…during a talk with a liberal friend of mine, regarding the MF Hussain episode…friend talked on the lines of what liberals usually speak i.e kamasutra khajuraho…But…his explanation that Brahma marrying his creation (daughter) Saraswati amounted to incest which according to him means Hinduism sanctifies such relationships…made me quite uncomfortable and disturbed.

This kind of “analysis” typically stems from the Wendy Doniger school of thought, which confounds the symbolic with the literal and sees sex and perversion everywhere in Sanatana Dharma. There’s a Sanskrit proverb for this phenomenon: yad bhaavam tad bhavati (broadly, you perceive according to your mental makeup).

Different Puranas have different versions of how Brahma was born but the most popular one is that he was born out of the lotus that grew from Vishnu’s navel (hence his name, Nabhija). After he was born, he created a female form, Shatarupa, who then became Saraswathi. Essentially, he fell in love with his own creation and ended up marrying her. This is the story very briefly.

If you create something–a painting, a poem, a tune–it becomes yours and many people use colourful phrases to describe their creation: “labour of my love,” “my baby,” “manifestation of my creativity,” and so on. However, we don’t hear anybody expressing a desire to feed their creations with milk and food. Neither do they nurture any hallucinations that their painting will crawl after three months. However, if someone starts talking about taking the tune that they composed in Abheri to the doctor for giving it polio drops, you know what number to call. In other words, when you describe your artistic creation as your baby, it is implied that you are only talking figuratively, not literally.

This background is essential to understand Brahma’s supposedly-incestuous marriage to Saraswathi.

So, we have established/accepted that Brahma is the God of Creation. But is that all there is to it? The answer is yes if you take the marriage literally, physically as in a marriage between a man and a woman. But if it’s nothing more than a marriage between a man and a woman, why was Brahma so attracted to his own daughter? Being Creator, how difficult was it to create a wife for himself? And this question is what prompts us to look at the symbolism behind the supposedly incestuous marriage.

As Creator, Brahma brought to life Existence itself. Which logically means he thought of creating the physical world that we perceive through our sense organs and our mind. If you talk about the physical world of shapes and forms you need to give it a definition, or a name or label. This is known as the world of Rupa (Form/Shape) and Nama (Name), both inseparable from each other. In plain language, you look at a tree and your mind can’t be satisfied unless it finds a word (nama) to define it clearly so that when you say “tree” you know exactly what it is without having to actually look at it with your eyes. And this process of defining the physical world lies in the realm of thought. Thought then is expressed through speech.

What follows from this is rather simple. The shapes and forms that Brahma gave to his thoughts became the physical world. When he expressed it in language, it became speech. Which is Saraswathi, his daughter. And which is perfectly in line with Saraswathi worshipped as the Goddess of Speech (or vaak), language, and learning. However, we’re yet to hear of a word which has no meaning at all. As someone said, every word is an idea–it represents something: a thought, an object, anything. In other words, a word cannot be divorced from its meaning. Even in case of names of people–if I say out the name of a person, it conjures up an image or some sort of memory or association related to that person. This meaning is again Saraswathi, now donning the role of Brahma’s wife. This is what Kalidasa says in the opening verse of his grand Raghuvamsha:

Vaagarthaviva Sampruktau Vaagartha pratipattaye|
Jagatah Pitarau Vande Parvati Parameshwaru||

Just as a word and its meaning are inseparable
I bow to the Shiva and Parvati, the parents of this world.

As the meaning of the word, Saraswathi is Brahma’s wife just like a wife who stays with her husband for life through good and bad times. This symbolism is pretty much true of all Gods and their wives. As the wife of Vishnu the Preserver of the world, Lakshmi is the Goddess of Wealth. You cannot hope to attain peace and order in the world without prosperity.

This then is the symbolism behind Saraswathi as both Brahma’s daughter and wife. Yet, for millions of Hindus over thousands of years, Brahma and Saraswathi have continued to remain worship-worthy. The last thought to a practising Hindu about Saraswathi is her so-called “incestuous marriage” to Brahma. There’s a reason symbols and myths in Hinduism have an enduring quality about them: they make highly abstract philosophies and concepts readily accessible to us by making them part of our daily life. It’s easier telling a child about the importance of learning by narrating the importance of worshipping Saraswathi than it is to threaten it to “study or else!” Equally, it is easier to explain abstract concepts of thought, words and meanings to a layman using this story than conduct an academic session/seminar. Even without this complexity, the story of Brahma and Saraswathi still makes for a fascinating and interesting narration.

However, in this age of an absurd insistence on Reality-Everything, we’re forced to look for literal meanings in places where finding literal meanings is both irrelevant and absurd. If you do that, you’ll be forced to read literal meanings even in Atlas’ tale of bearing the weight of the Heavens on his back. You can’t be selective in choosing literal meanings for some, and symoblic meanings for other mythological tales. Those who readily accept the symbolism, not literalism, of the Trinity as symbols of creation, preservation, and destruction suddenly look at the literal meaning in the marriage of Brahma and Saraswathi. This is typically why Hindus are upset with the likes of Wendy Doniger et al, who read literal meanings because it fits the conclusion they want to derive.

On a related note, there’s a deeper reason why Hindus are outraged by M.F Hussain’s pictures of Hindu Gods and Goddesses. Hindu art, according to Ananda Coomaraswamy, moves from the impersonal to the personal. For example, if I draw a painting of a mike and say this picture is an artistic representation of the triumph of technology to improve the quality of our lives, it draws absolutely no outrage. On the other hand, if I caption the same picture with something like, this is the penis of my friend Robert’s father, and shows the virile nature of the force behind all creation, what’s your guess how Robert will respond? Given the deeply personal nature of our mythology, Saraswathi and Sita are as much–if not more–our family members as our parents and siblings are: in other words, they are not merely paintings of just any nude female form. It is this that upsets Hindus not mention the way Hussain perverts these mythological tales to create his trashy “art.” And this is also why Hindus aren’t upset with Khajuraho sculptures or for that matter any random nude pictures.

I suppose this adequately puts my anguished reader at peace.

Tags: Commentary, Creativity, Hindu Mythology, Hinduism, India, Indian Art, Indian Mythology, Indian Philosophy, Indian Politics, Khajuraho, Literal and Symbolic, M F Hussain, Politics, Pseudosecularism, Pseudosecularism Hall of Shame, Society & Culture

It helps to answer a few questions at the outset:

Did Swami Nithyananda commit a crime by having sex with that woman?
No. The video clearly shows it was consensual.

Are such Swamijis/Godmen “allowed” to have sex?
Yes unless they’ve explicitly, publicly declared that they are celibate and/or where they have prohibited their followers from having sex. In which case, it becomes a case of hypocrisy, double-standard and not really a crime. The operative word always is “consensual.”

Does Nithyananda’s act involve abuse of position and/or power?
Going by this video, this is unclear, and really immaterial. Again, the woman wasn’t coerced into having sex with him.

Do reports of sandalwood illegally stocked at his ashram make him a criminal?
They do but that is totally unrelated to him having sex with the actress.

So what or who is really wrong here?
Several answers but the most obvious one is buried beneath all the mudslinging happening: journalism of sleaze a.k.a invasion of privacy. The culprit of the whole episode is the TV Channel that carried out this rotten spycam operation.

But why is the public outrage focussed mostly on the Swami having sex with the actress?
Because of what we have inherited as we shall see later.

Am I condoning Nithyananda’s romp caught on camera?
I leave that up your intelligence to figure out.

But, the aftermath turned out as expected. The gleeful media readily extrapolated Nithyananda’s “immoral act” to brand Hinduism. If you’ve followed the case, the media has already passed its irrevocable judgement that Nithyananda is somehow a wrongdoer because he, a Godman, Guru, indulged in sex. That explains why the Congress News Network–Islamic News Network’s “show” is cunningly titled, “Sex, Sleaze and Swamis: Bhupendra Chaubey asks the panel what’s wrong with India’s holy community.” The Big Daddy of the Indian TV media, SpiNDTV, true to its name has wasted no time in slipping in its typical insinuation: “Bangalore godman: Modi a follower?” (I recommend looking at all the pictures in the SpinDTV picture gallery).

But the duplicity and innuendoes don’t end here. Now, a certain section of the media has appointed itself as the guardian of the “real” or “true” Hinduism. This section changes its tone and lingo to suit the occasion. It passionately hates the “goons” and “thugs” and “extremists” who besmear the fair name of the oh-so-all-encompassing Hinduism by wielding tridents, disrupting movies, Valentine’s Day, etc. Some of the more passionate protectors hailing from this section wax about “I don’t want MY Hinduism to become like an aggressive version of Islam.” Please note the special stress on MY. Others “defend” Hinduism by wailing like dogs in freezing winter nights about how “Pop Hinduism,” “Instant Gurus” have hijacked the “true essence” of Hinduism. Yet, these same Media Mullahs give space on their papers and Websites for the selfsame instant Gurus. However, their version of “true” Hinduism is this: a Zoo or Museum version of Hinduism at which you can throw fruits and nuts and watch the adherents take the bait and clap in glee, or worse, admire from a distance and gasp, “Ooh sooo esoteric!”

Truth is, both cases are different variation of the same despicable act of Hindu baiting by the Media Mullahs and assorted intellectuals who are bleeding our universities dry. For had they even the basic inkling of Sanatana Dharma, they’d know that nobody can proclaim himself or herself as a Guru. It is an honour that is bestowed upon a person after he/she passes the most stringent of spiritual and philosophical tests. This time-honoured tradition dates way back to Vedic seers right up to Ramana Maharshi. Guru literally means one who dispells darkness. In other words, he/she is one who has experienced philosophical enlightenment and he/she makes no claim that he/she has the ultimate key to the Truth. He/she doesn’t advertise his/her enlightenment but will accept disciples if they pass his/her test and vice versa. Unlike today’s Pop Gurus (for the record, I abhor them for the damage they do in the long run) who acquire a smattering of Yoga, Tantra (nothing to do with sex as is commonly misunderstood), meditation, ill-understood Bhagavad Gita, Upanishads, and a bastardized form of mysticism. However, if there’s a Pop Guru who has understood all these accurately and still goes about like a Nithyananda, he is a bigger charlatan.

Neither does our tradition prescribe celibacy for someone who is looked upon as a Guru. Majority of the ancient sages were married, had children and some even had more than one wife. Yet, why do we still revere a Vishwamitra who had numerous “affairs” and fathered many children? That’s because he gave us the most amazing Gayatri Mantra, which the same media–Slimes Music for example–makes tons of money out of. Which brings us to another instance of the media and academic ignoramuses who sit in the judge’s seat. There’s a wide gulf of difference between a Sanyasin and these self-styled Gurus. Celibacy among other things, is prescribed for a Sanyasin. Hindu tradition strictly condemns a Sanyasin who, in the position of a Guru abandons celibacy. Strict punishment is prescribed for such Sanyasins and once he has abandoned his celibacy, he can no longer claim the right to be a Guru. Apart from this, the respect or devotion people have for someone in the position of a Guru doesn’t rest on whether he/she is celibate but what he/she brings for the world. So why was the public outraged when Nithyananda’s footage was aired?

The answer to that question lies in the colonized attitudes that continue to plague Indians: it shows we haven’t cast away the ugly Victorian morality. More accurately, it points to the hold both Islam and Christianity continue to have on the Hindu psyche. The same crowd that went berserk over Nithyananda’s romp video still flock to that charlatan couple, Kalki and Amma “Bhagavan” (sic), both married and who would’ve definitely had sex at least once. What explains this?

Back to the media, we wonder why no channel has ever planted a spycam inside the dark and holy halls and rooms of a Church or Cloister. Is it because perhaps the good Lord Sees All and needs no spycam? All exposes of the Father-Sister, Brother-Sister, Brother-Brother games that go on in those holy halls have seen light of the day because somebody from within revealed them to the world. And let’s not forget that these Brothers and Fathers have taken an oath of lifelong celibacy when they entered God’s Service. Let’s not even go near the Madrassas. Here’s a sample (Image courtesy: http://freethinker.co.uk/)

Any spycams a la Nithyananda? Courageous Media, we’re waiting. Which brings us to the real issue in this whole affair de disgrace: invasion of privacy. But then sting ops are de rigeur in today’s TV journalism. It’s one thing to do a thorough, old-fashioned investigative journalism and another to put cameras into somebody’s bedroom to expose exactly…what? Interestingly, not one media house has questioned the TV channel for adopting Peeping Tom tactics to manufacture sensationalism out of nothing.

Additionally, the argument that Nithyananda broke the trust of millions of his followers is also bogus. A Pop Swami/Guru, Nithyananda, like others of his ilk, cleverly marketed his wares. Those who came into his fold have no right to complain for their own disillusionment. In the end, Swamis and Gurus like Nithyananda thrive because of the en masse loss of our traditional values. And it is equally also the reason why the media thrives in derogating Hinduism.

Tags: Commentary, Gurus, Hindu Swamis, Hinduism, India, Indian Philosophy, Indian Politics, Media, Media Shame, Media Watch, Nithyananda Scandal, Politics, Pseudosecularism, Pseudosecularism Hall of Shame, Sanyasin, Secular Media, Secularism, Society & Culture, Swami Nithyananda Scandal, Swamis

Question: What’s common between Nicolas Sarkozy, Taslima Nasrin, free speech, and the Indian media?
Answer: The Burqa, the veil, the headscarf, the chador, the purdah, which is regarded by various people variously as “dignified,” “protective,” “secure,” and “comfortable.”

Those who hold any view that opposes these positive connotations are given a taste of what our media paints as “peaceful protest.” As one newspaper, an entire district and parts of another district tragically discovered.

Communal violence erupted in Shimoga and Hassan, in the Malnad region of Karnataka on Monday, resulting in the death of two persons in police firing.

Riotous incidents across the two cities were sparked off by protests by the minority community against a controversial article, by Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen, published in a Kannada daily in its Sunday edition. Scores of people were injured in incidents of stabbing and large scale stone-throwing.

Most of us give 99% discount when we read words like “protest by members of a certain community,” “people of a certain community were upset and took out a march,” “clashes between two communities erupted,” “mobsters pelted stones,” “protesters commmitted arson,” “hooligans burnt tyres and public vehicles…” You can make up variations of this.  A couple of really brave media houses deign to use “minority community” but that’s usually veiled.

What happened in Shimoga

After many phone calls, research on the Internet, and collecting reports from the spot, here’s what happened in Shimoga.

• On Sunday, Feb 28, 2010, Kannada Prabha, the Kannada daily–part of the New Indian Express group of newspapers–published a translation of an article that Taslima Nasrin had written.
• On Monday, March 1, 2010, thousands of Muslim protesters gathered outside the Shimoga Wakf office on Sir M.Vishveshwaraya Road to protest against the piece.
• What’s a protest march without some games? And so, en route, the Musical Stones game began. Those who couldn’t find stones started Fire my Faith,  His Car or Hers? and Blast the Bike! Post-siesta, it was time for Stab me Badd!
• The entire Shimoga watched on in handclapping glee as these merry-makers kicked up a jolly ruckus in the main localities of the town including B H Road, the city bus stand, Shivappa Nayaka circle, Nehru road, Gandhi bazaar, and Kote road. The games culminated inside the Kannada Prabha office with Press the Press!

But you know what I’m really talking about. Islam is in danger! and all that.

The Provocative Piece and Aftermath

Now we wonder what was in that article that gave such a red (green?) twist to so many pink panties? As is the media’s wont, it didn’t mention the name of the newspaper nor the contents of the “offending” article. Here’s the Kannada translation of Taslima Nasrin’s original piece entitled, Let’s Think Again About the Burqa:

http://www.kannadaprabha.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=KP420100227135550&Title=Sapthahika+Prabha&lTitle=%D1%DB%AE%DB%A1%D5O%DA%AE%DA%C3%BA%DA&Topic=0&ndate=3/2/2010&Dist=0

The original article authored by Taslima Nasrin is on the author’s website, available as a PDF. Aside: I’ve read both pieces and the translation is faithful to the original.

In a line, Nasrin’s piece severely criticizes the Burqa as a symbol of female oppression. But that’s a lesser crime compared to how she does it. She digs into the Koran and the Hadis to provide firsthand evidence to show how and why the Burqa is demeaning. Simultaneously, she “insults” the Prophet (PBUH, for my own safety):

Prophet Mohammed’s wife Ayesha was very beautiful. His friends were often found staring at her with fascination. This clearly upset the Prophet. So the Koran has an Ayat that says, “Oh friends of the prophet or holy men, never go to your friend’s house without an invitation. And if you do go, do not go and ask anything of their wives.” So it was to resist the greedy eyes of friends, disciples or male guests that the purdah system came into being. Later it was extended to all Muslim women.

And closes her piece with a battle cry of sorts:

Some 1,500 years ago, it was decided for one individual’s personal reasons that women should have purdah; since then, millions of Muslim women have had to suffer it. So many old customs have died a quiet death, but not purdah. Instead, of late, there has been a mad craze to revive it…What should women do? They should proclaim a war against the ill-treatment meted out to them. They should snatch back from the men their freedom and their rights; they should throw their headscarves out. They should take off their burqas and burn them.

I was unable to find out the date of this piece but a safe estimate (from my research on the Internet) is that it’s at least three years old. The fact that it escaped the attention of these Wakf worthies for so long is enough proof of the pathetic lives they lead. Equally, it’s a testimony to the time-tested tactic of their mob-mobilizing capacity and to run riot at will. We also wonder what the role, function, and goals of the Wakf Board are. The Central Wakf Council website lays it down as:

The Central Wakf Council as a Statutory Body was established in December, 1964 by the Government of India under the provision of Section 8A of Wakf Act, 1954 (now read as sub section 1 of the Section 9 of the Wakf Act, 1995) for the purpose of advising it on matters pertaining to working of the State Wakf Boards and proper administration of the Wakfs in the country. Wakf is a permanent dedication of movable or immovable properties for religious, pious or charitable purposes as recognized by Muslim Law. The Wakf Institutions deal with the religious, social and economic life of Muslims. They are not only supporting Mosques, Dargah etc. But many of them support Schools, Colleges, Hospitals and Musafirkhanas which are meant for social welfare.

As the Shimoga and other, similar incidents show, this is some amazing display of social welfare activities. For good measure, there’s some suspicion that the lead actor of Inglorious Basterds, who also happens to be India’s former Prime Minister, had a hand in scripting the riots by Muslims in Hassan. Of course, the media says it “spread” to Hassan, two hours away from Shimoga.

“Deve Gowda is playing his old tricks. However, this time the issue is not strong enough for him to exploit. He has instigated communal riots but he can’t topple our government,” said K S Eswarappa, the state BJP president.

Some Muslims took to the street in Hassan, Gowda’s home district and parliamentary constituency, to protest an article published in a Kannada newspaper that allegedly contained derogatory references to the prophet of Islam….a JD (S) corporater from Hassan — Mangalamma — who was seen in the middle of the action last afternoon, appeared to have sustained injuries on the thumb…Home Minister VS Acharya rubbished the suggestion that the riots had broken out due to the perceived slight to the prophet of Islam. “They say a newspaper article caused the riots. If that was the case, the protesters would have protested in front of the newspaper’s office. Why did they go on a rampage and damage public property. Why was the violence only witnessed in Hassan and Shimoga, where Gowda’s political friend and former chief minister Bangarappa had pledged to support Gowda?”

To its credit, the cops managed to quell the Islamist riots in less than two days in two cities, which is no mean feat given the hugely hurt sentiments. Equally, full marks to Sindhu, the translator and Kannada Prabha for courageously publishing the piece. We wish it wouldn’t desist from publishing similar pieces in future. But no marks for the braindead cops who registered defamation cases against the paper. It simply means that they recognize the right of Islamist thugs to indulge in wanton vandalism on perceived insults to Islam.

Media Misinformation

Just a few years ago, Nasrin was a huge media celebrity: she was a self-described liberal, humanist, feminist, and chain-smoker, all stellar qualities, which are entirely in line with the media’s definition of female liberation. However, she didn’t attain near Goddesshood because she was overtly critical of Islam. Nobody in the media spoke in her favour when she was denied Visa extension or voiced anger when she was attacked by Islamic hooligans in Hyderabad. Nothing, not even the most liberal of liberal women can supercede Merciful Islam. But when a 95-year old Perverted Painter relinquishes his Indian citizenship, the media feels as if its testicles have been chopped off:

The enormity of the loss may take some time to sink in, but it’s now clear that MF Husain will no more remain Indian. “It’s all over. I’ve just completed the final formalities,” said the artist to an anguished Indian fan at the immigration department in Qatar’s capital, Doha…Husain was forced into exile in 2006 after some fundamentalist outfits launched a virulent attack on him for his portrayal of Hindu deities in the nude…As his number approached, Husain, dragging his weary legs, moved from the second row to the first. He then pulled out a small book from his pocket and started reading it. It was the Quran. He was probably praying for last-minute divine intervention.

And now when a mere translation of Nasrin’s piece unleashes an orgy of fundamentalist violence, not one media eminence has a word of at least crocodile-like condemnation. Worse, such is the power of media misinformation that Nasrin has herself issued this statement:

Nasreen said in a statement made available to PTI that she had never written an article for the Kannada Prabha newspaper in Karnataka…I suspect that it is a deliberate attempt to malign me and to misuse my writings to create disturbance in the society. I wish peace will prevail…The appearance of the article is atrocious. In any of my writings I have never mentioned that Prophet Muhammad was against burkha. Therefore this is a distorted story..

If she truly believes what the media has reported–that she actually wrote the article in Kannada–it stands to reason that she’s right in issuing the denial but it also stands to reason that the media is the author of this mischief. And lo and behold! Ever since her denial, the papers have gone on an overdrive printing it, yet another attempt at turning their sorry faces away from the truth. Turdesai has done even better on Twitter.

the maulvi and the temple priest who incite mobs are not men of religion but agents of violence. both must be shunned.

Without bothering to educate his poor readers on which temple priest has incited mobs so far. While a certain Vishnu Som calls the Swiss Minaret ban a “fundamental threat to Indian Muslims,” Turdesai spins it with greater sophistication over a series of Tweets, which draw a neat symmetery between protests over Hussain’s paintings and Islamic thuggery:

those who protest against husain paintings and who target taslima’s article are two sides of same coin. coin of intolerance.

freedom of expression is not an absolute, it comes with responsibility. but violence is not the answer.

does ‘hurt to religious sentiment’ override freedom of expression? and who will decide when religious sentiments are hurt? the mob?

my stand is rule of law is supreme. freedom of expression is not an unfettered right, neither is mob violence acceptable.

Yet, we all know what “stand” his channel took on the Danish Cartoons affair. Rule of law. Responsibility. Even better is this singular Tweet from Turdesai’s better half:

artistic representations of gods,goddesses not a sin in Hinduism. In islam representations of Prophet are banned.

No holds barred. Beyond comment. But I’m getting ahead of myself. These tweets set the perfect tone for masturbatory editorials about being “sensitive to minority feelings,” “for every Mullah there’s a sadhu/temple priest,” “Hindus had it coming,” and so on. I had to indulge in this tiresome exercise of media duplicity to underscore, yet again, the kind of poison we’re repeatedly fed with.

The media has shorn itself of even the last ounce of accountability, decency, and even plain honesty. Nothing else explains this kind of brazening out even the vilest form of assault on free speech. Over the years, the media has shown that it isn’t really interested in supporting freedom of expression in a democracy. It is committed to protecting the Islamists’ “freedom” to indulge in any act of vandalism. Quite obviously, for it has replaced its inhouse style guide/reporting guidelines with the Koran, Hadis and the Congress party’s Constitution.

Tags: Burqa, Commentary, Congress Party, Democracy, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Expression in India, India, Indian Politics, Islam Watch, Islamic Rampage in Shimoga, Kannada Translation of Nasrin’s Burqa Piece, Media, Media Shame, Media Watch, Politics, Pseudosecularism, Pseudosecularism Hall of Shame, Public Debate, Public Discourse, Secular Media, Secularism, Shimoga Riots, Society & Culture, Taslima Nasrin

Since it lost power in 2004, the Bharatiya Janata Party, India’s principal opposition party, has lost its earlier appeal among the middle classes and the youth. This erosion of support was a consequence of a tired leadership, internal feuding, the pursuit of a policy of blind obstruction to all government initiatives and a failure to check sectarian hotheads identified with its Hindu nationalist ideology. From being a party of conservative Middle India, the BJP ceded its centrist space to the Congress Party. In recent months, it has been paralysed by a failure to counter the appeal of Rahul Gandhi, the Congress heir-apparent.

As he says, the BJP’s multipronged problems today surely stem from a mix of these factors but to say that BJP ceded its “centrist space” is to miss the mark really hugely. And this is also why we urgently need to define and fix certain terminologies in public debate. For starters, there is no such thing as a “center” or “right” in India as I’ve argued several times in this blog.

The Indian political landscape comprises two main sides. One, the Left, which has itself, unambiguously defined what it stands for. Two, the Congress party, which stands for…well, opportunism, to put it mildly. Because the BJP and the Sangh Parivar and other pro-Hindu organizations don’t fall in either category doesn’t mean they fall in what’s incorrectly called the Right. And then we have folks–like Swapan here–who hate the Left and are turned off by the Congress’ opportunism and are also uncomfortable with what they call extreme Right Wing. They describe themselves as the Centrists, Center of Right, and so on. I have a more, impolite term for such people: fence-sitters.

The fence-sitters are typically decent, urbane, English-educated, intelligent, well-read and thinking people. However, while they are readily able to see through the Congress’ crassness and can’t stomach the Left’s duplicity, they are not quite equipped to do the initial donkey labour required to understand what the “right wing” is all about. They go by superficial displays of the “right wing’s” anger–the trishuls, demonstrations against MF Hussain’s “art,” the Ayodhya movement, etc–and conclude that this is not good for a healthy democracy. But is this all that the “right wing movement” stands for?

To be fair, most of the vocal exponents of the “hardline Hindus” are not well-versed in framing their viewpoints in the sophistication that current public discourse demands. Which only hurts them, and makes these self-described “Centrists” run away from them. However, fundamentally, the “right wing” is about reviving an ancient, deeply spiritual way of life and applying it to current times as appropriate. If some proponents of this show dogmatic tendencies, we have an atmosphere where we can openly criticize such dogmatism but dismissing the thought itself as “ancient,” “outmoded,” “regressive,” etc shows both arrogance and impatience with something that doesn’t fit your worldview. A small example will suffice. The concept of Rna (or debt) means that we borrow everything from the future generations. Thus, it becomes our responsibility to safeguard nature, the environment, values, etc for the future. Now, if you instill this concept in public/societal consciousness, you won’t need to frame laws to safeguard the environment. One way of doing this is by regarding nature as God or something that’s worthy of deep reverence, if you hate God so much. If anybody from the “right wing” calls for bringing about this change, it is bad practice (and manners) to call them “hardline.”

The Ayodhya movement is similar. Every nation needs its heroes and symbols and Gods and other cultural icons. And so when Swapan casually says,

[Nitin Gadkari] offended Hindu hardliners by opposing the regional xenophobic agenda of their Shiv Sena party allies and suggested an out-of-court, political settlement of a 60-year-old case over a site in Ayodhya that Hindus believe is especially sacred but which was also the site of a 16th century mosque.

Not too many regard the Shiv Sena as some great Hindu/cultural/unifying force. However, Swapan truly shocks us with this Ayodhya statement. Does it mean then that all those scholars and leaders and ordinary folk who toiled for years and presented a mountainous heap of evidence as proof that the Ram temple existed laboured towards an illusion? Swapan’s choice of words is pretty interesting: “Hindus believe is especially sacred.” And so, archeological, historical, and literary evidence means nothing? Also, what explains the fact that the Babri Mosque was made of material from the demolished Ram temple? It seems that Swapan considers anybody–BJP or otherwise–wanting the Ram temple built on the site are hardliners who are not good for the BJP’s revival. So what does that make the BJP then? As Elst says, the BJP will truly become the Congress party’s B-team. Elsewhere in the piece, Swapan says,

To that extent Mr. Gadkari has made a good start and has earned himself considerable goodwill. The more difficult journey involves winning the trust of voters, particularly that generation which never experienced the heady Hindu mobilization of the early 1990s.

Question: on what basis, and who ensured the said heady Hindu mobilization? The selfsame hardliners. Which brings us to the problems within the BJP. Apart from internal bickering, etc, the real problem is its dilly-dallying over crucial issues and its unmatched capacity to self-destruct. It has thrown away every advantage that came its way and has spectacularly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. When everybody hollered to settle the issue of the “second rung/generation leadership” a few years ago, it blissfully dreamed on. It hasn’t still woken up to the fact of superior media and/or image management. Swapan himself has fallen prey to this when he says:

Although Mr. Modi remains controversial for his alleged complicity in the infamous sectarian killings in 2002, his government is marked for its efficiency and single-minded pursuit of economic growth rather than the advocacy of Hindu nationalism.

Exactly one question: why is it difficult for Swapan to mention Modi’s name minus “his role in” the 2002 riots? But the more accurate question to ask is this: why isn’t there a single Hindu-Muslim riot since Modi’s reelection after the riots? Of course, a twisted answer could be: because Modi is a “Hindu bigot” and Muslims live in an atmosphere of fear, etc. But then, that would contradict Swapan’s own mention that economic growth, not Hindu nationalism is why Gujarat is prosperous today.

Swapan also largely exaggerates the “threat” of Rahul Gandhi. “Popularity” and “appeal” in University campuses and local trains do not fetch votes. When the nation goes to vote in 2014, it will look at Manmohan Singh, his bosserina and the entire coterie and decide what to do. Two years down, we’ve seen where the gentle Dr.Singh has been leading us. One Rahul Gandhi who spends more time outside the Parliament than in it (his attendance is in single digits if I remember right, and till date he has asked NO question, and participated in NO debate) can’t ensure victory. Seriously, what does Rahul Gandhi have going for him: looks? the devilishly-charming smile? his circus yatras? This man hasn’t been able to convincingly answer ONE question from college-going undergraduates. And therein lies a pointer for the BJP–these are the issues it needs to pick. But the BJP being the BJP, it’ll probably hand victory on a platter to the Crown Prince who’ll then become King.

In the end, we wish Swapan Dasgupta could’ve shown a little more balance instead of dismissing everybody in the BJP who votes for Hindu causes. Nitin Gadkari’s “Village India” mantra is good but cut back to the “heady” ’90s. The Village India is where Hinduism and Indian culture really lives. Less than 40 Kms from Bangalore is a steep hill located amid a sizeable jungle, which has a Shiva temple on top. In January each year, more than 50000 people from villages surrounding the hill walk up to offer prayers. The temple is open throughout night and these village folk stand guard en route and help other devotees. Nobody really organizes this annual festival. But the deracinated innards of Bangalore could care less for what this signifies. Which is why the BJP needs to tap into this segment, affirm their faith, and give them avenues to better their conditions. Swapan’s prescription to move away from this will yield nothing.

But it’s quite understandable why the self-professed “centrists” analyze Hindu revivalism the way they do. As I mentioned earlier, they lack the donkey labour, which is the prerequisite foundation for attempting such analyses. Till about 70 years ago, we had an array of scholars and thinkers who knew their Shakespeare, Shaw, Locke, Hume, Voltaire, et al. But these people also knew equally well their Yagnavalkya, Medatithi, Valmiki, Vyasa, Kautilya, Vidyaranya, Kalidasa, Banabhatta et al. They had studied both the West and the East in their respective originals. And when they wrote, their words were worth their weight in gold. And they firmly and repeatedly called for a revival of India’s greatness based purely on Indian values. The so-called “right wingers” today–the BJP/RSS variety–are ill-equipped in the tools and techniques of modern debate. They are knowledgeable but not articulate. The so-called “centrists” lack knowledge of the primary sources of Indian tradition and neither show any inclination to equip themselves with it but they are articulate in the Western tradition.

Parting question for Swapan Dasgupta: if Vivekananda was alive today, would you describe him as a Hindu hardliner?

Tags: BJP, Center, Commentary, Congress, Ill-defined Labels, India, Indian History, Indian Philosophy, Indian Politics, Left, Left, Right, & Center, Meaningless Labels, Politics, Pseudosecularism, Public Debate, Public Discourse, Right, Secularism, Society & Culture, Swapan Dasgupta

Boddharo matsaragrastaah prabhavaah smayadooshitaah|
Abodhaapahataschaanye jeernamange subhashitam||

Consumed with jealousy are the teachers and scholars, repositories of knowledge and wisdom,
Polluted by arrogance are the rulers, enforcers of justice, character, and conduct,
Beaten by their own ignorance are the ignorant who remain ignorant–
Thus are the wise words digested by us, remain hidden within us.

Tags: Bhatruhari, India, Indian Philosophy, Nitishatakam, Sanskrit, Sanskrit Poetry

Pune is just the name of another city because we’ve had a history of one attack in every six weeks: does it really matter where it happened and where it’ll happen next?

Needless, the usual charade followed this time as well: thundering media noise, outraged bloggers, shocked stars, a whimpering BJP, and the rest. It’s quite amusing actually. When 26/11 happened, India was under attack! and Mumbai (was) besieged! complete with the media copywriters’ semen stains on the headlines. But poor Pune has been robbed of such glamour. What the ugly assortment of politicians, penpushers, kingmakers, and the crown prince don’t realize–or don’t want us to know is the fact that India has been under attack for more than 1000 years. More on that after asking a rapid-fire round of questions:

• Dear Shahrukh Khan, this attack was done by your good neighbours. No. we’re not questioning your patriotism. We need honest answers. Your “good neighbour” remark might’ve been in the context of your IPL tomfoolery but Pakistan’s cricket team is NOT Pakistan. It’d do good for you to read this letter addressed to you. And next time, please don’t take Shakespeare’s “all the world’s a stage” too literally.
• Dear media, I know you’re already overworked with 24/7 spinning. And one of your Gin-sipping sisters has already speculated something about Sanathan Sanstha. Do us a service. Just STFU. We know operate largely in the space of cerebral vacuum but for once, don’t go overboard trying to prove it again and again. We know you won’t show the same spine you displayed in hammering the recent Shiv Sena hooliganism. Also do not spin the following:
• • Terror has no religion
  • Muslims are victims
  • This happened in <insert city of your choice> because Hindu fanatics are very strong here
  • The spirit of <insert city of your choice> will keep us going!
  • Shiv Sena and Taliban/JeM/LeT are the same
  • Secularism is under threat
  • Any and/or all of the above
• Dear fence-sitters and liberals, do not wax eloquent on the need for a “responsive” and “preventive” security apparatus, latest technology, advance warning signals, effective policing/Home ministry, international pressure, and similar nonsense.
• Dear Rahul Gandhi: where are you? The country needs you now! You can take a break from giving sleepless nights to those pretty university lasses.

What was limited to just Kashmir has merrily spread across the land in a space of just 6 years. A phenomenon familiar to anybody who has read Indian history–not the Romila Thapar version. To them, we’re a land of Kaffirs. Our eminent op-ed writers who try to explain this away are actually insulting the unblemished religious fervor of the perpetrators. These guys also harbour the illusion that Pakistan is really a democratic country–witness their several calls to “restore demoratic processes/norms/machinery” in Pakistan. Pakistan remains an Islamic theocracy. It’s even “purer” than Saudi Arabia in that it routinely vacuum-cleans non-Sunni Muslims (Ahammadiyas for example).

And because it is an Islamic theocracy, it is faithful to the Koran. Those who use the fancy military-jihadi complex need to consider this. What is the raison d’être for this military-jihadi complex? What propels and sustains it? The answer is uncomfortable but so is the truth. Military-jihadi is actually using the same word twice. If you are a pure Islamic country, your military exists not just to defend but to launch Jihad when the time is opportune. Also, Jihad essentially implies that you need to use military might to cleanse the world of infidels. There’s a reason why the likes of Kasab are given hardcore military training. To them, they are soldiers of Allah, sevants of the Prophet (PBUH). It’s therefore irrelevant if they are army regulars or freelancers. As history shows us, there’s no such thing as permanent peace in nations firmly under the sway of Islam. A current state of peace is simply preparations for the next Jihad. Which is why it is very important to use terms with full knowledge of their exact meaning. “Islamic terror” simply means Jihad. You cannot separate Islamic terror from its teachings. And it is the teachings that provide the justification for what’s known as the military-jihadi complex. People who call for a dismantling of this complex need to read the Quran and the Hadis first.

In the end, India has to take care of India’s interests. A friend might lend a supporting shoulder but you need to shed your blood and tears; he can’t do it on your behalf. Every country has its own methods to teach its enemies a lesson in a way they think is fit. Appealing to the US to mount pressure, etc won’t work. Pakistan’s relentless attacks against India is India’s problem. Talking international diplomacy and strategy is an optional next step. The first step is to grow a spine. (Vetoed! said Sonia).

Which city wants to go next?

Technorati : Congress Party, India, India Going to Dogs, Indian Politics, Islam Watch, Islamic Terrorism, Media Watch, Pakistan, Pseudosecularism, Pseudosecularism Hall of Shame, Pune, Pune Blasts, Terrorism, UPA
Del.icio.us : Congress Party, India, India Going to Dogs, Indian Politics, Islam Watch, Islamic Terrorism, Media Watch, Pakistan, Pseudosecularism, Pseudosecularism Hall of Shame, Pune, Pune Blasts, Terrorism, UPA

Who’s the Charioteer?

The Hampi festival is an annual cultural extravaganza that began 15 years ago with the Hampi Ustav in 1995. This year’s festival holds a special significance because it marks the 500th year of Sri Krishnadevaraya’s coronation in 1509-10. But the festival per se is not what prompted this Indian Express piece. Among others, the real reason is that it is the BJP government that organized, oversaw, and ensured that it was a huge success. And it was a huge success no matter what the media wants you to believe. Thankfully, we’ve not yet reached a stage where we’re completely ashamed to even take pride in local traditions, heroes, and accomplishments to the extent that we disown them. Every tiny hamlet, village, boulder, hill, and cave in the remotest corner of India has what you call a sthala purana or local legend/tale/story. If you are the scholarly type, you typically dig into the authenticity, truth, historicity or otherwise of that sthala purana. But to the inhabitants of that hamlet, it is a living truth–it provides them the heroes they need, and gives them the values and ideals that guide their lives. To that extent, these legends, heroes, and artifacts are worship-worthy. You might with the might of your scholarship, prove that it is legend/tale/fiction but you can’t negate the real experience that’s wedded to the lives of these inhabitants. On the negative side, if your scholarship has ideological/political backing coupled with lung power, you’ll succeed not just in showing how amazing your scholarship is but, tragically, in destroying a generations-old value system that made people better people. It’s a different matter that your scholarship doesn’t provide an equivalent alternative.

Which is exactly what the Indian Express article sets out to do.

The Indian Express spin begins with

There is a Pancha Pandava feel to the legend-invoking festival, going by the number of sites that host a plethora of cultural programmes. Of the five venues at the Hampi Festival that host music shows, dance recitals, literary soirees and rural sports, four are relatively smaller compared to the main one. The major locale close to the famed Viru paksha temple of this historic north Karnataka city is a rather sprawling expanse — with its open-air feature further lit up by replicas of tastefully moulded exhibits that typify the aesthetics of the good old Vijayanagara Empire.

While it gives due credit to the arrangements, etc, we fail to understand what exactly is a Pancha Pandava feel. Nor does the writer of the piece care to explain. At the most basics, Pancha Pandavas means the five Pandavas or the five sons of Pandu. We fail to understand how this is anyway connected to either Hampi or the festival. But obviously, if you’re spinning, you typically massacre facts. After some hurried words about Krishnadevaraya’s coronation, he says,

And, to be fair to the organisers, the pomp and pageantry at the three-day fete that ended on January 29 did lend colour to the significance of the occasion. Top performing artistes — both classical and popular, and some of them from abroad — did add vivacity to the proceedings.Only that they could regale the evening audience after the political leaders and senior bureaucrats vacated the stage, ending a long series of speeches. [.] this happened on all the three days. The confluence of politicians at this place in Bellary district not only came as a suffocating surprise for the common visitors at the prestigious fest, but even the passerby on the road struggled, what with traffic snarls that any VVIP’s presence would painfully entail.

He glosses over the fact that it is no mean achievement to draw such top artistes to a festival held in a location where the dry heat throughout the year is quite unbearable. Also the fact that “festivals” like Kala Ghoda and other secular pomp shows routinely get far wider and slobbering coverage and accolades escapes his attention.

After this, the article pretty much disses the entire event. A reader looking for a factual reportage of the Hampi festival gets everything but that: from traffic jams caused by VVIPs and politicians, from foreigners treated shabbily, from rampant drug usage in Hampi, from the presence of corporate magnates to how the Hampi festival resembled a political show instead of a cultural event. Here’s the thing: a World Heritage site that is today the site for all forms of perversity imaginable should have fired up this reporter’s passions. Instead, his focus is on how it turned into a political circus. We wonder where Hampi was on his map before this festival happened. If anything, Hampi has become the haven for drug addicts, paedophiles, orgies, rampant prostitution, and wholesale land encroachment. Dargahs and mosques appear overnight in and around the premises of this UNESCO World Heritage site.

But then, we know the reason why the media reports on such events the way it does. In this case specifically, the government explicitly mentioned that the festival–usually held in November every year–was postponed to January 2010 because it wanted to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the coronation of Sri Krishnadevaraya, unarguably the greatest ruler of the Vijayanagar empire. And this sounded off alarm bells in the usual quarters. There was little opposition all these years to celebrate the Hampi Utsav. But when the BJP government announced the special significance of this year’s Ustav, these alarm bells shrieked deafeningly. Elsewhere, the same Indian Express quoted it as the “fest of the Sangh Parivar. (ha!)”

And why?

So far, the Hampi Utsav was…well, just another cultural festival held in a World Heritage site. The “significance” was explained away with the usual epithets of “great sculptural beauty,” “exquisite carvings,” “rare architecture,” etc. This fell neatly in line with the Congress party’s dictum of not taking pride in our own achievements. And the government-sponsored history of the Vijayanagar Empire is the best proof of this. To most of us who learnt history in school, Krishnadevaraya was just another powerful king who occupied other kingdoms, planted trees, strengthened the economy, patronized arts, etc. Equally, the Vijayanagar Empire was just another powerful empire that was founded as a “rebellion” against Islamic invasion. And thus, lest the people think otherwise, Hampi Utsav was just another cultural event where the chic circles generally had a good time: ooh! the Veeroopaksha temple is sooo beautiful! And those nudes!? And so when Krishnadevaraya’s name suddenly came into focus, the Indian Express found it prudent to find the “other side” of the story. And who does it call upon? An old suspect, an ex-Vice Chancellor of the Hampi University, a gentleman named M M Kalburgi who’s famous for being on the buttered side of the bread. A known Hindu baiter, he says,

Krishna Deva Raya did “nothing” to promote Kannada language. “I would not hesitate to call him anti-Kannadiga. He suppressed our language by patronising Telugu poets in his court.” And, then a rejoinder: “Plus, he encouraged Tamils too. Today if you find large pockets of Tamilians living in Bangalore, it is because of Krishna Deva Raya.

Another way of looking at people with hundreds of academic acronyms and important-sounding titles affixed to their names is that the greater your qualification, the greater your chances of being guilty until proven innocent. M M Kalburgi epitomizes this phenomenon. But let’s give the devil its due.

The learned ex-Vice Chancellor forgets that there was no one state of Karnataka or Andhra Pradesh or Tamil Nadu in Krishnadevarya’s time. Besides, a host of inscriptions and praises by contemporary poets describe Krishnadevaraya variously as Kannada Rajya Ramaa Ramana (Lord Vishnu–Ramaa’s husband–of Kannada Kingdom) and Kannadaraya (The King of Kannada). Almost every other inscription of the time refers to the Vijayanagar Empire as Karnata Samrajya (Karnataka Empire). Krishnadevaraya patronized several well-known Kannada poets including Chaatuvittalanatha, and Gubbi Mallanna who in turn praised his generosity and his spirit of inclusiveness. Krishnadevaraya is one of the very rare kings who became the ideal hero and role model for two states simultaneously–people of both Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh till date remember him with fondness and respect. More importantly, he held Vyasaraya, one of the greatest exponents of Madhvacharya’s Dvaita philosophy, in great esteem, and made him the Raja Guru (official guru of the King). It was Vyasaraya who propagated the Haridasa movement in a far-reaching manner. Vyasaraya was the Guru of the celebrated Purandaradasa, the father of Carnatic classical music, and Kanakadasa, another Haridasa poet, singer, and saint. (Aside, casteist politicians spearheaded by the Congress party’s Siddaramaiah have tried to appropriate Kanakadasa because he hailed from the same Kuruba caste). All these saints are still widely revered in Karnataka–their songs are still sung in concerts and recited as poems in daily life. And all these men flourished under Krishnadevaraya’s rule. And all these were thoroughbred Kannadigas. Besides, in Krishnadevaraya’s time, Telugu literature had reached its peak compared to its Kannada counterpart. Now if the learned ex-Vice Chancellor wants to blame even this on Krishnadevaraya, we have no option but to recommend that he’s in dire need of lobotomy.

In light of this–sample, but significant–evidence, the eminent ex-Vice Chancellor should tell us how he can reconcile these historical facts with his narcotic-induced statement that Krishnadevaraya was “anti-Kannadiga.” In addition, M M Kalburgi’s statement that Krishnadevaraya was responsible for “large pockets of Tamilians living in Bangalore” is so sodden that he’ll slip and hurt the region of his anatomy where the sun doesn’t shine. In Krishnadevaraya’s time, Tamilians were largely concentrated in the Thanjavur and adjoining belts. However, being the true connossieur of fine arts and tolerant of all faiths and philosophies and languages, Krishnadevarya had a number of Tamil poets in his court. During the Vijayanagar times, Bangalore was but a very very small hamlet kind of place with little population of Tamils. Tamilians migrated to Bangalore chiefly during the British rule, who force-employed poor Tamils as labourers in the Bangalore cantonment–these Tamilians were drawn predominantly from areas adjoining Kolar. The second wave of migration of significant numbers of Tamils happened when Seshadri Iyer was the Diwan of Mysore (under the British). M M Kalburgi stretches the limits of logic in the realm of both time and space–from the 16th Century to today and from Hampi to Bangalore.

And then the Indian Express spin consults similar “experts” who amazingly claim that

Krishna Deva Raya…was partially responsible for the influx of “migrants” into the territory that is now part of Karnataka.

This is unbelievably mind-numbing and leads us to ask this question: given the sickening Kannada chauvinism of Kalburgi & Sons, was Krishnadevaraya required to predict that his kingdom would someday in future be split up on linguistic basis to form Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh & Tamil Nadu and thus, it was his responsibility to prove his Kannada-lover credentials by preventing non-Kannada people from encroaching on the future Karnataka? And does Indian Express recruit its journalists based on how many negative points they score in logic? Also, for all his chest-thumping about Kannada, Kalburgi & Sons need to yet demonstrate their service to Kannada.

Elsewhere, Kalburgi & sons cry hoarse about secularism, multiculturalism, and tolerance. But here is Krishnadevaraya, a devout Vaishnavite, who welcomed, encouraged and patronized people of all sects, beliefs, faiths, and opinions, and he’s the made the villain of the piece. And then we have Paramashiva Murthy, another “expert” who, under substance-abuse says,

“Why does the government single out Krishna Deva Raya as the ideal ruler of Vijayanagara? Is he the only person responsible for what the mighty Vijayanagara was once?” He observes many other kings contributed to Vijayana gara’s prosperity between the 13th and 15th century. “In fact, Prouda Deva Raya did more to encourage Kannada.”

Simply because Krishnadevaraya was the greatest/ideal ruler of that empire. His military success was unmatched either by his predecessors or successors. None of the hostile Islamic kingdoms surrounding Vijayanagar dared raise its voice against him. Under him, the Vijayanagar empire held sway over the largest swathe of geography than his predecessors or successors. He maintained law and order, delivered justice & security to his subjects, and took prosperity to the highest levels. The West hankered to do trade with him and wrote glowing accounts of the economic prosperity of Vijayanagar under his rule. He instilled a sense of cultural refinement and encouraged the arts. He was well-versed in music, could play musical instruments, wrote poetry–Amuktamalyada–and other forms of literature. At best, Proudha Devaraya had one stellar poet, Kumara Vyasa (Gadugina Narayanappa) who wrote the amazing Karnata Bharata Katha Manjari. However, that doesn’t automatically make him a Kannada lover or absolve him of shortcomings, whatever his other merits. Paramashiva Murthy’s soporific yardstick to measure the greatness of a king of the Vijayanagar empire seems to rest on how much they loved/patronized Kannada. I suppose these stoned experts would’ve been mightily thrilled if the stone-pelting warriors of the Karnataka Rakshana Vedike had ruled the Vijayanagar Empire.

And then the spin suddenly takes a mysterious turn by mentioning the powerful Bellary mining barons and the government’s lack of rehabilitation efforts in the wake of last year’s floods in the region. Not to mention a certain Joshi guy who cribs about not being able to gorge on a “grand Deccani feast.” Deccan (or Dakkan), by the way, is a term Muslim rulers used to refer to South India. We wonder what place such “issues” have in a report about a cultural festival.

In the end, the actual reason for the Indian Express’ angst and anxiety is not Krishnadevaraya per se but what he symbolizes: a powerful testimony to what heights a fully-awakened Hindu society is capable of attaining in a short span of time. A government that explicitly honours such a king will get people asking uncomfortable questions starting with: who is/was Krishnadevaraya? Really bad for secularism, no?

Tags: 500th Anniversary of Krishnadevaraya, Communal Historians, Eminent Historians, Hampi Festival, History, India, Indian Civilization, Indian Express, Indian History, Indian Philosophy, Indian Politics, Indian Value System, Kannada, Karnataka, Krishnadevaraya, M M Kalburgi, Media Watch, Politics, Pseudosecularism, Pseudosecularism Hall of Shame, Sanatana Dharma, Secularism, Society & Culture, Spindian Express, Vijayanagar Empire

This is not to argue that Hindu values alone provide solutions to all problems of all times. However, it is important to first understand these values, and the hundreds of years of penance and thought that’s gone into moulding them before discarding them as unsuitable to current problems. Not just that–a study of the history of these values shows their intrinsic strength in sustaining an ancient civilization for a few thousand years. When Ananda Coomaraswamy wrote of the unwashed, dirty, and sweating peasants of Sri Lanka and India fit to occupy a king’s throne–complete with refinement in speech, thought, judgement, and wisdom, he spoke of centuries of deeply-instilled values, which to them had become second nature.

To understand the kind of values that shaped India for centuries, corruption is a good example. It wasn’t that corruption didn’t exist in the past but it was certainly not on a scale as it is today. Also, it wasn’t just the fear of God or King or whatever that prevented people from indulging in corruption without a care for punishment, even.

Consider this.

You depend on the municipality/corporation for your water supply needs. As is their wont, the water supply ceases abruptly, with no warning and it ceases for over two weeks. What we typically do is crib and complain to the folks in charge and go back home and buy water from private parties till the day the (government) water supply resumes. A water pipe has broken somewhere and nobody has bothered to fix it. Clearly, folks in the water supply department are in the wrong. And they don’t care.

Now, let’s apply the Hindu value system working backwards by asking a series of questions.

Q: Why didn’t the folks fix the water pipe?
A: Because they don’t care.

Q: Why don’t they care?
A: Because they lack a sense of accountability.

Q: Why do they lack a sense of accountability?
A: Because they lack a sense of duty.

Q: Why do they lack a sense of duty?
A: Because they’ve lost, forgotten, or are ignorant of the concept of Rna, or debt that one owes during one’s lifetime. Debt towards ancestors, parents, teachers, nature, and the society all of which contribute immensely for ensuring the person’s well-being. When this debt is discharged according to an individual’s ability, it ensures that the society and by extension, the country as a whole is decent, ethical, harmonious and prosperous. More importantly, it is a relatively strife-free society. Contrast to modern day India where we’re out to get one another because of the imbalance in the discharge of Rna.

Q: Why have they lost or are ignorant of Rna?
A: Because they’ve lost, forgotten, or are ignorant of the concept of Dharma, which is what governs Rna among other things.

Q: Why have they lost or are ignorant of Dharma?
A: Because they’ve lost, forgotten, or are ignorant of the concept of Rta or the cosmic order that sustains everything in the universe, and of which Dharma is a subset. The foundation of Dharma rests on the principle of causing the least damage/imbalance to the functioning of the cosmic order.

And now, when you work forwards, starting at Rta, you’ll see how, when these values are imbibed till–as Ananda Coomaraswamy says–they become second nature to an entire civilization, you create a just, and ethical society. Which is something far greater than passing strict laws can accomplish. In a values-based society, the corrupt will be the exception than the norm. And it is the erosion of these values that Swami Vivekananda lamented when he thundered that English education taught children that their parents were fools.

I leave it to the reader’s wisdom to apply this Q&A to help eradicate–or substantially bring down the problem of endemic corruption.

Tags: Corruption, Dharma, Dharma & Corruption, Ethics, History, India, Indian Civilization, Indian Philosophy, Indian Value System, Indian Values, Rna, Rta, Sanatana Dharma, Society & Culture

This freaky prelude was necessary as we shall see.

In his monumental literary blunder, the Discovery of India, which now passes off as history in–among other places–UCLA, Jawaharlal Nehru characterized the Upanishads as some sort of esoteric works whose complexity, meaning, intent, and purpose is beyond our comprehension. He was, really, speaking for himself. He expressed a personal opinion about the Upanishads. It was his complete lack of comprehension about the subject that he foisted upon the Upanishads, quite similar to a schoolboy who thinks Mathematics is bad because he can’t solve those damn sums. Whatever his other faults, Nehru was being honest: the Upanishads were really beyond his comprehension. But I wouldn’t judge him too harshly on this shortcoming. Nehru read and “understood” the traditions, philosophy, and culture of his own land through alien eyes. He read them all in English–more accurately, he read their interpretation in books written by Westerners. He was as far removed from India as the Westerners were. If he was really interested, he’d have to like travel just a few minutes to find scores of people who were deeply rooted, preserved, and fought for the preservation of this culture. Instead, he chose to call them kaminey.

And that was a monumental tragedy for India.

The India in Discovery of India became the real India after he became Prime Minister. His interpretations of Western and Islamic (guess at whose feet he learned Indian history?) interpretations of Indian history became authentic Indian history. The Brown Sahib was not only an alien in his own country but unleashed a reign of terror on the nation’s cultural past (chiefly). He actively discouraged Sanskrit. He just couldn’t get to the core of the seemingly-meaningless Hindu rituals. He took a fancy to tyrants, despots, plunderers, and savages who had ravaged India. Mahumud Ghaznavid was a historical hero while “Marshall (sic)” Stalin was his contemporary counterpart. Small wonder Nehru was enamoured with the (then) USSR and China. Under his auspices, the meaning of the term Communal was turned on its head to mean exactly the opposite. A progressive, democratic Prime Minister of a newly-independent nation who despised dynastic rule ruled for 17 years and actively groomed his daughter to perpetuate democracy. I don’t know this for sure, but there’s no evidence that he as much as pondered over what kept such a complex, diverse and large nation with all its conflicts intact.

In other words, he was supremely self-assured in his stupidity, which he covered up with this massive ego.

Is this judging him too harshly, or unfairly? I think not. At a level, you can argue that he was a product of his times. However, so were his contemporaries. Gandhi, his mentor, who declared himself a proud Sanatani Hindu, and Sardar Patel and a host of others.

The result of his self-absorption, love for tyrants, and myopia mixed with hot-headedness culminated in the 1962 humiliation. But the soul of India had already suffered the real blow many years before 1962. A generation of self-hating Hindus was growing and today it’s a pretty sizeable number. It gleefully joins the ranks of the ignorant who casually abuse Hindu traditions and way of life. If you abuse native traditions long enough, you create a class of rootless people who will eventually see no sense in defending the nation they were born in. As we see, this class is multiplying exponentially. Given this mentality, how do you ensure that India stays together? Every category of “liberal,” “modern,” and “secular,” has its own reasons–and they are perfectly logical reasons from their standpoint–to, say, give away Kashmir. Give it enough time and Assam will go the Kashmir way and these selfsame people will advocate these selfsame arguments to give it away.

One of the few solutions to counter–if not redeem before it’s too late–this is to embark on what I call the Rediscovery of India. I’ve done my fair share of ranting about secularism, the Congress party, votebanks, Islamists…. To give it some shape, here are a few broad (and probably vague) themes:

• Repudiate the Nehruvian “idea” of India
• Examine issues, ideas, and policies by scrutinizing/comparing it with similar work our ancients had done
• Examine everything in the context of its applicability to native Indian traditions
• Revive traditions that have timeless relevance
• Discard any ugly traditions that exist
• Revitalize Indian art, sculpture, music, dance, and literature. The value this has in keeping India together is intangible but infinitely more significant than most of us realize.
• Stop jerking off to the fact that one of the greatest strengths of India, for all its flaws (sic), is that it’s a democracy. What we have is a sham.
• Develop a spine: we don’t need to seek the West’s (or the whole world’s) approval for everything we do.

The last point will automatically result if the rest are taken care of. I’m aware that lots of good work is happening in one or all of these areas but I discern three major shortcomings: it is not enough, not widespread enough, and not assertive enough. And it won’t happen merely by the BJP or any other, similar party coming to power. If you believe that fixing drains will fix terrorism, then you equally need to believe this approach will rejuvenate India. We are a sick nation at present, miraculously surviving on the feeble support of some unconscious, civilizationally-inherited values that may not last long. These values, deeply rooted in Hindu civilization is not an inexhaustible blank cheque.

And with that, and at the end of about 10 years, this reassessment of my blog comes to an end.

And I’ve decided to rename this blog to Rediscovery of India. Nothing else changes.

Tags: Ancient India, Blogging, Blogs, Commentary, Culture, Democracy, History, India, Indian Civilization, Indian Culture, Indian Genius, Jawaharlal Nehru, Nehru, Reassessment of Blog, Rediscovery of India, Rejuvenating Hinduism, Rejuvenating India, Santana Dharma, Secularism, Seriously Sandeep, Society & Culture

So here’s an FAQ of sorts that (hopefully) addresses Vir Sanghvi’s concerns. But before that, it helps to keep Offstumped’s words as a backgrounder.

There is a perceptible disquiet amongst the Delhi based media elite who have for long exercised a monopoly on opinion in the public debate. With their attempts at editorialising news with a psuedo-progressive slant now under severe challenge, they have taken to the good old leftist game of slander by label if not by libel.

1. What is a blog?

A: It started as an online personal journal/diary where you pretty much said anything about yourself and over the years, grew to become an informed and influential “alternate” media. You now have micro-specialized blogs on every conceivable topic.

2. Why did it become so popular or why did so many people adopt it so quickly?

A: As a medium of expression initially. The main reason it become widely popular was because it provided the “common” man an almost uninhibited and open way of expressing opinion and commentary. In the old days, media had a monopoly over not just news and opinion but even in its choice of publishing letters to the editor. Blogging simply made it possible to ignore that impenetrable fortress. More importantly, people who didn’t have any stake in some news event/happening/incident wrote what they felt. In other words, independent opinion/analysis was expressed by independent (yeah, sounds corny I know) people. Over time, these opinions began to prove far superior than established media warhorses and experts.

3. Why is the India media repeatedly upset with bloggers and Tweeple?

A: Several reasons. As Vir Sanghvi says, “At present, bloggers, visitors to websites and tweeters remain a curiosity for traditional media…I suspect old media may be making a huge mistake by being so blinkered.” And I agree. The reason for this is because the Internet was adopted much faster and more innovatively by the “common” man than the media. Till just two years ago, most Indian media heavyweights had extremely poor design, usability, and used outdated technology on their websites. The media picked up the blogging story like really late in the game. People usually read news items on news websites and turned to specific blogs for analysis and commentary. Till date, this hasn’t changed: you see a prominent story in a paper and you kind of predict what that paper’s editorial stance/comment will be on that story.

But the real reason is the fact that highly-respected bloggers are not scared to say it like it is. These highly-respected bloggers do rigorous homework and back their stuff up with sound reasoning. And they’ve repeatedly called the media’s bluff and don’t hesitate to dissect the said warhorses’ opinions. It’s no coincidence that this dissection happens at brutal regularity. This more than anything else has upset the traditional media.

4. Why are bloggers so “ferocious” about traditional media?

A: Honest answer: because the media is incredibly corrupt. Vir Sanghvi (and others) needs to admit this and begin honest introspection instead of trying to defend the indefensible:

Are many of those who blog and tweet (and I don’t just mean those sad losers who escape from their pathetic little lives by spending hours abusing other people on the net) beginning to believe that they constitute a secondary elite?

This kind of attitude will result in nothing positive. Rohit has already answered Sanghvi’s derogatory usage of “elite” but I’ll just add this: no blogger considers or claims himself/herself as belonging to some kind of an elite set. It exists in Sanghvi’s perception. It might surprise Sanghvi but most bloggers work independent of each other. In other words, blog posts aren’t orchestrated, or “planted.” And two, even if bloggers were “elitists” in a minority, why did it upset him so much that he took the trouble to write two entire posts dissing them? Why does he find it hard to ignore this insignificant “elite?” And neither is traditional media’s record clean: we’ve seen enough instances of mainstream media journos threatening bloggers with lawsuits, making talk shows showing bloggers in poor light, denigrating them as “Cyber Cinderellas,” and so on. This is, as Offstumped says, because the MSM’s near-monopoly over newsmaking is increasingly facing a serious challenge. If MSM demands freedom to question politicians, why doesn’t it want us to have the same freedom?

But let’s see why he makes this charge of elitism. To do that, we’ll take up the questions he himself asks in his piece.

5. When bloggers tell you that TV channels are only interested in TRPs, what are they saying? In effect, they are saying that TV channels are only interested in reaching as many people as possible.

A: This is among the worst generalizations I’ve seen. It’s like saying all Biharis are bad people because Lalu/Shahbuddin hails from the land. Why does he ignore the fact that most bloggers criticize MSM not because of its TRP thirst but mostly because MSM offers zero value in terms of insight and opinion. Take any random edit page/column of any newspaper. With very rare exception, the “substance” is generally on these lines: socialist policies are good, capitalism is ugly, subsides should be permanent, Indian secularism is in danger, minorityism is the way to go, and BJP/Hindu organizations are evil. By his own admission, Sanghvi claims to have scoured the Web over the past year and it’s quite surprising that he didn’t find ONE blogger critiquing this vacuum in the content that MSM churns out.

And it’s not just the content vacuum. Does Sanghvi admit that almost every mediahouse today publishes paid news? (Open Question to Readers: Does Hindustan Times accept paid news?) There are tons of blogs that’ve discussed this openly unethical practice. Couldn’t Sanghvi find even ONE blog that talks about it? And why is he silent about the Slimes’ strong-arm tactic that forced Pradyuman Maheshwari to shut down his excellent blog? These are serious issues that bloggers talk about, and they’re unrelated to TRPs or circulation figures. And wasn’t it Sanghvi’s own paper, Hindustan Times, which ran a campaign of sorts a few years ago (I think it was called “Just say no” or something. Not sure.) against the Slimes, which had just announced the vile Medianet concept? I do remember a lot of bloggers (including me) had signed up to support this cause. Your response to this, Mr.Sanghvi?

6. And why is this a bad thing? Surely the people the TV channels will reach will be just like the bloggers, ordinary people with an interest in some aspect of the news. Why should it be a form of abuse within a medium that is supposed to empower ordinary people to attack traditional media for trying to reach more ordinary people? Or, look at it another way. If a programme gets high TRPs, then this means that lots of ordinary people have liked it. The ordinary people may be right or wrong to have liked it – I pass no value judgements here – but the fact that they liked it is a reflection on them, not on the TV channel. So, why blame the channel? Why not blame the viewers?

A: This is even nicer. Notice the repeated usage of the word “ordinary people” to hammer home the distinction that bloggers aren’t “ordinary people.” And you got to be really naive to believe that “ordinary people” aren’t aware of the corruption in the media. And this is another, classic, characteristic trait of the MSM: assuming that “ordinary people” are ignorant and stupid and the all-knowing media must show them the way: “ordinary people may be right or wrong to have liked it.” Here’s the thing: stuff like TV programmes usually don’t hold up to any objective evaluation: people may like something today for some reason and hate the same thing tomorrow for the same or different reason. Bloggers don’t talk about “tastes of the ordinary man” and such like. Mr. Sanghvi, look at blogs like this, this, this, this, this, and this. These are serious blogs, very focussed and will beat the beauty-parloured news anchors by lightyears in terms of analysis, insight, research, opinion, and value. It might surprise you, Mr. Sanghvi, but most of these bloggers aren’t really big fans of watching TV. They do the work that the MSM no longer does. If MSM had done its job properly, it wouldn’t come to such a pathetic pass. I know this is undigestable but it is a fact.

7. The answer is obvious. Some of the more opinionated bloggers and tweeters believe that they are part of an elite. They distance themselves from the tastes of ordinary people and have contempt for the kind of programming that gets TRPs (i.e. is preferred by ordinary people).

A: This is so beautiful. Impute stupidity/ignorance to “ordinary people” first, and call in their support when convenient! But we wonder on what exact basis did Sanghvi conclude that “opinionated bloggers and tweeters believe that they are part of an elite?” But it’s true. Not just “ordinary people,” but millions of Indians feel worse than contempt for the kind of stuff that gets shown on TV. Here’s a sample of features drawn from various “genres” that get high TRPs:

• Orchestrated “reality” shows involving small children dancing to obscene lyrics and making vulgar moves
• Celebrity trash chat shows of people living in strange houses with their only full time activity being bitching & plotting against others
• Staged talk shows with political leaders with anchors giving cues for the “appropriate response”
• Showing live footage of terror attacks, which only helps terrorists
• Acting like mouthpieces of a certain secular party
• Cutting opposing/critical views in midsentence in a serious debate

What makes Sanghvi assume that because these millions don’t blog, they aren’t outraged by such charades? And why are bloggers supposed to feel compellled to share the tastes of “ordinary people.” Notice again that Vir Sanghvi has set up the artificial distinction as “elite bloggers” and “ordinary people.” And are bloggers supposed to feel thrilled/elevated by such shows? And hypocritically, ironically Vir Sanghvi indulges in the same thing he accuses these “elite bloggers” of: speaking on behalf of “ordinary people.” Notice “programming …[that] is preferred by ordinary people.”

8. I do not dispute that bloggers have a right to regard themselves as an elite. My point is more limited. Such is the arrogance of the blogging elite these days that even when it attacks journos, it is effectively dissing the vast majority of media readership and viewership.

A: The underlined sentence in #8 above is perhaps the most brilliant display of arrogance I’ve ever seen. Vir Sanghvi provides a textbook illustration of McCarthyism: if you don’t join my whimsical Communist/bloggers witchhunt, you’re a traitor/wrong. Sanghvi makes “attacks journos” sound like bloggers are coming after them with Uzis. This is beyond comment and only serves to show Vir Sanghvi as a haughty mediaman.

9. But the next time I see attacks on journalists from pseudonymous bloggers who complain that the journos are only trying to get TRPs (i.e. reach a mass audience)…

A: Grand assumptions and leaps of reasoning. Not all bloggers are pseudonymous. You wrote this on your own (gasp!) blog Mr.Sanghvi, under your own name just like I write mine under my own name. And just like hundreds of other bloggers. I’m sure you could’ve done better, given your Internet-scouting over the past year. Like Rohit said, you have the backing of a large mediahouse while we work alone. Besides, what’s your focus, Mr. Sanghvi–the pseudonymn or the content that the pseudonymous blogger writes? By that token, we need to dismiss people like Mark Twain.

10: I will wonder: just who do you guys represent? Are you speaking on behalf of viewers and readers? Or are you just another anonymous elite that feels emboldened to pass judgement on the rest of the world from the darkness of your rooms?

A: We’re not the media, Mr.Sanghvi, to represent anybody. We belong to your favourite category of society: “working class.” We have a vested interest to see India as a strong, proud, and self-respecting nation, which it currently isn’t. That is who we represent. In the same vein, we speak on nobody’s behalf, and half the problem is usually solved when you know the correct questions to ask. And the correct question to ask is not on whose behalf we speak but what we speak. Policies. National interest. Security. Freedom. Media (yes). Your questions will sound intelligent if they’re centered around these themes. Again: themes, not people and/or groups. Our rooms are sometimes dark thanks largely to secular economic policies but our minds are far better-lit than the fancy lights in Television studios.

Oh, and Mr. Sanghvi, you wrote this piece on your (gasp!) blog!

Tags: Bloggers, Blogging, Blogs, Commentary, Democracy, FAQ for Vir Sanghvi, Freedom, Freedom of Speech, Hindustan Times, India, Indian Bloggers, Indian Media, Media Malpractices, Media Watch, Secularism, Smothering News, Society & Culture, Vir Sanghvi, Vir Sanghvi’s Blog