without being denounced as “illiberal”. You cannot call the right to offend liberal and then denounce the right to be intolerant as illiberal – intolerance after all is, at least in the eyes of some, nothing but counter-offence.
Liberality then, although it might seem otherwise, is not really a state of mind, but a state of the state. It depends on whether the government gives you full freedom short of violence, threats and fraud which subtracts from somebody else’s freedom.
Now I understand that many BJP supporters would agree with all this – but what really angers some of them, including me, is the double standards followed. Tasleema, Da Vinci movie being banned and many other example come to mind.
But the question for the young conservatives, nationalists and true liberals of India is do we want to get stuck in a politics stuck on identity where even if we win, the nation loses. Or do we want to start defusing it, to move to more important debates about economy, development and national defence. Nandan Nilekani’s writings come to mind here – what do we want to concentrate on – our horizontal identity divisions or our vertical development issues?
For all those who feel strongly about how to make India a great nation – they must realize that every move by any politician to bring in religious or caste issues is nothing but to mask his own incompetence and to prevent a fundamental policy debate about the future of our country. We should not fall for that trap.
Pages:
so you didn’t have the guts to call out Narendra Modi for banning books and movies in Gujarat. you hindutva clowns are always amusing.
abortion is murder. and in India, is more often a result of incest, rape or coercion to abort a girl fetus. if Indians treat abortion, the way american treat it (ala murder), Indian mothers will be far better off.
and there is no such thing as Hinduism. and it certainly is no single religion. All Indians of all faiths/rationals are Hindus. Muslim Hindus perhaps are also offended by Husain’s painting just like Brahmanical or non-denominational Hindus. and the same populous is again offended by fascist parties harassing an elderly artist. court cases are valid and Husian has indeed run from the law. but he can’t be expected to appear in court if his physical security is threatened.
and yeah, praise Nandan Nilekani, the guy ramming thru UID, the very anti-thesis of civil liberties. and not to mention monumental waste of tax payers money.
you guys shud learn what conservatism is (or liberalism as u call it) before setting out to blog.
Balaji, agreed completely that Modi banning books is as deplorable as the Congress. I do not know what else to write here except that the whole banning encouragement really started in India with the Rushdie controversy. Now it is just competitive intolerance. But I think the Hindu community will be far more OK with all bans going compared to maybe some other communities.
Also, agreed that the UID project indeed has some anti-civil-liberty features. But I think on the whole the project is worth going forward with.
About Hinduism as one religion, I disagree with you – please read varnam.nationalinterest.in
My comment is not about what B P Singhal feels about gay rights and all. I am only interested in the MFH bit.
While I agree with your view that “tolerance is inherent in hindu thought and has to be reflected by political representatives of hindu community”, I would also urge you to think about this hypothetical scenario:
“M.F.Hussian drew hindu dieties nude. He has a right to do that and still live in India. If at all we stand by liberty in its truest sense we only have right to protest and complain in the court of law but we have no right to issue a life threat to stop him. Currently, at least as far as i know hindus have lodged their protest through 1500+ legal appeals. I have not heard/read of any life threat from any hindu or a part of hindu community.
Now, around at the same time, lets say I become a little artistically aroused and I draw a nude caricature of Prophet and his daughters. There will be protests from muslim community of course. But bigger question is am I going to live without fear of life threat? I am quite certain you would call me stupid if i expect any support from the govt. I am also certain I would call you stupid if you expect me to think that govt is going to support me with whatever it can. We saw what happened to Taslima Nasreen.”
It is clear that two particular communities are always given preferential treatment, by the two legs of the tripod of indian administrative system – executive and judiciary. In such an environment where my rights are always threatened and two particular communities are always at liberty to whatever heck they want, then how am I supposed to sit and protest forever. Where will my protest lead me. Will I ever get justice? How long should I take it? In this situation, if I turn violent, then would you call it an impulsive outburst of frustratingly long wait for justice or would you call it religious extremism. Dont you think most of the people including some politicians are today behaving this way because of this long and extended walk toward the mirage of Justice. Justice in india has been joke ever since the word was introduced in the country!
what does Satanic verses got to do with Modi banning a history book written by the leader of his own party in the Rajya Sabha?
and book banning is not a new phenomenon. “Ravana Kaviyam”, a book written by Pulavar Kuzhandai (in Tamil) which presented the Ravana side of the Ramayana story, was banned by the Congress in 1948. and since 1971 almost all school children in TN board have studied both “Kamba Ramayanam” and “Ravana Kaviyam” as part of their tamil text.
in India, civil liberties are seriously threatened by the govt. in US, there is group which goes to funerals of fallen american soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan and shouts that they deserved to die becos Americans have tolerated “gayness and other perversions” and hence its a punishment by ‘God’. courts uphold their right to do so.
here in India, the Supreme court warns Raj Thackeray about hate speech! a court which is supposed to uphold Article 21 of the constitution and hence protest Raj Thackeray’s right to say whatever he wants, is instead threatening him. strange country this.
That Hinuds filed 1500 criminal cases against MFH is a myth originated by the media mafia. Criminal cases were filed in the following places: Pandharpur, (Maharashtra); Rajkot, (Gujarat); Indore and Bhopal, (Madhya Pradesh). MFH appealed to the SC to consolidate them. Accordingly the SC directed that the DHC hear them.The DHC delivered its judgement on May 8,2008 and appeal against it in the SC was dismissed in September 2008.
Please read the following articles we published on various aspects of the issue including analyses of the DHC and SC judgments.
No ‘secular’ newspaper or magazine gave them space although they have done a lot to propagate lies, more lies and damn lies.
For e.g. consider this headline in page 4 of ‘The New Indian Express’, Hyderabad: “Reports on Objections to Hussain’s art flawed”. The headline is inserted in quotes. A first reading gives one the impression that someone has questioned the veracity of the reports.
However the report is about Swami Dayananda Saraswati condemning “reports that a vast majority of Indians do not have objection to the impugned paintings of MFH and that only a small fraction of Hindus have been angered.” There is mischief even in this sentence. The Swami in fact pointed out that “…because Hindu masses were averse to organized violence to get what they wanted in religious and cultural matters, this sort of misinterpretation was being made…The truth is the opposite”
In order to view the correct perspectives, please read the following:
M. F. HUSSAIN SECULAR HOLY COW OR MARKET DRIVEN PEDDLER?
http://voxindica.blogspot.com/2009/11/m-f-hussain-secular-holy-cow-or-market.html
DECCAN CHRONICLE APOLOGIZES – HUSSAIN DOESN’T!
http://voxindica.blogspot.com/2009/04/oscar-awards-ceremony-this-year-was.html
OBITER DICTA ON ARTISTIC FREEDOM AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
http://voxindica.blogspot.com/2008/09/did-delhi-high-court-grant-m-f-hussein_13.html
ARTISTIC FREEDOM AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
http://voxindica.blogspot.com/2007/06/artistic-freedom-social-responsibility.html
The ‘The New Indian Express’ report mentioned in the earlier comment appeared on March 9, 2010, i.e. today’s edition.
Bravo, Swaraj! Finally, a nuanced, balanced post. Hope to see this on GVO.
It is instructive to note how mature liberal democracies in Europe, the Americas and Australia/NZ have dealt with the hysteria generated by the ‘Hindutva’vadis’ cousins- the Christian fundamentalists, over the ‘The last temptation of Christ’, the Jerry Springer Opera, ‘Jesus Christ superstar’, the Monty Python series etc.
That such competitive intolerance is being encouraged in the name of Dharma and Hinduism is a perversion. Period.
Quite agree with you swaraj. The problem arises when a wrong picture is presented. I am pretty sure you agree majority of the hindus don’t support such violence. The fringe group is used as a mask by the liberal establishment to present a sorry picture on hinduism and hindus. The goons can be defeated by arguments but any normal person with basic understanding of hinduism. But we never get to see, the hindu nobility and intelligentsia on the TV shows. They are enough to make the ultra conservative morons fall flat. To be frank i find this guy rahul easwar representing hindu opinion quite a disaster.
We could never have had got rid of sati system if our scriptures mandated it. So the malaise in hinduism can only be rooted by hindu scriptures, and by people with deep understanding of it. Unfortunately they are in plenty they dont have a voice.
A remarkably balanced post. I’m gratified that you feel that we need the freedom to offend – whether we offend hindus or muslims is irrelevant.