|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | COMMENTARY | THE OUTSIDER | |||
|
June 16, 1998
SPECIALS
|
How Readers responded to Saisuresh Sivaswamy's recent column
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:31:37 -0700 Let me preface this by unequivocally condemning the behaviour of a certain right-wing group. I oppose censorship of any form. I haven't seen the painting. But if it is offensive, people needn't look at it. Or they should seek legal recourse. Accuse Husain of poor taste/judgement, but not of any ulterior motive or grand conspiracy. That would be a stupid thing for Husain to have done and he is not stupid. However, to blame an entire religion in one broad stroke for the fundamental idealism of an extremist right-wing group is patently unjust. Tell me, Mr Sivaswamy, are you an intolerant, slobbering, rabid Hindu? "NO" you say, despite your having branded yourself, and all other Hindus, intolerant by calling the entire religion bigoted! Oh! So you as a Hindu is open-minded but the rest are raving, intolerant lunatics? How dare you, sir! Just like how Bajrang Dal does not represent my view of the world, you have no right to brand me, a proud Hindu, a bigot. Misdeeds done in the name of caste to our own brethren are shameful and makes me cringe every time it is mentioned. To gloss over the progress, the efforts and the price paid by today's generation of 'ex-offenders' to set a wrong right, by ascribing it to sheer growth in numbers of 'ex-offendees', is a ludicrous effort at trifling a great reparation. Living with quotas at 75% for the past 50 years, to set an ancient wrong right, in which this generation had no direct culpability, is a colossal sacrifice to ask of anybody and to debase it as reluctant, inevitable culmination of transfer of power is adding insult to injury. Tolerance and humanness are displayed in other 'egalitarian faiths' you say. Which faith are you talking about? Not the great religion of Christianity, I hope? It has more castes and sub-sects than Hinduism. Live in the deepest, darkest corners of the Christian belt of Arkansas, Oklahoma and Texas and you will see what true bigotry is, and realise how truly liberal and tolerant Hinduism is of other beliefs and culture. Now, why do you say India has done nothing for Husain or the minorities? A person of the minority community being hailed and coddled as the greatest modern Indian artist is doing nothing in your book? Or that the head of one of India's greatest scientific achievement of modern era belongs to the minority must also smack of Hindu intolerance to you, I suppose? The less said about Islamic fundamentalism, the better. It is not for nothing that the world is more worried about an Islamic country having nuclear capability than India finally owning up to having nuclear devices. Sorry is the plight of the minority community in an Islamic country. Hordes do not rush to Islamic countries for their salubrious climate or the openness of religion. Lure of petrodollars, Mr Sivaswamy, pure and simple. Who do you think you are kidding when you say people are not attracted by money? Have you heard of Maslow's hierarchy of needs? Humanity does unbelievable sacrifices to make a better living. Ask me and my ilk of millions of immigrants the world over and they will tell you. No religion or country is perfect. The Japanese never apologised to the Chinese for all the atrocities, nor the majority of Germans to the Jews. Jews are still abused by the Christians for what a group is purported to have done 2000 years ago. Try to get the Saudi government to carve out a piece of Arabia or the western nations to create a sanctuary so that the emigrant Indian population can have special privileges there to overcome the handicap of immigrating to a foreign land. Then we shall compare the tolerance, or lack thereof, of other religions vis-à-vis Hinduism. The very fact that the past misdeeds have been owned up by the majority Hindus in India and active steps are being taken to pay for the mistakes is a sign of a tolerant, inward looking religion. Your two faced, fork-tongued hypocrisy is transparent when you claim that the narrow-minded fanaticism displayed by Islamic hooligans in the case of Salman Rushdie is somehow justified as it had government backing. Can you spell APEASEMENT of the minorities? Have you even read the book? I have, and know what? Despite my being widely read, I had a very tough time untangling the contorted, abstract ramblings of Rushdie. Do you think the multitude of illiterate, protesting Muslim masses read the book? What made them protest other than a fundamental belief in religious supremacy and intolerance of others? And all this despite what Rushdie wrote was in no way insensitive or irreverent of Islam as it was made out to be. If Rushdie was offensive and justified in being handed a death sentence for writing Satanic Verses, then by your own twisted logic, Husain should have been stripped, publicly paraded and stoned till he bled to a torturous death for depicting a Hindu goddess frolicking in the nude. That didn't happen, did it? Yes, his house was ransacked by a bunch of ruffians, but unlike Rushdie he was not forced to go underground or live a life of constant fear till eternity. Everybody kissed and made up once Husain apologised but the sentence on Rushdie is still on. Do not even try to equate the actions of an isolated few in the case of Husain to the fatwa brought on Rushdie by the Islamic community. Condemn where condemnation is deserved Mr Sivaswamy. Hooliganism by a few radical religious extremists sure deserves universal condemnation but do not damn an entire religion for the ignorance of a few. Unfortunately, people like you are more the norm than exception among Hindus; always passive towards others intolerance, quick to criticise fellow brethren, and extremely sensitive to the exposition of patrons of other groups about your self worth, for you value their opinion more than your own self esteem. I could have ignored your article as one more example of a pacifist Hindu sucking up to the halo of pseudo secularism, a dog-bone so effectively used by his non-Hindu masters. But the danger here, Mr Sivaswamy, is that an untruth repeated many times takes the garb of an all-encompassing truth. Case in point,ask the western media whether the BJP is a Hindu extremist party, fit to be lumped with all the despots of Islamic nations. Do not diminish the greatness of Hinduism -- for, yes, it is indeed a great symbol of tolerance when the majority community has allowed, nay, pampered the minority community to live and prosper. The fact that they haven't prospered is more an indictment of the religious fundamentalism of the minorities rather than the alleged persecution of that community by the majority populace. An aside: did you know the Indian Muslim population is the fastest growing ethnic group in the entire world, many time faster than the sub-Saharan countries or even the other Islamic countries? Huh! So much for blaming the Hindu majority for their woes!
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:13:45 -0700 By publishing the article, Rediff has done a mistake. If we allow such painters, they will start painting and making blue films on gods. Prevention is better than cure. Do not allow such things -- or later when the fight between two communities grow, there will not be any one left to mediate. This incident is a small spark that can start communal violence. Nagoji
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 16:58:29 -0400 I don't agree with the author that what has been existing for 20 years shouldn't be touched now. Some day this insensitivity to all abuses of Hinduism would be accepted as our culture or even as the essence of Hinduism. This mindset reflects the Western indifference that has been absorbed and glorified by such intellectuals as liberalism and tolerance. Husain may be a great painter, but art is subjective and the way it is depicted must not cross the boundaries of normal understanding. I do agree that the threats to Husain were shameful; but, then, no freedom is unbridled. And lastly, what is this nonsense in the lines "After all, India has not done Husain proud, Husain has done India proud"? No one is above the country. Husain is no god.
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:54:49 -0500 It is utter rubbish to conclude that all Hindus are goondas of some party. The people in question don't even account for a miniscule percentage of the whole population. So Mr Saisuresh, you just used some incident involving M F Husain to paint every Hindu in the same light. If you have to report on some miscreants who are Hindus by religion, please do so by all means. But don't generalise that all Hindus are intolerant and Hindu tolerance is a myth. You just don't seem to realise that this land of the Ganges, great spirituality and science has been ravaged by barbarians from across Central Asia. They have ruled this peaceful land for the last 350 years or so. Despite all this, Hindus have forgiven the past misdemeanours of our aggressors and absorbed them as part of our culture and society. Nowhere in the world do we have so many people professing so many religions, speaking so many languages and dialects and a wide diffusion of cultures. It would not have been possible to be the world's largest secular democracy if there was intolerance here. Nations have been formed on religious basis and on the belief that they cannot tolerate and live with people of other faiths. This itself amply goes to prove that Indians by and large are tolerant of their countrymen and the world. A few misguided people are always bound to be bad examples of a largely tolerant population. There is bound to be frustration when largely tolerant people see that the minority is appeased for political gains, time and again by power-mongers. This leads to anger among the majority because politicians have unduly taken advantage of their tolerance. Some people are bound to react more than the others, and this looks as if the whole populace has suddenly turned intolerant. I believe in peace and tolerance. So do an overwhelming majority of Indians. But when tolerant people are taken for a ride, they will raise their concerns in no uncertain terms. Please refrain from taking an extreme view and seeing everyone in the same light. You need two hands to clap. One hand can reach the other faster but the need is to keep a balanced distance between them -- or else the sound might be a jarring one. Hinduism is a way of life and anyone who wants to disturb this peaceful concept by using some religious card is reaching out for a delusion.
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:38:14 -0700 Mr Sivaswamy is right in his view that Hinduism, like all great religions of the world, preaches tolerance and non-violence. Misguided parties like the RSS are the ones who exploit the name of the religion, just like Hamas does in Mid-East. Where were these people during the two decades when those paintings were actually done? It took them 20 years to realise what is wrong and what is right!!? And to think that all this violence is taking place in the land of the Mahatma Gandhi!
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 13:12:13 -0700 Mr Sivaswamy probably needs a history lesson. To begin with, there would not have been 15% Muslims in India if Hinduism was not as liberal as it is. Hindus were converted to Islam in India (and all parts of the world) by force. When tolerance is interpreted as cowardice, then I don't think that Hindus should feel proud because they are tolerant. M F Husain did not have the guts to portray Muslim religious figures in nude because he is aware as to what happened to Salman Rushdie. Instead, he pictured Hindu gods in nude. I won't preach that we should destroy his Paintings; but to me he is a moron. What has he done to make India proud? I am no art expert but whatever he has painted till now does not appeal to me at all. India does NOT owe Husain anything and he should be condemned for what he has done. Finally, though Mr Sivaswamy thinks he is a believing Hindu, he sure sounds like a leftist zealot. Bhagwan
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 20:20:50 EDT The author wants to defend the actions of Husain. I do not view "Sita Revisited" as a painting by a Muslim. As Saisuresh points out, it may be from an Indian artist who has come to believe in the symbols of Hinduism. As a Hindu, I do not believe in Sita mata as a mere symbol. To me and to the vast majority of Hindus, She is the consort of Lord Ram and is the divine incarnate of the mother of the whole humanity. If Husain believes the same, he would not have painted Her nude. After all, I have not heard of any 'sane' artist who has ever painted his/her mother in nude. Being an artist does not give you any license to hurt the sentiments of others. Should the Constitution of India protect this kind of perversion of mind, it should protect first of all the sentiments of people. The author may be against the BJP. But it sounds too immature to compare the situations of India and Nazi Germany. At best, it only shows Saisuresh Sivaswamy's ignorance. It may be in his best interest not to defend such irresponsible, idiotic and reprehensible actions as Husain's. Kumar
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 13:28:29 -0700 (PDT) I have been constantly amazed at the blatant way with the groups like Bajrang Dal, Ranbir Sena etc proudly declare that they have commited such and such atrocity in order to set something "right". Is the law dead in the land? How come the govt/police/courts don't even *try* to do anything to stop these? Of course in a democracy they have every right to opinion. But certainly NO right to force it on others. And this includes the activities of the morals police of Navalkar. I wonder if the government cannot BAN such groups given their violent approach to issues. India does not need it. I agree with Saisuresh in that such groups should be condemned for their acts. I would love to see Bajrang Dal being forced to make repairs to whatever public/private property they damaged. I'm sure Hindus don't want their religion to be represented by ruffians. However, I differ from Saisuresh in some parts of the article. Saisuresh says: "If Hinduism were really tolerant, it would not be so easy to lure away sections from it with just a wave of petrodollars". I don't understand the logic of this statement. I don't see people escaping from "intolerant" religions with any kind of gusto. In fact, in most cases, especially in mass conversions, the point in issue is not tolerance of one religion over the other, but hunger. Intolerance is present in all forms of religion, either as part of their religious dogma/texts or some kind of societal institutions. Husain, as you mentioned rightly, is the lamb. But leaving the country is no solution to the problem. Instead of preaching that Husain should not have apologised, what did we Indians do to protest against the Bajrang Dal? Isn't it the duty of the strong to protect the weak? Das
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 16:14:56 -0400 This is a matter of great shame for every Indian. This destruction of civil liberties in the name of defending Hinduism is ominously similar to the route taken by Hitler and Germany in the 1930s. When will the middle class recognise that this is the greatest threat to the very concept of democratic India? If we do not give people like Husain artistic freedom, mainly because he belongs to the wrong religion, how can we claim that we are any different from the other countries in the subcontinent? Viswanathan
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 14:39:05 -0500 EXCUSE ME! Did you say that Husain should walk out of the country after having been humiliated? What kind of pseudo-secularism do you follow? This guy has painted the dieties in nude and offended millions of people's faith -- and you are not worried about that! You are ready to use this occasion as an opportunity to spew venom on the Sangh Parivar. You say you are sure that offence was the farthest from his mind. Do you know or do you think that to be the case? If you have so much confidence in your thinking abilities, please extend the same courtesy to others too. Let them think for themselves. Mr Sivaswamy, please do not go in for so much BJP-bashing that you lose sight of what is right and what is wrong. Sanjay N Gattani
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:19:23 -0400 Sai, Answer one question: If any Hindu had done a similar thing for, say, Prophet Mohammad, would it have been accepted by the Muslims? If you say 'yes', you are naive. If you say 'No', then your article is invalid. Indians have been tolerant, but the last 60 years have shown that tolerance cannot be a one-sided feature. It needs to be reciprocated. However, due to our pseudo-secularists protections, minorities have refused to reciprocate. Can you give me one proof of tolerance by minorities in India? I know I am writing a bit aggressively. I am not trying to lock horns with you, though. Would love to have your response to this.
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 14:59:04 -0400 You are not a believing Hindu as you claim to be. You are a believing leftist/Communist fanatic. Being a true Hindu, I am not against people criticising my dharma. But what really troubles me is that people like you take the liberty of making the worst kind of arguments against Hinduism. Your arguments are motivated by malice rather than by a sincere intention to bring about reformation. Your arguments are based upon ignorance rather than the truth. Your arguments are laced with a malevolent bitterness and doused with a copious amount of violent fanaticism. In fact, in your self-righteous rage you are not very different from the Bajrang Dal which you have set out to condemn. First and foremost, let me say that Hindu tolerance is not a myth. The very fact that people like you have the liberty of slinging mud freely upon (as you call it) 'an otherwise beautiful face' of Hinduism, without being lynched by a mob of zealots is a testament to Hindu tolerance. I wish that, rather than India, you were born in Pakistan or some other true Islamic country which seeks to pattern itself as an Islamic nation. You would be hanged under the Islamic law for criticising Muhammad. In fact, why don't you try criticising Muhammad in India itself and face the consequences? You accuse the Bajrang Dal of choosing soft targets like M F Husain who will not fight back. Have you not done the same? This is the height of hypocrisy. If you have real courage, you hypocrite, then criticise Islam, or its founder and see what happens. You call yourself a believing Hindu?? I ask you what the hell is it that you believe in when you do not believe in Hinduism itself? You, sir, are a liar if you can equate Hinduism to the Jati system then you are not a true Hindu, for no true Hindu will do so. I am sure that you are a BELIEVING COMMUNIST who has sold his reason and mind to that dirty ideology. Your entire argument revolves around a supremely stupid assertion, 'Because the Jati system has been practised in India, Hindu dharma is intolerant'. This is the worst kind of mindless leftist propaganda imaginable. Mr Swamy get a life. At least, get a brain, will you?? And what egalitarian faiths are you talking about?? About Islam which holds the Arab to be the most supreme in the world? And which ruthlessly divides the world into believers and non-believers!? About Christianity which is responsible for the subjugation, enslavement and destruction of entire races and civilisations? Please read the Koran and see how much equality it preaches. Even I do not agree with what happened to Mr Husain. I think the Bajrang Dal behaved idiotically because they should not have chosen a soft target like Mr Husain. Rather, they should really have focused on a soft-headed target like you. Mr Swamy the real threat to Hinduism is not from Bajrang Dal activists but from traitorous, brainwashed, senseless leftist/Communist, anti-Hindu Hindu fanatics like you. Amit Rajesh Nishar
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 14:54:42 -0400 Hello Mr Saisuresh Sivaswamy, Saraswati is the first deity to be remembered by all the artists. Sita is the ideal godess of our mythology. I am saddened that we Hindus tolerate such gross portrayal of our worshipped ones. You have written about all the injustice meted out because of the caste system. Of course that was/is/will be wrong! But the issue here is not of Hindu tolerance. It is just whether being an artist suddenly gives you the right to become indecent! No one should have any problems if Mr M F Husain paints decent paintings depicting mythological characters. He is an excellent artist and sure has done India proud. He should not have been treated badly at all, I agree. But how about respecting ALL the gods and godesses from all religions? Keyoor
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 12:23:37 -0600 It's deplorable how the so-called liberal Mr Saisuresh Sivaswamy advocates tolerance and says he finds no fault with M F Husain. When there are "n" number of topics on which he could have painted why did he pick the diety of scores of Hindus to paint in nude? Doesn't he have the commonsense and minimum intellect to know that it would offend people? Or is it because he knows that Hindus are so tolerant that they would not bother? Apparao Kodavanti
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 13:16:46 -0500 (CDT) I would love to see you write an article lauding Salman Rushdie for writing Satanic Verses. Your days would then be numbered. Get out of your intellectual ivory tower into the real world. You may be ashamed at what the activists did. With abstract philosophers like you trying to be role models for the Hindu way, no wonder we were in servitude for hundreds of years!
Date sent: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:15:48 -0400 Mr Sivaswamy, I am not going to say much. But let me start off by asking you one question: Does anything offend you? Anything at all? You probably belong to that category of "Proud Hindus" with abundant tolerance and basically no spine. Do you realise that because of this very nature of not living in the real world, we are probably the most dominated civilisation. Look at any dominating religion or civilisation in the world. The two outstanding facts about them are that they are aggressive and proud. When I say aggressive, I do not mean goondas vandalising or terrorising anybody. What I mean is people like you and me standing up and saying "Mr Husain, it is not good art to insult anybody." The greatness of Hinduism is that one need not believe in anything and anybody -- yet one can be a Hindu. So if you are not offended by what people do to your gods, that's fine. But at least have the common courtesy to respect the outrage of the people who do believe and respect their gods. Rajeev Subba Rao |
| Tell us what you think of this column | |
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
CRICKET |
MOVIES |
CHAT
INFOTECH | TRAVEL | LIFE/STYLE | FREEDOM | FEEDBACK |
|